David Horowitz says The New York Times et al are committing espionage and sabotaging the war effort...
Horowitz also takes the anti-war left's war against Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), which the collective left mocked as "Star Wars," to task. In today's world, with today's insane fascist dictators of N. Korea and Iran engaging in nuclear proliferation and/or nuclear blackmail, thank goodness we have the long-stalled SDI to perfect and use to defend us, our country and our allies.
Some excerpts from Horowitz' piece are below. The entire, somewhat lengthy piece is at the above link. It is well worth reading all of it---especially the critique of some actions of the Clinton administration.
"The Worst Defense"
"It’s been an interesting couple of weeks for looking at the war against the Islamo-fascists and other enemies of the United States. North Korea attempted to launch an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile capable of reaching American shores and one day carrying a nuclear warhead...
President Bush announced that anti-ballistic systems the United States was developing provided us with a good chance of intercepting the Korean missiles... But this is also no thanks to Democrats who have waged a ferocious 25-year war against the building of an anti-ballistic missile defense. The entire liberal arsenal was launched against this program... Left to Democrats... America would have no defense against the maniac in Pyongyang, Kim Jong-il.
Meanwhile, the New York Times and apparently now the New York Daily News, egged on by American radicals posing as civil libertarian activitists, are busily leaking national security secrets. The secrets are being provided by government agents, disgruntled with national policy, who are expressing their “dissent” by violating America’s espionage laws and endangering its citizens.
This is the situation we find ourselves in. And in this situation, the defense of those abetting elements in the government willing to betray us to our enemies is what? We are protecting the Constitution... We cannot prevail in the War on Terror if we cease to be who we are in the process... That is the defense. Tell that to Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus to defend the Union and would have put the publisher and editor of the New York Times in jail long before this...
Liberals... and leftists... think this argument is not only the best defense of America in the wars that confront us, they think it is the best way to defend their own actions – actions which others can see are endangering our troops abroad and our citizens at home. In fact the argument that those who have declared war on the war policy are really defending America is the worst possible defense.
We live in a democracy... Breaking the law does not protect the law. Breaking national security laws betrays the nation; it does not defend it.
The government leakers who provided the Times with the information that won its reporter a Pulitzer prize, are conducting a war against the very system the Times is claiming to defend. This is an unacceptable way to dissent from national policy, and no excuse can be offered for it. It is an act of violence against our democracy and the Constitution which governs it...
This is not an illegal war and the Administration has behaved in a far less peremptory manner in conducting it than, for example, the Clinton Administration in conducting the war in Bosnia, which was launched without authorization by Congress, yet was not made an object of outrage and a target of opportunity by the New York Times.
Liberals are not defending our constitutional liberties when they betray the contract on which those liberties are based... Sabotage of the war effort – which is what the New York Times has been engaged in – is not criticism; it is sabotage. The violation of American security laws like the Espionage Act is just as much a declaration of war on our democracy as publishing information illegally provided..."