NYT Finally Weighs in on CIA-on-the-Hudson

Perhaps six months late, the NYT figured out (with no sense of irony about that delay) that if Ray Kelly can spy on Muslims with impunity–as he appears to have done–he can do it to anyone.

It is a distressing fact of life that mistreatment of Muslims does not draw nearly the protest that it should. But not just Muslims are threatened by this seemingly excessive warrantless surveillance and record-keeping. Today Muslims are the target. In the past it was protesters against the Vietnam War, civil rights activists, socialists. Tomorrow it will be another vulnerable group whose lawful behavior is blended into criminal activity.

The editorial focuses on one of the many areas that should have offered a reasonable middle ground months ago: if it’s true nothing is wrong with this spying, than the NYPD should provide more information about what leads the cops were actually following.

Mr. Bloomberg has reacted in the worst possible way — with disdain — to those raising legitimate questions about the surveillance program. Asking about its legality, and about whether alienating innocent Muslims is a smart or decent strategy, does not translate into being soft on terrorism, or failing to appreciate that it is a dangerous world.

The mayor insists that the actions reported by The A.P. were “legal,” “appropriate” and “constitutional.” He also says the police were only “following leads.” But he has yet to explain what sort of leads, why they justify police surveillance of so many Muslims, or whether the type of surveillance depicted in the news reports continues.

If only the NYT knew of a newspaper that employed some good reporters who could do some reporting on such questions. I wonder where they might find that?

Perhaps most curious, though, is the NYT’s focus on Bloomberg, not Kelly, even while they admit that this program is Kelly’s baby.

It’s all a very curious focus from the NYT.

But it’s a good start.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

8 Responses to NYT Finally Weighs in on CIA-on-the-Hudson

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @drgrist But only on black Friday because they're probably going crazy shopping and so have it coming or maybe just won't notice.
3mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @puellavulnerata To be fair, CIA has been known to have terrible OpSec (cf the Abu Omar rendition).
3mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @paulwaldman1: Why the Supreme Court should be the biggest 2016 issue: http://t.co/Qf8FKB9QOj
6mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 "Lifestyles of Glamorous Criminal Defense Attorneys" R Us. No robe, but am in sweats from last night.
9mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 Well, I have already eaten a giant plate of leftovers, and mixed the first margarita. Watch out!
23mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 No, I am laughing. Also, I walked straight into that wall.
28mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 I actually was gonna respond to other dude who was equivocating; but decided not to twitter fight with a dope.
31mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 Nobody ever.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mirriam71 No can do. Unless it was pointed at the cops, it is bullshit.
34mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @seanpaulkelley Seriously, looking good.
52mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mellowtoo_hype @SpaceCoastLaw @FAFSA I bill at $350/hr. Fucking FAFSA cost me four hours to get a $500 grant for my daughter #BiteMe
58mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @seanpaulkelley No, really, who is that guy?!?!
1hreplyretweetfavorite