Posted by: Puma1 | October 28, 2008

BREAKING: LA Times Responds, Refuses to Release Obama-Khalidi-Ayers Tape on Grounds of Protecting Sources

Well, unlike the notorious “whitey tape,” there is one explosive Obama videotape we now KNOW exists. Probably is that just like the “whitey tape,” you may never see it.

For days, the LA Times refused to either confirm or deny that it was in possession of a video in which Obama is alleged to have commiserated with Palestinian activist and anti-Semite, Rashid Khalidi, and allegedly also with washed-up domestic terrorist Bill Ayers at reception that allegedly took on a decidedly anti-Israel tone.

Finally, the Times has admitted the tape exists — and that they have it. But the newspaper, which is currently suffering from poor profits and thus getting rid of staff, responded to accusations from the McCain campaign that it is suppressing the tape to help Obama get elected by refusing to release it, on the grounds that it would compromise their sources:

“The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it,” said the newspaper’s editor, Russ Stanton. “The Times keeps its promises to sources.”

Of course, reporters as a general rule should protect their sources, but the Times’s reasoning does not hold water. One, it is amazing that it took them days to come up with such a simple excuse. Why, if they really are protecting a source, didn’t they just say so earlier?

Two, the Times has already written an article revealing much — but not all — of the content of said tape. If it’s permissible to reveal its content in detail, why can voters not just see it and judge for themselves? What is the source hiding?

Moreover, all Americans, including American reporters, have a duty to protect their country. If the Times is in possession of explosive, illuminating information about a man who could be elected President in less than a week, the Times has a duty to the public, the nation, and the world to release the videotape immediately.

At the very least, if the Times still refuses to publish the tape, they might at least answer some questions about it, namely, was Bill Ayers there as alleged? Did Obama sit and/or talk with Ayers? What is the full text of Obama’s toast to Khalidi? Did Obama mention Ayers in his toast? How did Obama react to anti-Semitic jokes? And so on.

This would not be the first time that a journalist had to renege on a promise to a source for the greater good.

The purpose of protecting sources, after all, is to preserve truth. The Times’s withholding of this tape compromises truth.

Let’s keep putting pressure on the Times to release this tape — the future of this country and of our families depends on it!

Advertisements

Responses

  1. […] BREAKING: LA Times Responds, Refuses to Release Obama-Khalidi … Well, unlike the notorious “whitey tape,” there is one explosive Obama videotape we now KNOW exists. Probably is that just like the “whitey tape,” you may never see it. For days, the LA Times refused to either confirm or deny that it … […]

  2. And if anyone — ANYONE — believes the tripe that the LAT has issued about why it won’t release the tape, there really is a well-known bridge across the East River in New York City that is for sale. Cheap, too.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: