Undermining the war on terror, that is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."
Today, The New York Times ran a story pinpointing countries in Europe that have allowed CIA planes to land on their soil in ongoing operations after 9/11. The story does two things — gives America's enemies information, and it could encourage al Qaeda to attack the countries that have helped the USA. That's speculative, but there's no question European countries are under pressure not to help the CIA.
So here's my question. Does that help you and your family? If the world will not cooperate with the Central Intelligence Agency, doesn't that make it easier for terrorists to operate? Of course it does.
This never would have happened during World War II. Franklin Roosevelt created an Office of Censorship in 1941 and pressure was put upon American news organizations not to publish information "that the enemy might be interested in."
"Talking Points" believes the enemy is probably interested in which countries allow CIA planes to land. The Office of Censorship was closed in 1945 after the war, but the issue was not closed. FDR didn't want the press undermining World War II. And the country went along with it.
Today, we're fighting World War III, but every day, the American press puts forth information the enemy might be interested in.
Now this is very difficult territory. The American public has a right to know how the Bush administration is waging the war on terror. We have a right to know what's going on.
There comes a point when the media has to decide if the information they're disseminating is going to damage the war effort. You know, I don't have to know where the CIA planes are landing in Europe. Do you? That information is not vital to me. And again, the information hurts the USA and the war on terror.
So we're appealing to the American press to help fight the terrorists, rather than to use the conflict to promote a political point of view. Let's do what's good for the country. Is that is too much to ask? And that's "The Memo."
The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAUREEN DOWD, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK TIMES: This whole Fitzgerald case is very confusing. Don't you find it confusing?
DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST, CBS'S "LATE NIGHT WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": I'm dizzy, honest to God.
DOWD: Right. OK. So do you want me to explain what you need to know about it?
LETTERMAN: Please do what you can.
DOWD: OK. You don't have to pay attention to anything that's happening, and you only need to remember two words: Cheney's guilty.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: Well, with all due respect, madam, if you had proof of that, I'm sure your newspaper would love you to put it on page one. If you do not have said proof, it's irresponsible to smear the V.P. on national TV. It's also ridiculous.
By the way, Maureen Dowd has an open invitation to appear on "The Factor."
—You can catch Bill O'Reilly's "Talking Points Memo" and "Most Ridiculous Item" weeknights at 8 and 11 p.m. ET on the FOX News Channel. Send your comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Copyright © 2005 Imaginova Corp. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.