« Obama report on Blago contacts has some glaring holes | Jobless claims jump while fuel prices ease and consumer spending climbs »
PrintDecember 24, 2008
The response to Bill Ayers the New York Times wouldn't run
Freedom of the press, open to diverse opinion? Not at the rapidly sinking NY Times. While for some reason they were eager to publish a blatantly false letter ostensibly from the Parisian mayor knocking Caroline Kennedy's presumptive senatorial appointment, the NY Times' editors have been less than forthcoming opening their precious op-ed pages to both sides of an issue.
Last summer then candidate Senator Barack H. Obama (D-IL) was gratefully welcomed to outline his opinions on the NY Times op-ed page; using convoluted logic known only to them,
candidate Senator John McCain (R-AZ) was deemed not worthy and thus denied its forum.
A few weeks ago terrorist and now education professor and pal of The Office of the President-Elect, William (Bill) Ayers, guilelessly explained in another NY Times' op-ed
that no, he wasn't a terrorist because he really didn't have any outlet other than bombing to express his opinion in an oppressive, repressive America and besides he didn't kill anyone.
"Wrong!," thought Larry Grathwohl,
the only informant to successfully penetrate the Underground for the FBI and personally lived through the history Ayers so desperately desires to rewrite.In hopes of correcting the lies that Ayers put in print, Grathwohl twice submitted an op-ed of his own to the Times to rebut Ayers. The editors rejected Grathwohl’s op-ed, stating in a curt December 12 email:
Dear Mr. Grathwohl,
Because this is a direct response to an op-ed, it should be directed to our letters department.
Please email them at letters@nytimes.com.
Sincerely,
The Op-Ed Staff
Rejected by the NY TImes, Grathwohl turned to Pajamas Media which exclusively published his fact filled reply. Maybe another New York paper will print it also.
