"Lincoln's Surveillance State" Op-Ed NYTimes July 6, 2013

[David Lockmiller]

Today, the NYTimes presented me another opportunity to make a comment about the July 5, 2013 NYTimes Op-Ed, "Lincoln's Surveillance State." Andrew Rosenthal wrote in his Editorial Page Editor's Blog today a short piece entitled "Clapper and Carney Get Slippery on Surveillance." (Andrew Rosenthal was one of the NYTimes personnel to whom I wrote regarding the NYTimes Op-Ed.)

Mr. Rosenthal began his piece with this question: "Does anyone still believe anything the Obama administration has to say about surveillance?"

And, he ended his piece with the following statements:

"Sadly, this is not the first time we’ve had this problem of obfuscation, misdirection, cover up and even outright lying about surveillance.

In June, when The Guardian first began publishing Edward Snowden’s leaks, President Obama assured everyone that there were so many safeguards in place that nobody’s rights could possibly be violated even if the N.S.A. was collecting metadata on every phone call and email from every American every day.

Later, through more leaks, we found out that those safeguards are entirely internal (and of course, secret) and that they have frequently been violated.

If this administration wants to provide “the most truthful or least untruthful” answers, it might consider simply telling the truth."

The following is the comment that I have submitted to this Editorial Page Editor's Blog piece today. But, there is an extremely strong probability that my commentary will not see the light of day for any NYTimes readers. (After submitting any commentary, the following message from the NYTimes appears: "Thank you for your submission. Your comment will appear once it has been approved." If the comment is not approved by the NYTimes, it does not appear.) However, I hope that the NYTimes will now admit its own "truth" about publishing the Op-Ed "Lincoln's Surveillance State," even at this late date, to wit, it has unwittingly, but falsely, disparaged the reputation of President Abraham Lincoln. And, thereafter, the NYTimes should retract the offending Op-Ed on page one for this stated reason.



On July 5, 2013, the NYTimes ran an Op-Ed entitled "Lincoln's Surveillance State," which may have been a NSA planted story to befuddle the American public.

"Many commentators have deemed the government's activities alarming and unprecedented. The N.S.A.'s program is indeed alarming - but not, from a historical perspective, unprecedented. In 1862, after President Abraham Lincoln appointed him secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton penned a letter to the president requesting sweeping powers, which would include total control of the telegraph lines. By rerouting those lines through his office, Stanton would keep tabs on vast amounts of communication, journalistic, governmental and personal."

This was a successful hoax perpetrated upon the NYTimes and it was printed as the "truth" about government surveillance of all Union citizens' telegraphic communications being authorized by President Lincoln during the Civil War, and thus serves as a precedent for all the current NSA secret programs.

On Sunday, July 7, I sent an email to the Executive Editor of the NY Times, Jill Abramson. I wrote: "I think that this is some sort of bizarre hoax. In the first place, to think that it was technologically possible to "reroute" at that time all the telegraph lines in the United States through to the office of the Secretary of War Stanton is an absolute ABSURDITY."

I was stonewalled by Jill Abramson and all of the other NYTimes personnel to whom I presented irrefutable proof of this hoax.