Who will punish the New York Times for giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

First the New York Times and then numerous other newspapers reported, according to “anonymous sources,” the methods on how the U.S. government is tracking terrorists' financial activities. But, who will call it treason?

The New York Times has exposed a perfectly legal, perfectly acceptable government operation that has undoubtedly helped catch or track members of Al Qaeda and maybe saved the lives of countless Americans. Exposing such a secret national security program is not whistle-blowing. New York Times has published details on a highly classified program, which amounts to treason.

President Bush has said: "the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country."

Webster's New World Dictionary defines treason as: “1. Betrayal of trust or faith; treachery. 2. Violation of the allegiance owed to one's sovereign or state; betrayal of ones country.”

The US Constitution, Article III, Section 3, states: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

The New York Times executive editor Bill Keller wrote in an editorial on the newspaper's website that the decision to publish came after weeks of discussion with administration officials and that the paper didn't feel the program would be jeopardized.

Yes, and if you believe that, I must tell you that I had weeks of discussions with Administration officials before I wrote this column.

According to Keller: "(The New York Times) remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest."

The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is a matter of public interest, but any fool who would make that information public would only drive the insurgents underground to await the announced withdrawal date. Would this be acceptable to the New York Times?

The U.S. Congress will do nothing serious because they need the news media to get the publicity for re-election.

Many of the anti-Bush news media will stoop to the lowest levels during an election year because they know that Congress will not go too far in condemning the media. But, there were some who are not up for re-election and they were speaking out against the New York Times but only for a day or two.

Now it seems the brouhaha over the breach in national security has blown over. Is this an indication that the New York Times is so powerful that it can influence all other news media in the United States?

What can be done?

I for one have canceled my subscription to the New York Times website for daily news headlines and editorial columns.

So what can you do?

Stop buying anything to do with the New York Times .