La Russophobe expresses her profound disappointment in the New York Times, a source of Russia news listed in her sidebar and sometimes quoted in posts. Readers must take care in critically assessing all information received from the Times pages.

The Weekly Standard has a horrifying story about how the Times is suppressing information about the trove of documents uncovered by U.S. forces in Iraq regarding that rogue nation's plans for developing weapons of mass destruction and supporting terror attacks against Americans.

Making matters even worse, the Times appears to be guilty of truly breathtaking hypocrisy, claiming that the U.S. government itself should not release these documents, arguing that they could be a blueprint for further terrorist activity. This is quite amazing since the Times itself has, as the Standard notes "published details about eavesdropping and finance-tracking efforts by the U.S. government, two of the most effective and most closely guarded programs in the war on terror" and "stubbornly defended that reporting even after government officials said the articles had done significant damage to national security. No matter, countered the Times, the public has a right to know." In fact, the Times' publication of U.S. national secrets dates back to the Pentagon Papers.

There appears to be an unsettling parallel between the Times and Russia itself. Both appear to be ruled over by rabid idealogues impervious to criticism who sit in ivory towers and fiddle while their domain erodes into dust. La Russophobe has already pointed out how utterly feeble the Times' is when it comes to trying to document the blogosphere, which it may well see as a threat to its survival. If the Times doesn't make some changes, it will implode of its own fetid weight just as did the USSR.