The New York Times, in trying to paint Giuliani’s foreign policy team–of which I’m proud to be a minor cog–too hawkish, singled out a piece I wrote last year in the National Review which explored the Presidential ban on assassination. The New York Times reporters, who did not conduct interviews but trolled the web, apparently read an inaccurate synopsis of the article on a left-wing website. A link to the original piece is here.

I stand by what I write.

It is ironic that the New York Times apparently believes it better either to let terrorists enjoy safe-haven among civilian populations or to conduct large scale military operations against them, but wishes to eliminate any discussion of intermediate options. The Times reporters also miss the discussion of international law and Congressional oversight.

A little integrity goes a long way, but the New York Times makes clear it operates by different standards.