Many people say that exaggerated accounts of what was happening in Cuba from William Randolph Hearst's New York Morning Journal helped push us into the Spanish American War. Well, the New York Times seems to be making the same sort of concerted effort to make us lose the war on terror.

It goes without saying that they've told the world about classified programs designed to stop terrorism without the slightest regard to whether or not it would end up aiding the terrorists and they've also relentlessly campaigned against the war and attempted to undercut support for the effort from the America people.

But now, in an effort to further demoralize the American people, they've actually sunk to a new low, even for the jackals that make up the bulk of the press core in this country:

"A photograph and videotape of a Texas soldier dying in Iraq published by the New York Times have triggered anger from his relatives and Army colleagues and revived a long-standing debate about which images of war are proper to show.

The journalists involved, Times reporter Damien Cave and Getty Images photographer Robert Nickelsberg, working for the Times, had their status as so-called embedded journalists suspended Tuesday by the Army corps in Baghdad, military officials said, because they violated a signed agreement not to publish photos or video of any wounded soldiers without official consent.

New York Times foreign editor Susan Chira said Tuesday night that the newspaper initially did not contact the family of Army Staff Sgt. Hector Leija about the images because of a specific request from the Army to avoid such a direct contact.

"The Times is extremely sensitive to the loss suffered by families when loved ones are killed in Iraq," Chira said. "We have tried to write about the inevitable loss with extreme compassion."

She said that after the newspaper account, with a photograph of the soldier, was published Monday, a Times reporter in Baghdad made indirect efforts to tell the family of the video release later that day. The video was still available for viewing on the Times' Web site Tuesday night, when the newspaper notified clients of its photo service that the photograph at issue was no longer available and should be eliminated from any archives.

..."Oh God, they shouldn't have published a picture like that," Leija's cousin Tina Guerrero, who had not seen the images but was aghast about them anyway, told the Houston Chronicle on Tuesday in Raymondville. She said the images would be especially hurtful to the soldier's parents, Domingo and Manuela Leija, who have remained in the family's home on the edge of town. ''It's going to devastate them," Guerrero said. ''They're having enough pain dealing with the death of their son."

Accompanying the Times article was a picture of Leija on a stretcher, an Army medic using his right hand to compress the sergeant's wounded forehead. Leija was alive in the photograph. The story noted that he died later in the day.

...A brother of the slain soldier, Domingo Leija Jr. of Raymondville, said the immediate family would not have anything to say directly about the images. "And it's going to stay that way," he said, as he emerged from a City Hall meeting Tuesday afternoon with local officials who are assisting with funeral plans."

So, the New York Times reporters are embedded with a military unit. They take footage of a soldier with a fatal wound. Then, they break an agreement with the military and show a dying soldier without informing the family about it.

Imagine having your son die in Iraq and having some neighbor show your kid, dying on a stretcher, in the New York Times, where it was published so that a bunch of liberals could use it to undermine the war and put a few more dollars in their pockets...it's shameful.

And the NYT excuse for not contacting the family? "Well, the military told us not to do that." They also told them not to show the pictures, but that certainly didn't stop them. You know what the real issue probably was? They didn't have the guts to call a grieving family and tell them they were going to slap their dying son's picture up whether they liked it or not.

The New York Times is a disgrace to journalism and quite frankly, the military, and Republicans should refuse to continue to cooperate with them in any way, shape, or form. No interviews, no NYT reporters allowed in press conferences, no responses at all to requests from the New York Times. That's what they deserve for the Un-American way that they've behaved over the last couple of years.

Hat tip to Gateway Pundit for the story.