Thanks for sharing

To the editorial staff of the New York Times: The Press, an integral part of our American Democracy, helping to ensure our liberty through the freedom of information and promotion of social awareness on a variety of issues should nonetheless have a filter, albeit a very narrow filter. A filter small enough only to remove a few coffee grinds of information that may, while questionably in the public's interest, nonetheless prove more harmful when openly displayed to the world. My argument has nothing to do with the fact that "we're at war", because... are we? Nor am I concerned with the actual specifics or pros and cons of the debate. The simple fact in my point of view is this: Let's not have this debate out in the open on the front page of our newspapers. Talk about it in a closed Congressional hearing. Vaguely allude to it at the bottom of a piece involving Guantanamo Bay, but let's not have The Press vocalizing an open, public lively debate on a matter of such sensitive nature. What's next, the public should debate and vote on military strategy before our next engagement? Air or Sea attack first? Three Battalions? Do we send in the SEALS first, or go with the Marines?