NY Times making war on terror tougher -

[AURaptor 1,126]

By Thomas C Greene in Washington

Published Monday 26th June 2006 14:54 GMT

US Representative Peter King (Republican, New York), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has called the New York Times "treasonous" for informing the public about another secret Bush Administration counter-terrorist program, the Associated Press reports.

"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King reportedly told the wire service.

King has also called for the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to investigate the Times and prosecute the reporters, editors and publisher on any and all charges they can dream up.

The program in question uses vast amounts of data supplied by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift), a Belgium-based hub for international bank transactions. It receives transaction messages from approximately 200 countries, and the USA has been sifting the data in search of patterns indicating terrorist financing.

The US has used broad subpoenas to obtain the data, as Swift is not set up to provide targeted information. US Treasury secretary John Snow said Swift officials volunteered to give the US access to the entire database. US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales hastened to add that the program is perfectly legal.

And in terms of US law, Gonzales, who has been an apologist for torture and mass wiretapping, might be telling the truth for a change. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 authorises the President to initiate financial investigations of this nature, although perhaps not with the sort of broad, electronic dragnet approach in use at the moment. Still, there doesn't seem to be much risk for the White House under US law.

As for the laws of other countries whose citizens have been affected, that is another matter entirely. According to Reuters, the Belgian government has already launched an investigation into the data transfer, which may be illegal under local law. It's possible that other countries will follow suit. The European Commission is reportedly backing away from any regulatory responsibility, citing a lack of appropriate legislation, and pushing the issue back into the hands of member states. The wind-up could be that Swift will find itself regulated to death, although a whitewash seems the more likely outcome.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

By Thomas C Greene in Washington

Published Monday 26th June 2006 14:54 GMT

US Representative Peter King (Republican, New York), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has called the New York Times "treasonous" for informing the public about another secret Bush Administration counter-terrorist program, the Associated Press reports.

"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King reportedly told the wire service.

King has also called for the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to investigate the Times and prosecute the reporters, editors and publisher on any and all charges they can dream up.

The program in question uses vast amounts of data supplied by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift), a Belgium-based hub for international bank transactions. It receives transaction messages from approximately 200 countries, and the USA has been sifting the data in search of patterns indicating terrorist financing.

The US has used broad subpoenas to obtain the data, as Swift is not set up to provide targeted information. US Treasury secretary John Snow said Swift officials volunteered to give the US access to the entire database. US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales hastened to add that the program is perfectly legal.

And in terms of US law, Gonzales, who has been an apologist for torture and mass wiretapping, might be telling the truth for a change. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 authorises the President to initiate financial investigations of this nature, although perhaps not with the sort of broad, electronic dragnet approach in use at the moment. Still, there doesn't seem to be much risk for the White House under US law.

As for the laws of other countries whose citizens have been affected, that is another matter entirely. According to Reuters, the Belgian government has already launched an investigation into the data transfer, which may be illegal under local law. It's possible that other countries will follow suit. The European Commission is reportedly backing away from any regulatory responsibility, citing a lack of appropriate legislation, and pushing the issue back into the hands of member states. The wind-up could be that Swift will find itself regulated to death, although a whitewash seems the more likely outcome.

243501[/snapback]

Hardly.

[Tigermike 3,050]

By Thomas C Greene in Washington

Published Monday 26th June 2006 14:54 GMT

US Representative Peter King (Republican, New York), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has called the New York Times "treasonous" for informing the public about another secret Bush Administration counter-terrorist program, the Associated Press reports.

"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King reportedly told the wire service.

King has also called for the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to investigate the Times and prosecute the reporters, editors and publisher on any and all charges they can dream up.

The program in question uses vast amounts of data supplied by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift), a Belgium-based hub for international bank transactions. It receives transaction messages from approximately 200 countries, and the USA has been sifting the data in search of patterns indicating terrorist financing.

The US has used broad subpoenas to obtain the data, as Swift is not set up to provide targeted information. US Treasury secretary John Snow said Swift officials volunteered to give the US access to the entire database. US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales hastened to add that the program is perfectly legal.

And in terms of US law, Gonzales, who has been an apologist for torture and mass wiretapping, might be telling the truth for a change. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 authorises the President to initiate financial investigations of this nature, although perhaps not with the sort of broad, electronic dragnet approach in use at the moment. Still, there doesn't seem to be much risk for the White House under US law.

As for the laws of other countries whose citizens have been affected, that is another matter entirely. According to Reuters, the Belgian government has already launched an investigation into the data transfer, which may be illegal under local law. It's possible that other countries will follow suit. The European Commission is reportedly backing away from any regulatory responsibility, citing a lack of appropriate legislation, and pushing the issue back into the hands of member states. The wind-up could be that Swift will find itself regulated to death, although a whitewash seems the more likely outcome.

243501[/snapback]

Hardly.

243507[/snapback]

So what would you call it?

[Tiger in Spain 0]

First of all, the White House should revoke the NYT's press credentials. Take them out of the loop. Secondly, they should find whoever is leaking this classified information and deal with them in the most severe terms. At a minimun, the leaking of classified information is a felony. The official that leaked this information to the NYT should be in Leavenworth for 20 years to life. I'd prefer a good hanging myself (a la Julius and Ethel Rosenberg), but I'm old school that way. I have held a clearance my entire Naval career and if I ever deliberately give out classified information, I should (and would) be prosecuted and hung out to dry. These leakers should be treated no differently than I would be.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Hardly.

Why not, TT ? This program had been successful in capturing terrorist before already. Other than taking the knee jerk reactionary position of exactly the opposite that from W's, why do you think it's a good idea for the specifics of this program to be reported on ? What rights of YOURS were being infringed upon w/ the secrecy of this particular program?

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Hardly.

Why not, TT ? This program had been successful in capturing terrorist before already. Other than taking the knee jerk reactionary position of exactly the opposite that from W's, why do you think it's a good idea for the specifics of this program to be reported on ? What rights of YOURS were being infringed upon w/ the secrecy of this particular program?

243530[/snapback]

I think you found it.

I like Andrew McCarthy's take on this act of treason over at National Review.

Life or death. Which one it will be turns solely on intelligence and secrecy. Can you find out how they next intend to kill you, can you stop them, and can you prevent them from knowing how you know … so you can stop them again?

Simple as that. Modernity has changed many things, but it hasn’t changed that. In command of the first American military forces, and facing a deadly enemy, George Washington himself observed that the “necessity of procuring good intelligence is apparent and need not be further urged…. pon Secrecy, Success depends in Most Enterprises ... and for want of it, they are generally defeated.”

What on earth would George Washington have made of Bill Keller, executive editor of the New York Times, and his comrades in today’s American media?

What would he have made of transparently politicized free-speech zealots who inform for the enemy and have the nerve to call it “patriotism.”

Who say, “If you try to isolate barbarians to make them hand up the other barbarians, we will expose it.”

“If you try to intercept enemy communications — as victorious militaries have done in every war ever fought — we will tell all the world, including the enemy, exactly what you’re up to.”

“If you track the enemy’s finances, we will blow you out of the water. We’ll disclose just what you’re doing and just how you’re doing it. Even if it’s saving innocent lives.”

And why this last? Remember five years ago, back when they figured “you’re not doing enough” was the best way to bash the Bush administration? Remember the Times and its ilk — disdainful of aggressive military responses — tut-tutting about how the disruption of money flows was the key to thwarting international terrorists. So why compromise that?

Is there some illegality going on in the government’s Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (exposed by the Times and other news outlets Friday)? No, no laws have been broken. Is there some abuse of power? No, there seem to have been extraordinary steps taken to inform relevant officials and win international cooperation. Why then? Why take action that can only aid and comfort the enemy in wartime?

Because, Keller haughtily pronounced, American methods of monitoring enemy money transfers are “a matter of public interest.”

Really? The Times prattles on about what it claims is a dearth of checks and balances, but what are the checks and balances on Bill Keller? Can it be that our security hinges on whether the editor of an antiwar, for-profit journal thinks some defense measure might be interesting?

Well, here’s something truly interesting: There are people in the U.S. intelligence community who are revealing the nation’s most precious secrets.

The media aspire to be the public’s watchdog? Ever on the prowl to promote good government? Okay, here we have public officials endangering American lives. Public officials whose violation of a solemn oath to protect national defense information is both a profound offense against honor and a serious crime.

What about the public interest in that? What about the public interest in rooting out those who betray their country in wartime?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Awfully quiet from the left...

NYT new motto: "The people have a right to know...even if it costs them their lives."

[DKW 86 7,440]

I havent said anything on this. But what the NYT is doing is just so intellectually bankrupt. I mean it is morally and ethically indefensible. This is the NYT that said that Monica Lewinsky story was not in the public purvey until Newsweek broke the story. Then, MLS was just a character piece at the time. It was not national security, etc. It was just a harmless piece until Clinton lied about it to the American public and under oath.

This will subvert millions upon millions of $$$ in NSA money. It will take years to reconstruct the process and other million$ to re-implement it.

So why would the NYT publish this mess? I think they want to give the American people, those that hardly pay attention, the impression that their privacy is being invaded. In other words it was published because the NYT and the Left in the US wanted political advantage no matter how fleeting that advantage may be. Bush was turning around the war in Iraq. Zarqawi was dead. Bush's poll numbers were increasing. Something had to be done and this story just happened to be on their desktop. It was for political expediency and nothing else. The Left needed a slam piece to counteract all the good news in Iraq. If a couple of hundred or thousands of Americans eventually get killed from it, so what?

[Tiger in Spain 0]

So why would the NYT publish this mess? I think they want to give the American people, those that hardly pay attention, the impression that their privacy is being invaded. In other words it was published because the NYT and the Left in the US wanted political advantage no matter how fleeting that advantage may be. Bush was turning around the war in Iraq. Zarqawi was dead. Bush's poll numbers were increasing. Something had to be done and this story just happened to be on their desktop. It was for political expediency and nothing else. The Left needed a slam piece to counteract all the good news in Iraq. If a couple of hundred or thousands of Americans eventually get killed from it, so what?

243595[/snapback]

Nailed it!

[Captain Liger 0]

The sound of crickets can be absolutely deafening.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

The sound of crickets can be absolutely deafening.

243607[/snapback]

That's cuz the libruls are giving their employers an honest days work while you slackers play around on the internets all day.

[DKW 86 7,440]

The sound of crickets can be absolutely deafening.

243607[/snapback]

That's cuz the libruls are giving their employers an honest days work while you slackers play around on the internets all day.

243728[/snapback]

Tex, you mean "Poor Librul working people are being subjugated by the man suppresing my right to not have to work...The working people that dont have 100% free healthcare, nor Hummer supplied free from the govt, nor free Internet (thank you Al Gore), free housing, and all those folks that have one dime more than me should be taxed until they make exactly the same as my lame non-working butt. etc, etc, etc"

[TexasTiger 13,000]

The sound of crickets can be absolutely deafening.

243607[/snapback]

That's cuz the libruls are giving their employers an honest days work while you slackers play around on the internets all day.

243728[/snapback]

Tex, you mean "Poor Librul working people are being subjugated by the man suppresing my right to not have to work...The working people that dont have 100% free healthcare, nor Hummer supplied free from the govt, nor free Internet (thank you Al Gore), free housing, and all those folks that have one dimwe more than me should be taxed until they make exactly the same as my lame non-working butt. etc, etc, etc"

243732[/snapback]

Nah, that's David's fantasy librul land that only exists in the weak minds of those drunk on the right wing koolaid. But at least you took your own time to post it, assuming you are off the clock now.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Hardly.

Why not, TT ? This program had been successful in capturing terrorist before already. Other than taking the knee jerk reactionary position of exactly the opposite that from W's, why do you think it's a good idea for the specifics of this program to be reported on ? What rights of YOURS were being infringed upon w/ the secrecy of this particular program?

243530[/snapback]

I wonder if Genesis is one of TT's fav. bands from the 80's

If so, I'm sure his fav album is Abacab, featuring No Reply At All.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

Hardly.

Why not, TT ? This program had been successful in capturing terrorist before already. Other than taking the knee jerk reactionary position of exactly the opposite that from W's, why do you think it's a good idea for the specifics of this program to be reported on ? What rights of YOURS were being infringed upon w/ the secrecy of this particular program?

243530[/snapback]

I wonder if Genesis is one of TT's fav. bands from the 80's

If so, I'm sure his fav album is Abacab, featuring No Reply At All.

243750[/snapback]

Actually, I prefered Against All Odds and In the air tonight. But they were not one of my favorite 80s bands.

The question posed was, "Is it treason?"

I said, "Hardly."

TigerMike asked what I would call it... A few possibilities...1) Much ado about nothing; 2) No big surprise; 3) Old news; 4) Karl Rove firing up the idiot base.

Notice the White House didn't condemn the "leakers" or the "Wall Street Journal" that reported the same thing. Just the evil New York Times for reporting it. The idiot base responds, "GRRRRR. We hate those guys worse than the terrorists!"

The NYT is a convenient whipping boy. Look how all you guys responded on cue. You're like Pavlov's dog. TIS wants to lynch Keller, of course, he mostly just wants to kill somebody. But the truth is, Bush was bragging about this program one week after 9/11.

We've established a foreign terrorist asset tracking center at the Department of the Treasury to identify and investigate the financial infrastructure of the international terrorist networks.

     It will bring together representatives of the intelligence, law enforcement and financial regulatory agencies to accomplish two goals:  to follow the money as a trail to the terrorists, to follow their money so we can find out where they are; and to freeze the money to disrupt their actions.

     We're also working with the friends and allies throughout the world to share information.  We're working closely with the United Nations, the EU and through the G-7/G-8 structure to limit the ability of terrorist organizations to take advantage of the international financial systems.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20.../20010924-4.htm

Terrorists and those supporting them were put on notice by Bush himself.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Notice the White House didn't condemn the "leakers" or the "Wall Street Journal" that reported the same thing. Just the evil New York Times for reporting it. The idiot base responds, "GRRRRR. We hate those guys worse than the terrorists!"

The NYT is a convenient whipping boy. Look how all you guys responded on cue. You're like Pavlov's dog. TIS wants to lynch Keller, of course, he mostly just wants to kill somebody. But the truth is, Bush was bragging about this program one week after 9/11.

The NYT has a sad history of doing this, for starters. The eaves dropping program, the alledged prisons story, Jason Blair..... You're ignoring certain MAJOR facts on this story in presenting your view. The NYT was specifically asked NOT to run this story, and why. To then feign that it didn't think it was all that big a deal is a flat out lie. The LA Times and WSJ both AGREED to not run the story, but when they got word that the NYT was running w/ the story anyway, there was no reason to sit on it. The cat was out of the bag. Bush's comment wasn't nearly as specific as the NYT's story. Everyone pretty much knew 'something' was being done, but not the details.

When the President specifically asks you NOT to run w/ a story, and you run w/ it anyway, that's a problem. The NYT should be held accountable for putting its own sagging sales in front of national security.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

TIS wants to lynch Keller, of course, he mostly just wants to kill somebody.

243754[/snapback]

I only advocate hanging those that sell out their country. String him up, make an example of him, and I think the others would get the point that secrets shouldn't be pasted across the front page of a newspaper. This crap has been going on since WWII. Anyone recall the Chicago-Times revealing to the world that our intel folks had broken the Japanese code? Luckily for us, the Japanese didn't take the report seriously enough or else we'd all be speaking 彼は海へ行 right now.

But hey, why get mad. The NYT really stuck it to Bush again, didn't they? And in the end, that is all that matters. It shouldn't be suprising to anyone that a group of people who would burn the nations flag wouldn't see anything wrong with squealing on a program that was used to actually track down and capture enemies of the country. Besides, this poor editor is really the victim here, isn't he! Another poor, persecuted victim of the evil VRWC.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

Amazing. You guys are impervious to truth. Explains your politics, I guess. Again:

We've established a foreign terrorist asset tracking center at the Department of the Treasury to identify and investigate the financial infrastructure of the international terrorist networks.

     It will bring together representatives of the intelligence, law enforcement and financial regulatory agencies to accomplish two goals:  to follow the money as a trail to the terrorists, to follow their money so we can find out where they are; and to freeze the money to disrupt their actions.

     We're also working with the friends and allies throughout the world to share information.  We're working closely with the United Nations, the EU and through the G-7/G-8 structure to limit the ability of terrorist organizations to take advantage of the international financial systems.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20.../20010924-4.htm

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Yeah, and the Secretary of the Treasury along with several members of Congress were just playing politics when they pleaded with this arrogant jackass Bill Keller not to publish this story. They ALL said the details in the story would do harm to the country's cause.

Whatever, dude. You are hopeless.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

Yeah, and the Secretary of the Treasury along with several members of Congress were just playing politics when they pleaded with this arrogant jackass Bill Keller not to publish this story. They ALL said the details in the story would do harm to the country's cause.

Whatever, dude. You are hopeless.

243806[/snapback]

Show me what "details" in the article went significantly beyond what the President said in 2001.

[Tigermike 3,050]

So Tex, we should all step back and take your word for it that the NY Times are merely the defenders of freedom.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

The SWIFT program was disclosed to the Times by unnamed government officials who, by releasing the information, violated their legal and moral obligations to secrecy. By printing the information the Times demonstrated its disapproval of the Bush Administration’s conduct in the war, its disdain for U.S. security and its willingness to compromise that security as it pursues its own agenda. The program was safe, legal effective, and classified and the press went with it anyway.

It's one thing for the press to expose government abuses. It is quite another for Bill Keller to determine what information about legal tracking of terrorists, information that is classified as secret, should be revealed to the enemy. These are the same people who demanded we should have "connected the dots" and implemented the 9/11 commission findings. That's exactly what this legal program has done.

This issue as a whole is so infuriating. I seem to remember back when the Mohammed cartoons were the big story that the NYT wrote an editorial about why they chose not to print them. I don't have their piece in front of me but the gist of it was that it might hurt Muslim feelings. Keller, et. al., are so careful and considerate and concerned about these FEELINGS and yet when it comes to our national security and our LIVES, they have no compunction whatsoever about putting it out there.

Go ahead and justify their actions. They weakened national security and you couldn't be happier.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

So Tex, we should all step back and take your word for it that the NY Times are merely the defenders of freedom.

243823[/snapback]

What you should do is take your head out of your fat ass and try making some sense.

[AURaptor 1,126]

The more we hear about this travesty, the worse it gets for the NYT. It's become more and more clear that these bone heads, along w/ the leakers in the Gov't, are actively sabotaging the United States security in hopes of allowing another 9/11 type attack so as to use that as politcal fodder against the President.

There is no other explanation.

Defend the NYT on this, you ARE un-American.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

The more we hear about this travesty, the worse it gets for the NYT. It's become more and more clear that these bone heads, along w/ the leakers in the Gov't,  are actively sabotaging the United States security in hopes of allowing another 9/11 type attack so as to use that as politcal fodder against the President.

There is no other explanation.

Defend the NYT on this, you ARE un-American.

244048[/snapback]

You're consistently un-American. You also need to stop calling yourself a libertarian since you obviously don't know what one is.