I guess while I took the weekend off, the right-wing of the blogosphere waged jihad against the evil New York Times. So much so, that the #1 link on Memeorandum is this Bill Keller response to angry conservatives. Nut grafs:
Since September 11, 2001, our government has launched broad and secret anti-terror monitoring programs without seeking authorizing legislation and without fully briefing the Congress. Most Americans seem to support extraordinary measures in defense against this extraordinary threat, but some officials who have been involved in these programs have spoken to the Times about their discomfort over the legality of the government’s actions and over the adequacy of oversight. We believe The Times and others in the press have served the public interest by accurately reporting on these programs so that the public can have an informed view of them.
And:
The Administration case for holding the story had two parts, roughly speaking: first that the program is good — that it is legal, that there are safeguards against abuse of privacy, and that it has been valuable in deterring and prosecuting terrorists. And, second, that exposing this program would put its usefulness at risk.
It’s not our job to pass judgment on whether this program is legal or effective, but the story cites strong arguments from proponents that this is the case. While some experts familiar with the program have doubts about its legality, which has never been tested in the courts, and while some bank officials worry that a temporary program has taken on an air of permanence, we cited considerable evidence that the program helps catch and prosecute financers of terror, and we have not identified any serious abuses of privacy so far. A reasonable person, informed about this program, might well decide to applaud it. That said, we hesitate to preempt the role of legislators and courts, and ultimately the electorate, which cannot consider a program if they don’t know about it.
We weighed most heavily the Administration’s concern that describing this program would endanger it. The central argument we heard from officials at senior levels was that international bankers would stop cooperating, would resist, if this program saw the light of day. We don’t know what the banking consortium will do, but we found this argument puzzling. First, the bankers provide this information under the authority of a subpoena, which imposes a legal obligation. Second, if, as the Administration says, the program is legal, highly effective, and well protected against invasion of privacy, the bankers should have little trouble defending it. The Bush Administration and America itself may be unpopular in Europe these days, but policing the byways of international terror seems to have pretty strong support everywhere. And while it is too early to tell, the initial signs are that our article is not generating a banker backlash against the program.
By the way, we heard similar arguments against publishing last year’s reporting on the NSA eavesdropping program. We were told then that our article would mean the death of that program. We were told that telecommunications companies would — if the public knew what they were doing — withdraw their cooperation. To the best of my knowledge, that has not happened. While our coverage has led to much public debate and new congressional oversight, to the best of our knowledge the eavesdropping program continues to operate much as it did before. Members of Congress have proposed to amend the law to put the eavesdropping program on a firm legal footing. And the man who presided over it and defended it was handily confirmed for promotion as the head of the CIA.
Discuss (although I did like this little snide rejoinder from Keller: “Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government’s anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that’s the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.) “).
Steve
The common thread among this story, the telecom records story, and the secret prisons story is that all of them apparently involve folks who are happy to cooperate with the Bush Administration so long as no one knows they are doing so. You wonder why these people aren’t more proud to be fighting the War on Terror.
Slide.
Couple of questions:
1) how come the right wingers are not calling for the prosecution of the Wall Street Journal which published a very similiar story on the same day?
2) what part of the “freedom of the press” clause in the First Amendment is unclear to the neo-facists that seem so willing to forsake all of our liberties in the name of security?
3) why isn’t Congress doing it’s Constitutionaly mandated job of oversight so that members of congress would not have to learn about such programs without reading the NYT?
4) how long will it be before Darrell has 50 posts in this thread?
Mac Buckets
So in essense, this Champion of the Free Press is saying that everybody else should just shut up and allow the Times to expose legal and successful anti-terror programs…or the terrorists win? What a piece of work that idiot is — of course, his audience of barking seals probably thought it made perfect sense.
Keller just never stops insulting his readers’ intelligence with his fifth-grader’s logic, does he? Yeah, because no one would ever hear about the Times anti-anti-terrorism exposés if they were only in the NYT, and picked up immediately by the LAT, CBS, CNN, ABC, and MSNBC. So, naturally, if the anti-terror measures are ruined by exposure, it’s the bloggers‘ fault for daring to express their outrage that the NYT would sell out intel programs. Because everybody knows that the terrorists follow LGF and Powerline, not the Times and CNN! If no one would ever criticize the Times, then everybody would be happy, wouldn’t they, Bill?
Why can’t he just admit that he cares more about making money than he does about the paltry little fight against terrorists who want New York to be ashes in the soil?
Ancient Purple
How would they know? Honestly, unless a consumer/account holder can discover that their personal finances have been spied on by the government, it would be impossible to show abuse.
Sadly, most people don’t see that even a simple peek into someone’s bank account or a look-see into a history of transactions without a warrant is the abuse itself.
Oh, and before Darrell comes in here saying that what the NYT did was illegal and they should be charged with sedition and other crimes:
“Show me the law and the ruling.” – Darrell
Nutcutter
I have no comment until Darrell the Decider tells me what my opinion is on this.
Slide.
bucket boy:
whether these programs are legal is certainly debateable. The warrantless wiretapping program is mainifestly illegal according to the REPUBLICAN Senator that is chairman of the Judicial Committee. Some claim that the latest program is also of dubious legality. As far as being successful, no one has demonstrated to me that the massive wiretapping program has had any success whatsoever.
more from bucketboy:
this coming from the genius that is convinced that the Iraq war is a huge success. I need not say anything else.
Krista
I thought you were his spokesthingie, not the other way ’round…
Par R
I think Andrew McCarthy has put this in the proper context when he writes,….life or death in the Age of terrorism. 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?
What would our soldiers and ancestors think 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.”
D. Mason
I try not to label people as crazy, but the people calling for giving Bush power to prosecute reporters for printing the truth are off the fucking reservation.
Nutcutter
Exactly. Once he tells me what he has decided, then I can tell you what I think. I’m just the messenger.
Tony “The Whore” Snow is my role model.
Nutcutter
No, not at all. These are the same people who looked away when people like Tom Delay bashed the judiciary last year.
Propriety means nothing to these assholes. The righty blogosphere needs to have tough talk to keep the churn and the page views up.
Slide.
Oh please. I’m so disgusted with the cowardly fear of the bedwetting right wingers. Terror is a threat that we have to deal with no doubt but we always have had threats and always will. Is the bin Laden organization hiding out in their caves in Pakistan more of a danger than the tens of thousands of nukes we had targeting our cities during the cold war? Are they more of a threat than Hitler’s march across Europe? More of a threat than our Civil War which killed hundreds of thousands of Americans? If we are going to give up our liberties every time our nation faces a threat we might as well just burn the Constitution now and appoint George Bush Emperor and get it over with already.
Doctor Gonzo
Here’s the thing I don’t understand about the whole financial-tracking issue: how does publicizing it hurt anything?
Now that the terrorists know about it, they can do two things. First, they could stop moving money around, which sounds like a pretty big win to me since it would cripple international terrorism. Second, they can keep moving money around, and we will continue to track it. So explain to me how knowing about this program is so bad? The best security, in fact, continues to work well even when everybody is aware of it.
D. Mason
That almost seems to be the point now doesn’t it?
Mac Buckets
Trying to change the subject, Joe? In case you hadn’t noticed, this story wasn’t about wiretapping. The Times stories included several instances of the success of the bank data program in nabbing actual terrorists, as well as quotes from officials touting the disruption of terrorists’ funding.
That’s right, I forgot Saddam is still your President! How’d that hunger strike go?
Andrew
I’m 100% certain that terrorists had little idea that governments were watching their financials on this scale. Now that the New York Traitors have blown the whole program open, al Qaeda will simply use other methods to fund terror in America. Methods that we can’t track. Methods that leave us vulnerable. Our civil rights to life and safety have been compromised to prop up the bottom line of the loony left.
fwiffo
Only a fool concocts a strategy that relies on their opponent being a fool. You should play go or chess for a few months to see precisely why a strategy of “hoping your opponent doesn’t notice what you’re up to” is such a terrible idea.
Steve
The same people who are 100% convinced that the Plame leak couldn’t have possibly jeopardized national security are once again back to claim that the harm the New York Times has caused to national security is so self-evident it need not even be described.
Me, I’m just saving up all these quotes for when we have a Democratic administration doing what it feels is necessary to win the War on Terror. Gonna be comedy gold, when the wingnuts suddenly rediscover the sacred importance of civil rights.
Mac Buckets
The drawback is that we lose the ability to actually capture and convict the terrorists if they stop using the monitored systems. That’s a pretty big drawback.
Nutcutter
I felt safe when I believed that our safety depended on the terrorists never being smart enough to figure that we could monitor their financial activity.
Now that they have found it out by reading their Arabic NYT from right to left, we’re screwed. I am buying lead roofing for my house this week.
The Other Steve
I’m still amazed at the uttery stupidity of the right. That somehow letting the world know that your phone calls and bank accounts might be monitored is going to tip of terrorists and they’ll stop using the phones.
I mean, seriously? That’s their argument?
It’s like they think the reason we caught Al Capone was because he was reporting all his criminal activities on his 1040, and if the press had let the world know that the govt was reading your 1040 statements, Capone would have wised up and stopped reporting.
Do they seriously think criminals are this dumb?
As if bin Laden is walking around right now chatting on his cell phone like a overly loud soccer mom in a check-out line.
Mac Buckets
Terrorists were convicted under the program, as the Times reported. Obviously, they weren’t that smart. But now they know, and some terrorist groups will remain at large. Your press at work (for the terrorists).
Nutcutter
I felt safe when I believed that the terrorists could be caught and either jailed, or killed. The fact that there might be a million of them out there, spread around the world, notwithstanding.
And I’m glad that we pointed out how dangerous it was for people like John Kerry to talk as if he were treating terrorism as a criminal activity and not as a provocation for war, which we know it really is. So it is very clever of Mack “The Knife” Buckets to disguise the plan for war as a plan to capture and convict. That will totally throw the terrorists off track.
Doctor Gonzo
The point is that big terrorist organizations need to move money around to fund their operations. They aren’t going to be able to do this by strapping bundles of dollar bills to donkeys and sending them across the ocean. If people like bin Laden or his deputies can’t send hundreds of thousands of dollars to terrorist cells in this country in order to carry out attacks, then that’s a good thing.
Terrorists aren’t going to be able to stop sending money around the world if they want to keep on doing what they are doing. If, instead, they resort to lower cost “ideas” like blowtorching the Brooklyn Bridge apart, then I am confident that our law enforcement agencies can track these idiots down.
Mac Buckets
Uh, yeah. How is that in any way not rational?
Nutcutter
Right. Until the Times let the cat out of the bag, it was a sure thing that all two hundred terrorists would be captured and convicted, and then we could start saving two billion dollars a week to put toward Social Security.
Mr Furious
I love the false choice here… illegal surveillance programs and violations of basic Constitutional rights versus doing nothing and rolling out a red carpet.
I know of NOBODY who is opposed to proper surveillance of threats. But blindly trusting any government branch with absolute power without approval before or during, nor oversight after the fact, is fucking stupid. I’d say history has a pretty bad track record on that front.
Spy all you want on AQ and anyone else that’s a threat. If done legally and properly, I’ve got no problem. And neither does anyone else.
If these programs were legal, approved, supervised and effective there would never have been a story here, you jackasses.
Nutcutter
But you’re forgetting that 911 changed everything. Prior to that, we didn’t need a reckless king who would kick asses and take names and ask questions later.
Now we need the king. Your rhetoric is SO August 2001.
Tom
The WSJ: 1) didn’t do an independent investigation, 2) wasn’t asked not to run the story, and 3) ran it only after it was clear that the NYT and LAT were publishing the results of their own independent investigations.
The Other Steve
Speaking of the complete utter stupidity of the right…
Nutcutter
Because WSJ is a GOP house organ?
Jim Allen
And terrorists don’t read the WSJ anyway. Proven fact. Have you ever seen a picture of bin Laden reading the WSJ? They want to read a newspaper with actual photographs in them, not those silly woodcuts.
Nutcutter
Well, if secrecy is the key, we should keep that airport passenger security stuff secret. We could disguise the checkpoints as Shoe Shine Stations dres the TSA agents like Sesame Stree characters. If we had done that, we’d have all the terrorists behind bars by now.
Nutcutter
Russ Feingold had it right yesterday on Press the Meat:
The stuff we are doing now is insanity. Everything from Iraq to NSA to our foreign policy to our troop deployment model …. insanity. Time to put a stop to it.
Now we can add jailing the NYT to the list.
In case nobody is paying attention, countries that jail al the reporters don’t HAVE terrorist attacks. Helllooooo?
The Other Steve
Moron. You don’t fight crime by luring and catching criminals. You fight crime by stopping criminals from committing crime to begin with. BY MAKING IT TOUGHER FOR THEM!
That’s the fucking purpose of monitoring financial activities, telephone calls, travel patterns, whatever. WE WANT TO KEEP TERRORISTS FROM USING BANKS!
You better get up on your high-horse then and go after the US Government, because their are a whole slew of websites used by the finance industry to find out about complaince with the anti-money-laundering laws.
Nutcutter
Well, what we really want is for the terrorists to not only use banks, but to use the ones in the Safeway store.
We want them to get credit cards, do balance transfers, rack up the free air miles and use the rewards programs.
Apparently, we secretly know that terrorists are hot for those cheap magazine subscriptions that are in the rewards redemption flyers. Especially the Road and Muslim Track magazine, and also Popular Terrorist Mechanics Monthly.
Pb
In other news, Glenn Greenwald is still right, and Tom Maguire, Jeff Goldstein, InstaHack, etc., etc., are still petulant morons who apparently will believe anything that fits in with their preconceived notions, regardless of whether or not it’s even close to being true.
The Other Steve
Next thing you know Mac Buckets is going to be demanding we have all passengers sign Non-Disclosure Agreements before walking through the metal detectors.
You know, to keep the terrorists from sharing information on their experiences with one another.
Mr Furious
Oh, Steve, you fool. Treating terrorism like a crime…
slickdpdx
Since ppG is otherwise occupied, please allow me to call Nutcutter a spoof.
The Other Steve
Oh crap, see now you’re giving Mac Buckets more ideas.
He’s going to start demanding more laws to force the terrorists to use credit cards, under the assumption we’ll starve the beast with interest charges and late fees.
Nutcutter
Exactly, Steve. See, we have the terrorists trapped when we set the telemarketers after them, making them offers of credit score monitoring, overpriced life insurance, and home equity lines of credit. But remember, these schemes only work when ABSOLUTE SECRECY is maintained.
Besides, why should the terrorists be able to sit down to a meal or a tv show without getting a damned telemarketing call like the rest of us?
I think you see my point.
Nutcutter
More of a Pouf. But like the war on terror, my activities required ABSOLUTE SECRECY in order to work correctly.
Nutcutter
In other news, it will be reported later this week that NSA is running monitoring of grocery store discount card activity. Terrorists are know to have a taste for Tablouleh and also goat cheese.
By comparing tabouleh and goat cheese buying patterns against a secret mathematical model, we can identify not just active terrorists, but potential someday-wannabee terrorists, whose arrests are relatively painless, and according the Wolf Blitzer, solidly favorable for President Bush and the Republicans’ efforts to hold onto Congress.
So it’s win-win.
But again, the scheme only works if there is ABSOLUTE SECRECY.
Nutcutter
Okay, more news coming in …. the Safeway Shoppers discount cards will be wired directly to Terror Threat Level Color Code displays in the stores.
If there is a suspicious purchase of tablouleh or goat cheese, the Terror Threat Level display will automatically shift from Yellow (moderate threat) to Pink (pandering and hyping the threat) automatically, without operator intervention.
That way, you can shop in complete peace of mind at all times knowing that the government is right on top of the situation.
General Mills and Proctor and Gamble are bidding for the contract to do the actual compilation of shopping habits. Both companies assure us that this information will never be used for any commercial purpose.
Tim F.
Read his link.
Nutcutter
C’mon, Mac and Darrell, this is a fun thread. Jump in, the water’s fine!
(Warning: Your swim may be recorded for quality control purposes. Wink, wink).
Par R
Some moron above said:
Apparently this twit didn’t even bother to read the NYT or LAT stories. Even the Times is not asserting that the program is illegal or constitutes a violation of basic constitutional rights!
Nutcutter
That’s good to know. After Darrell, LAT is my preferred first source for opinion about the legality of things. And for crossword puzzles.
Nutcutter
The recipe that NSA ferreted out after monitoring twelve trillion phone calls. Had this recipe been kept secret, and not revealed by a traitorous press, the GWOT would have ended already in Total Victory(tm).
Nutcutter
Sorry, fixed.
slickdpdx
Thanks Tim. I noticed the link (hence the “while ppG is otherwise occupied”) but I don’t know the story behind the nom de guerre “Nutcutter.” That’s probably just as well!
Nutcutter
The antique Betel Nut Cutter is my inspiration.
I like to mix history and culture with my politics
Of course, some morons around here have suggested a more sinister meaning, or a sexual one. Those are persons of low degree, and should be scorned and ridiculed.
Otherwise, the terrorists win.
Mac Buckets
Look, TOS, we all know you aren’t very bright, but that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen a multi-celled organism write. “You don’t fight crime by luring and catching criminals.” The lefty brain at work. LOL!
The Other Steve
You may be onto something! I never realized just how disasterous the Do-Not-Call List has been to fighting terrorism!
Now Acme Kitchen Utensils and Explosive Ordinance can’t call your average terrorist at home and inquire as to whether he might want to buy a falafel maker or a small shipment of C4. Without this, we can’t monitor the trade of illicit munitions across state borders!
Hell, I mean take that logically extended further. Do you realize just how much banning the sale of C4 in the United States has hurt the war on terror? Back before it was banned, you could go into any hardware store and buy a pound of C4. You know, for uhh… starting your own rock quarry in your back yard.
But back then terrorists would just walk into the store and slap down the Safeco credit card with Member’s Rewards to buy their C4. This allowed us to track those purchases!
Today what we got? No tracking! We can’t track the terrorists, because they’ve gone below ground with their illicit weapons sales.
Clearly we must revoke the laws banning the sale of C4 in hardware stores! TO FIGHT TERRORISM!
Oh yeah, and the Do-Not-Call list!
Caseyl
Nutcutter, Ilove tabbouleh and that looks like a wonderful recipe.
Hey! Can I trigger a Code Orange all by myself if I buy tabbouleh, goat cheese, and dates? What do I need to do to make it a Code Red? Add some baklavah?
Rex
Weren’t we all well aware back in the winter of 2001 that the government was tracking banking transactions? This strikes me as no story at all.
tzs
May I point out that a lot of this data information gathering provides the following:
1) a lot of data that needs to be waded through. Lots and lots of data. Lots and lots and LOTS of data. We were already swamped with what we were collecting against money laundering, does anyone think adding more data to the heap is going to help matters?
2) a very low signal to noise ratio. (What do you do about false positives, hmmm?)
3) the more you make it difficult for people to get money sent around, the less likely they are to do business with you. Banks are already tearing their hair out due to some of the clauses of the PATRIOT Act. My business partner in Japan had to physically travel to the US to get signed up to access our business account. It’s an international bank, with branches in Tokyo, but the possibility of going to a local branch with identification and signing a signature card was just O-U-T. C’mon, guys–this is just stupid. At some point the rest of the world is going to get fed up and say heck, it’s just not worth the bother.
The Other Steve
Right. Because you know, the goal of having law enforcement is to throw as many people in jail as possible. It couldn’t possibly be to act as a deterent.
This right here represents the difference in the great divide between left and right. Lefties want to stop crime. Righties want to encourage crime so they can arrest more people.
We report, you decide on which one has a greater impact to the national economy.
Nutcutter
Thassright, Mac. If we could just make enough Roach Motels, we could get rid of cockroaches forever.
Par R
Here’s what the 9/11 Commission recommended (page 382):
That sounds pretty clear. The 9/11 Commission, over which the Times has endlessly fawned, demanded that the US implement “vigorous efforts” to track terrorist financing in order to prevent another attack. The Swift project did just that, without breaking laws or endangering civil liberties, according to the Times’ own reporting. The Times chose to blow the program and tip the terrorists anyway.
The Other Steve
Aye. Actually listening to Mac Buckets rant and rave about this reminds me of the old Elmer Fudd/Bugs Bunny cartoons.
Bugs Bunny: Eh, what’s up doc?
Elmer Fudd: Be verrry quiet, I’m hunting wabbits.
And you wonder why Mac, er I mean Elmer isn’t very effective at doing what he wants to do.
Nutcutter
Well, you can use your Al Qaeda No Hassle Rewards Visa Card to pay for the groceries.
Nutcutter
See, now you are going to get me in trouble. That AQ No Hassle Card monitoring program was TOP SECRET, and now I have exposed it to public view.
Fuck. The terrorists win again.
The Other Steve
Easy. We arrest them and hold them while we investigate. When we prove that they are innocent, we’ll release them.
Really, you ought to be asking yourself do you really need to do business in Japan? I don’t think so, and besides can you really trust these Japanese anyhow?
After all the first use of Nuclear weapons was in Japan. How do we know they won’t do it again, and use them on one of our cities!?
Oops, sorry… was channeling Darrell again. :-)
The Other Steve
NOOOOO!!!! You’ve blown our entire operation!
Next you’re going to reveal that the National Car Rental Emerald Card was really a secret program to hunt down Irish terrorists?
OH NO!!!! HWAT HAVE I DONE!?
Nutcutter
Thassright. Until NYT exposed it, terrorists would never have suspected that the scheme, touted in public by the commission a long long time ago, has actually been put into practice.
They thought, until last week, that if they just tiptoed vewwwy vewwwy quietwwy to the bank, nobody would notice them.
Of course, trying to make those CD deposits using a TalibanExpress ATM Card might have been a tipoff.
The Other Steve
So let me get this straight.
The 9/11 commission suggested that we track financial transactions to help stop investment in terrorist operations.
And you assumed that the Terrorists would look at that and say “Right! The US is going to actually do what the 9/11 commission says to do. I don’t believe that shit. I’m just going to continue using the banks like I always have done.”
The thought never crossed your mind that after the 20th time or so some guy get’s arrested, or money gets seized that maybe these terrorists might catch onto the government monitoring their financial trackings?
That was your plan?
Seriously?
If this is how you’re fighting the War on Drugs, no wonder the Columbian cartels are winning.
The Other Steve
Be very quiet. We’re hunting terrorists.
SeesThroughIt
Exactly. Now is the time to kill ’em all and let (a very specific white Christian) god sort ’em out.
After all, we’ve got to dismantle our freedom, otherwise these terrorists–whose sole rationale for becoming terrorists is that they hate our freedom, mind you–might dismantle our freedom! Is that what you want, you commies? Dismantling our freedom must be done by true patriots and NOT Al Qaida!
Pb
Boy is Cheney pissed. You’d think that the New York Times had stopped him from shooting someone in the face…
Nutcutter
Things not to say to your bank over the phone:
“Please I am liking to inquire about your Death to Infidels Interest Checking account. Allah akbar, I would like to deposit twelve million dollars.”
Certain alarms may be triggered if you use key words like “infidel” and “checking” in the same sentence.
Tulkinghorn
If you get a balaklava to go with your baklava, you need to be watched. Then again I think they caught all three of the Greek terrorists a couple years ago, so this may not be necessary.
Still a good way to keep tabs on that anarchist Dukakis.
The Other Steve
Damnit! Now you’ve blown Mac Buckets entire plan to defeat terrorism!
Mr Furious
Hey, Par R., are you too much of a “moron” to refer to me by name? It’s right there at the front of the comment. No need to strawman me, when you can take me on right in the here and now. I know the old “some say” is the preferred tool of the right, but come on…
Yeah, I did not read the stories, because there were no links provided. That makes me a twit? It might make me lazy, I suppose. I saw fit to comment based on the following passage in the Keller column John cited…
Which is pretty much what I said, you “twit.”
I lumped this story in with the “outrage” over the other programs disclosure when I referred to the false choice presented. You are presenting a false choice between giving the governement free reign to do whatever it want versus doing nothing at all, or saying anything is tantamount to treason.
If the government is powerless and cannot function or perform it’s duties protecting us without complete secrecy, and no criticism, then ( to take a favorite phrase of the Right), the terrorists have already won.
You Kool-Aid-swilling acolytes are prefectly willing to give everything up on your Commander’s say-so. I am not.
Steve
Absent some kind of disclosure of how suspicious transactions get flagged, there is absolutely no way this disclosure could have damaged the effectiveness of the program.
This administration fetishizes secrecy, so it’s totally unsurprising that when a media bogeyman like the NYT writes a story about them, they’d jump to the bully pulpit to scream about how national security has been harmed. What’s depressing is to see how many Bushbots fall for this same old line yet again.
Perry Como
Considering how many other recommendations the administration has ignored, it’s not that much of a stretch.
Nutcutter
Breaking News!
Safeway Stores will begin selling Jihad Calling Cards at the cash register this summer. Terrorists can buy these cards and get discounted calling rates to selected Middle Eastern area codes.
Safeway officials stated that they were sworn to secrecy about the cards, and had no further comment.
Krista
No, you’d just find me standing on your doorstep with a bottle of very dry red wine.
Nutcutter
Eddie Bauer Stores reportedly will test market a CafeBuster(tm) explosive fanny pack with thumb-operated detonator in selected stores later this year. Available in Hamas Olive Green and BinLaden Brown, the stylish terrorist gear is another step forward in the Department of Homeland Insecurity’s campaign to invade the activities of terrorists around the world … but especially in upscale American shopping malls.
Nutcutter
Oh, I forgot … batteries and plastic explosives, not included.
Krista
Good point. Nobody’s revealed the nuts-and-bolts of the program and how it works, just that it exists, which any person with half a brain would have suspected or deduced anyway. Good lord, we already know that your credit card company will call you if there’s “unusual activity” on your account, in order to prevent fraud. Everybody knows that. Does the knowledge of that somehow harm the attempt to catch those who would commit fraud?
Nutcutter
No, but more to the point, it doesn’t seem to slow down the avalanche of credit and identity theft activity, either.
Pb
So, I’ve got a question… who seriously didn’t know that we were tracking terrorist finances? Just Republican syncophants? I knew about it since at least 2002, when Bush started issuing executive orders detailing this precisely, including *lists* of which terrorist groups they were concerned about, and exactly what constitutes ‘terrorism’ (hint: pretty much anything we did to Iraq and Saddam would count too…).
chopper
i love it, the crazy paranoid dudes who swear that the jews ‘run the world’ couldn’t have possibly thought that the US is trying desperately to monitor their banking transactions. they only figured that out after the Times brought it up.
Nutcutter
People who don’t get cable?
I remember Bush himself talking about monitoring terrorist financial activities a long time ago. I guess the BushLatin speech patterns didn’t throw off the terrorists who were monitoring his utterances?
Nutcutter
And the Jew media are blowing the government’s cover. Is irony dead?
SeesThroughIt
Well, now you’re getting to one of the interesting ironies of the Republican position. See, terrorists are so stupid that if the treasonous, traitorous, terrorist-loving press didn’t report on things like phone tapping and finance watching, said terrorists would plum forget that such things are going on. Yet those same terrorists would be able to come up with new ways around phone tapping and finance watching.
To summarize, terrorists are too stupid to remember these things without a reminder, but they’re clever enough to work around them.
Otto Man
Yeah, Ben Franklin and Tom Paine must be spinning in their graves.
Seriously, go read some actual history. Your ignorance is painful.
Mac Buckets
So your brilliant reasoning is that eventually, terrorists would’ve figured it out anyway, so why not expose a working secret program today? (Reason #1,297 why the lefties lose elections on national security.)
Officials are quoted as saying the program was very effective and worked on many terrorists. Let’s see, from the few anecdotes in the NYT and LAT, we know that the bank data program worked on the Bali bomber in 2003, it worked on two terrorists that we know of in 2004, it worked on the guy in Brooklyn in 2005.
So that’s three years — when were these genius terrorists going to catch on? Three more years? Five? So how many terrorists will we lose track of because now the program is exposed to the world?
And when will johns start to figure out that she’s realy a cop?
Nutcutter
Right after you figure out that you are being boned by a government that apparently can get you to believe anything?
LITBMueller
Rick Santorum in Bizarro World:
Mr Furious
You’ve had a couple good ones today, p- er, nutcutter.
Nutcutter
Whew! Close one! Remember, my effectiveness, like your government’s, relies on Total Secrecy.
Steve
Zero. Get real. The terrorists are going to stop transferring money now?
Maybe they’ll be more careful in the future. Remind me, what in the NYT story provides any operational details about the program? What tells the terrorists how they can avoid scrutiny?
Once again, the people who couldn’t see how national security was harmed by the outing of a secret counter-proliferation operative, and her front company, and anyone who ever had dealings with her or her front company, somehow perceive fatal harm to our counterterrorism efforts with every word the NYT prints. Stop it, you’re killing me.
Tom in Texas
Are you referring to this alleged program where cops arrest people soliciting sex by dressing up like a prostitute? Because if you are, and the whores read this, they’re gonna move one block over and you’ll have BLOWN OUR WAR ON VICE!
Nutcutter
Thassright Tom. The Whores win.
Which, you know, has its good and bad points ….
Mr Furious
Don’t worry, if the New York Times keeps its mouth shut, the Righties will never figure it out…
Nutcutter
True, true.
Wait …. is that some guy sitting in front of my house in a rental car, scribbling on a spiral notepad?
HEY GET OUTTA HERE! SCRAM!
Damn reporters.
Oh wait, it was the guy reading the water meter …..
TM Lutas
What I suspect pisses off the administration is that a significant number of terrorists figured we were watching US financial networks like a hawk but weren’t able to get into EU led networks like Swift and thus happily transfered money between 3rd world banks using the Swift messaging service. The occasional arrest of this or that terrorist could be put down to a lack of information discipline from any of a number of directions. Now they know where a lot of their problems are coming from and they’ll disguise transactions using Swift or not use the network at all. A bank in Bangladesh and a bank in Bahrain that have nothing to do with US financial networks and no cooperation agreements with the US would have looked safe prior to the NYT/LAT stories. Now they don’t look safe to the terrorists. Thanks NYT for teaching terrorists to ask whether interbank transfers go via Swift!
Nutcutter
That scheme fails when terrorists just learn to ask for their copy of the Terrorist Privacy Disclosure Statement available at any bank.
Right there in paragraph 18:
The Other Steve
I’ll bet those terrorists are saying “Damn! There go our frequent flier miles we accrued!”
Let’s just face facts. Wingnutters just like any opportunity they can to complain about a Free Press. That’s all this whole debate is really about, looking desperately for some excuse to attack the NYTimes.
Nutcutter
HAHAHAHAHAHA. You said “debate.”
Nutcutter
Tom Tomorrow joins the chorus of NYT-haters!
Is Brooks the terrorists’ secret weapon?
jg
I think they really like attacking the left and the neocons have spun the concept of a free press as a lefty ideal somehow. Put people in the position of having to choose between standing with the right or left on an issue and its amazing what they’ll give up in order to stay on the right.
Steve
Uh, I love how you refer to SWIFT as a “messaging service” as if it’s just some Western Union type operation. Your argument is analogous to saying that terrorists will just reroute their domestic bank transactions outside the Federal Reserve System. It’s not quite that easy!
Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that from this day forward not a single dollar of terrorist financing will pass through the SWIFT network, because the terrorists know from media reports that their security has been compromised. If you don’t instantly see how this development would be a huge, huge win for us in terms of crippling terrorist networks, I don’t know what I could possibly say to explain it further.
Of course, in reality, terrorists will no more stop using the SWIFT network than they will stop making phone calls, which will underscore in a diferent but equally valid way how the supposed “harm” from publication of this story is purely mythical.
Tstick
Not that this matters, (facts continue to prove so unimportant in these flame wars) but a close friend works at SWIFT in their software maintenance. As he explains it, if one wants to transfer funds internationally, once can’t avoid the SWIFT network. It’s the only way banks talk to each other. So, whatever one’s view is of the NYT, their story about this changes not a whit the dilemma terrorists face. First, they probably already knew of the danger of exposure using wire transfer, but if they didn’t, there’s not a damn thing they can do about it. Well, other than use suitcases, as Keller explained.
Don
No security measure can be evaluated solely on its successes. I have a 100% effective mechanism for eliminating homelessness: Kill every one of them. We could be done by Saturday. Similar solutions exist for eliminating crib death, Yankees fans and boy bands. More on point, we can stop all airplane-related terrorism by grounding everyone and claim complete success: no more planes hit buildings because we never fly another airliner.
Since most civilized people think this is a little extreme, we find other solutions that are slower or less effective in exchange for a lower ‘cost.’ In the case of any security program the cost is financial impact, personal impact, loss of trust and inconvenience.
In this case it looks like the financial costs fell on Swift; there’s no mention of payments for this data transfer. Like any business cost, you can be sure this rolls downhill and eventually is passed on to the consumer. In personal impact it seems confined to Swift but who can say? With no continued oversight – Swift seems to be acting based on a few initial and broad subpoenas – it’s impossible to know what’s been snooped. Note this line:
“At first, they got everything — the entire Swift database,”
It’s impossible to know what happens with that data. The government may be Good – you’ll have to take up that larger question with people like Gingrich – but it’s made up of people, not all of whom are trustworthy.
Their case certainly isn’t helped by exposure that they wondered if this was legal, but eventually based their decision that it was okay on a distinction between a bank and a data processor. It smells little different than saying it’s okay to look through your safety deposit box if they get the cleaning staff to let them in rather than bank officials. The data’s the same, it’s just a matter of who’s got the keys to the kingdom at that particular moment.
Of course, that’s the kind of distinction the courts could consider…. if the matter was handled by proper warrants or exposed to the light of day.
Nash
Now that the New York Traitors have blown the whole program open, al Qaeda will simply use other methods to fund terror in America. Methods that we can’t track. Methods that leave us vulnerable.
No, you don’t mean….No, it can’t be! al Qaeda will start using….
Gift cards!
Arghh!
Shh, just be sure no ones rats out the service fees to al Qaeda. As long as they think the gift cards last forever, there go the balances! Hee hee.
SeesThroughIt
Actually, Stephen Colbert, in a not-in-character interview made an excellent point about how that works:
Andrew
What about rollover minutes? Has the secret government plan to track al Qaeda’s Cingular usage come to light yet?
Dave
It really does make me sad to see so many people willing to completely give up on hte bill of rights all in the name of “fighting terror”.
Pb
Am I missing the page in The Constitution where it says “except for National Security”, or is that only in the Republican copy? I’m going to stick with my copy anyhow because I think their copy is missing The Bill of Rights too…
Marcus Wellby
I for one stopped giving a fuck what this idiot adminstration or its moronic supporters said a while back. Just accept that they want a Soviet styled America and there is nothing to do about it. THe press is clueless, the opposition useless, and the energy spent being concerned just isn’t worth it.
I will mind my own business, spend quality time with my wife, freinds, and family, and let the country go to shit. This is the government most Americans want, so fuck it, let the retarded babies have their bottle and leave me the fuck alone.
I don’t plan on voting in ’06, and unless a third party comes along in ’08 will be sitting that one out too. YOu ass clowns should have voted for Perot when you had the chance.
Richard 23
Blogs for Bush (aka Bobbleheads for Bush) is advocating terrorism: Is It Time To Bomb The New York Times?
Bomb the New York Times? But of course! Aren’t Matt and pals doing the same sort of thing those Sears Tower Seven were arrested for? Bloviating about boming US targets? Hmm. But just in case one of his readers goes all Timothy McVeigh, he follows this tirade up with an out. Just like mAnn Coulter, he was only kidding. Sorta.
No let’s not bomb the NYT totally, just like kinda. But of course. And if anyone were to do so, gee, I was just kidding. Ha ha ha. Deranged tool.
I recommend following the link for the unhinged bobbleheads who advocate arrest and execution for these communist traitors. With the first amendment comes responsibility to report only what the government wants and there is no such thing as a right to privacy. Enjoy.
Nutcutter
Well, the jury is still out on whether the GWOT can be fought by looking through the balance transfers and air miles records of 600 million Westerners …
…but I think that nothing beats the “torture a mentally ill guy and then believe any shit he tells you” approach to anti-terror intelligence. Pound for pound, that’s where you are going to get your most interesting, if not exactly accurate, information.
Tip-o-the-Nutcutter-hat to Eric Rauchway (MSNBC) for pointing that out to me today.
Hey, what did the crazy guy on the rack give us today?
Seven guys in Miami with a bong and an FBI informant they took to be an Al Qaeda operative?
Ooorah!
radish
Disclaimer: I haven’t read any of the three articles that started all this, so I realize I may have to eat some of these words…
What officials? Who do they work for? What’s that? They’re superdupertopsecret anonymous officials who swore an oath to uphold and defend and would never ever lie to us? Ah. Thanks for coming. Don’t call us, we’ll call you…
WTF are you talking about? Are you saying the Bali bombing never happened? Oh. You’re saying that it happened but
wethe Indonesians wouldn’t have caught the perps without using this program? Not that either? So what you’re really saying is thatwethey would have caught the perps anyway, but that this program must have contributed materially to their convictions in Indonesia, not because of anything in the court records, but because some anonymous US official said so to some journalist, and so there, nyah nyah nyah? Yeah, that’s about what I thought.“We” don’t know any such thing, and we are not amused by your presumption. Cites please.
You’re suggesting that the capture of the infamous Brooklyn Bridge Blowtorching Microlight Pilot was a result of this program? Maybe, but I’d like some cites please. I don’t even remember anything about money transfers. In fact… wait just a fucking minute… I thought Faris was trotted out as the poster boy for the warrantless wiretapping program when in fact the court case against him… Hmmm….
[Gooooooogle] Yeah, there it is…
Maybe you should explain what it was that you think Iyman Faris actually did for Al Qaeda, and how we caught him. That might reassure me that you have a fraction of a clue what you’re talking about.
Meanwhile, according to you and Par R and TM Lutas the terrorists are such boneheaded morons that they think transfers that don’t go through the US are automatically safe, but they have such sneaky-smart tradecraft that the only way to catch them is by sacrificing our civil liberties. (of course at that point they’ll stop hating us anyway because we won’t be free anymore, so we won’t even have to go to the trouble of capturing them).
Go ahead and surrender, guys. We’ll manage just fine without you…
Zifnab
I think the big joke is that the administration honestly thinks it can take down the NYT. The right wing noise machine isn’t going to make the paper any more “liberal” with its whining today than it did five years ago, and they’ve already poisoned their flock to everything that’s not a Rupert Murdock publication, and yet the NYT still has a very solid and substantial consumer base (*gasp*).
Bringing the Times up on charges of treason can’t help but lose. Bush hasn’t done THAT good a job of stacking the SCOTUS. He can’t try the case at the state level and expect to win – the judges up there aren’t your red-neck bible thumpers like Roy Moore. The very idea is all just tough talk and hot air.
They’re just trying to put the NYT on the ballot for ’06. You’ll be seeing Congressional debates and television ads decrying the treason-funding readers of the NYT like “insert candidate here” and rounding up databases of NYT subscribers to be targeted with traditional Republican sleazy tricks. Paint it red enough with treason, and I’m sure someone will be trying to ban the NYT from being delivered his locale as a Republican ballot initative in ’08.
Richard 23
Well the sad thing is we could give up all our remaining freedoms and it wouldn’t change a thing. “They” hate our government and its policies. So even if we all volunteer to wear a chain and take an embedded rfid chip and have a government webcam in our bedrooms and bathrooms we wouldn’t be any safer.
Nutcutter
In identity politics, you don’t want to take down the thing that riles up your base. You want to build it up, and then demonize it.
No point in demonizing the Billings Gazette.
Perry Como
That’s a perfectly rational response from a mainstream Republican. Why do you hate America?
Nutcutter
Well, it really is a brilliant strategy. They “hate us for our freedoms.” So the sensible thing to do is to throw them away.
Perry Como
They “want to terrorize us.” So let’s make sure the government does everything it can to make the American people scared little pant wetters.
Perry Como
And let’s not forget my personal favorite:
They “want to destroy our economy.” So let’s spend $8.5 trillion dollars.
SeesThroughIt
Richard 23: Isn’t Blogs for Bush fantastic? It’s like one-stop shopping for truly bizarre world views. I’m particularly enjoying Mark Noonan’s latest bit of complete idiocy: modern slavery in general and sex slavery in particular is entirely the fault of “the left” for hating the Judeo-Christian underpinnings that define civilization as we know it. Any normal person would think I’m making that up; Noonan atually believes it. Awesome.
Nutcutter
Too lazy to look it up … is B for B a PJ site?
The Other Steve
It’s impossible to spoof a righty. I mean you take the most bizarre idiotic, moronic statement you can possibly think of…
And some Republican will outdo you, and seriously believe it.
Everything from blacks ought to be happy about slavery because it gave their ancestors an opportunity to come to America. Or if Hitler could get rid of six million Jews in a few years, then Bush is obviously lying when he says he can’t get rid of twelve million illegal immigrants.
You just can’t make this stuff up.
Zifnab
Oh please. It’s a well known fact that reading the bible causes people to hate slavery. Only a bible-burning facist communist liberal would buy, sell, or use slaves for manual labor or sexual gratification.
Name one Christian who’s for slavery. One. You can’t, can you? That just proves my point.
The Other Steve
I’m pretty certain it’s an offshoot of the 2004 race, started by the Bush campaign to show they were hip and cool like the Democrats.
The Other Steve
Veritably this is true, oh wise sage.
SeesThroughIt
It was allegedly started independent of the Bush campaign during the 2004 race, but it isn’t a PJMedia site, at any rate. It is its own unique brand of fucking weird that basically goes out of its way to prove this statement:
Richard 23
Mark Noonan has admitted that his mother smoked and drank while pregnant. I’ve heard but not seen proof that George W Bush’s parents are cousins. Is this true?
So what’s Darrell’s excuse? Crack baby?
t. jasper parnell
Why we fight
Chaos
Wow, the ability to circle-jerk for hours and hours on end… how long each day do you guys spend doing crunches to keep that stamina up?
I’m not sure just how long Nutcutter has been typing one-handed with a huge mirror set up beside him so he can admire the sheer brilliance that is Nutcutter, but maybe while coming up with amazingly witty refutations of arguments no one made and devastating Elmer Fudd parodies, he forgot the part where apparently yes terrorists did not know that these transactions were being searched, since, yeah, Hambali and all that were indeed arrested thanks to, in part, the SWIFT program.
So, as far as I can tell, the program was useless anyway because terrorists are infinitely smarter than the idiots in the Bush Administration… even though this program has led to the arrests of terrorists.
So what should I believe? Nutcutter’s attempts at humor and the groupthink following his general line… or what appears to be the reality of the situation, that the program was Constitutional, that it didn’t violate anyone’s privacy (at least as determined by the US Supreme Court, apparently information in the hands of third parties can be accessed by anyone more or less if you can convince that third party to give it to you), and it was effective, helping the effort to catch Hambali (maybe the families of the 202 dead in Bali would appreciate your gargantuan wit, Nutcutter), among other terrorists.
I’m torn, because acting like eight-year olds for 130+ posts is really indicative that you guys are correct.
Oh wait, no it isn’t…
As is yours, since apparently you think the Founding Fathers would not be fairly and equally disappointed in both sides of the aisle.
I’m sure Tom Paine would be impressed by Elmer Fudd parodies and that whole Safeway thing, though. No doubt he’d declare that the comments here are descendants of Common Sense itself.
Funny how reporting on the program and mentions of concerns about legality and privacy are immediately accepted as fact of illegality and sinister invasions of privacy, while information about the successes of the program(s), legality, etc., in the very same article, is ignored.
Well not really funny, just kind of typical… I suppose retreating into ideological bubbles where everyone else thinks like you and vocally reinforces your own opinions is preferable to living in the reality of 12 years of electoral beatdowns (okay well Clinton smacked Dole in ’96), a conservative Supreme Court, a Democratic party still seemingly unable to mount any kind of forceful, effective political campaign…
But at least you guys have the comments section! Your victories are stunning, I don’t know why the GOP hasn’t just given up in the face of your overwhelming superiority.
Maybe because you can’t seem to translate that asserted superiority into any kind of tangible accomplishment?
Who knows really, I wonder what Elmer Fudd would have to say about it all… I’m sure Nutcutter knows!
Richard 23
Thank God Chaos is here to set things straight.
So Chaos, should the New York Times run stories by the government before publishing them? Should the NYT building be bombed?
Video Clip of the Day
The Other Steve
Chaos – I don’t understand. What was the point of your typing for 3 hours, when your first sentence summed up the whole post?
Slide.
Well what do you expect from someone that picks nutcutter as his brand new screename. From the Urban Dictionary:
.
Its a little bit difficult for me to take seriously someone who fancies himself as a pair of testical revealing, fugly shorts.
Sojourner
Did it ever occur to you that we care much much much more about the well-being of our country than we do about winning elections? That we’re Americans first and Democrats/Independents second?
This is not a f’ing football game.
What a moron.
Steve
You know, there are actually a lot of good points to be made on the other side of the issue (at least, where the issue is rationally defined as something other than “should the NYT face the death penalty”).
It’s amazing that that guy managed to write for so long without making any of them.
Nutcutter
These stories are usually vetted and the early reports I heard wrt this particular story are … that they did in fact have an exchange with the Bush administration, who “asked” that it not be published at this time.
Yes, I think they should run the stories by the authorities, for a variety of reasons, which include fact checking and dodging classified information.
Notice, NYT was not “ordered” not to publish, and there was no legal action taken to stop it … probably because the feds knew that there was nothing illegal about the story being published. The tough talk you hear now from Bush and Cheney is probably just the follow-through on a threat to intimidate NYT from the bully pulpit.
There’s no crime here and the government knew that from the get-go. If there were one, Bush and Cheney would not be chatting it up now, knowing that they would be prejudicing their case. There’s no case to prejudice.
That’s why NYT vettes the story, to find out what their exposure is. What they learned is that their exposure was that they were going to get screamed at for running the story, but that’s about all.
Bushco is on the offensive these days and probably sees this as a win for their efforts to motivate their base.
The Other Steve
AMEN!
The Other Steve
Shorter idiot on the video….
Whaaaaaa!!!!!! I hate the Bush administration for making me support Soviet Values instead of American ones.
The Other Steve
Oh dear, looks like Limbaugh is back at it again… this time he was caught with a bunch of Viagra that he didn’t have a prescription for.
What’s he doing with Viagra? I thought he got divorced and is now single. Surely he’s not engaging in sexual intercourse out of wedlock.
pdquig
Yeah, right. Nothing illegal to see here. No matter how you all frame it, the NYT just published its third set of classified information piped directly from government leakers (who signed sworn pledges to get their security clearances) to the NYT. These pricks made no attempt to use the legal whistleblower channels. Must be Baby Boomers: no patience for process and discipline, infinite narcissism and pique at not getting their way anymore electorally.
Why Bush has not taken on the NYT is fairly strange, since it would be an immediate boost for him with his disaffected base. It is so blantantly illegal that it makes one believe that Keller has some pretty nasty dirt on Bush. This one is going to be interesting in the end, one way or another.
Richard 23
Lock up them druggies. Hmm, time for a beer.
Nutcutter
We don’t suppose all this foot stomping and arm waving today is an attempt to deflect attention from the history of this story, do we?
And BTW, as Chris Matthews pointed out today on Hardball, there appears to be nothing in the recent NYT-WSJ stories that is actually new and hasn’t been reported long ago.
So what do we suppose all this fuss is really all about?
Richard 23
Laughable fool Brian Maloney, who equalizes nothing, immediately leaps to Limbaugh’s groin, er, defense.
Get this:
If AmericaBlog is on the right, I’ll eat my own foot.
John Redworth
Come on people, if this was just published in the WSJ, bin Laden would not have seen it… first off, he didn’t get the great sub rate as he did with the NY Times and secondly, bin Laden has a fetish for the NY Times crossword… oh wait, was that public information?
Nutcutter
Well, I should have read that earlier. It confirms what I said … that the story was heavily vetted to Administration officials, and … more to the point here … no argument of illegality was apparently made to BYT by those officials. The reason should be obvious … the story “calls attention” (their words) to the story, but does not really reveal anything not already known.
That’s the basis for the insane rantings on the right: The story “calls attention” to a program already made public long ago. In fact, stories about the basics of this program go back six years, to before 911.
You can believe what you like, but AFAIC this government has not earned the right to hide behind a veil of secrecy in these situations, and then browbeat reporters who write the story. Even if a theoretical argument in favor of restraint could be made, it could not be made successfully to me by this asshole government. There is a danger to the country here …. it’s called the Bush Administration. They don’t lecture me about what is “disgraceful” in this context. They are disgraceful.
Nutcutter
I dunno. Planning for 911 began when the evil Will Short became the puzzle editor. No wonder the terrorists hate us.
Nutcutter
I dunno. Planning for 911 began when the evil Will Shortz became the puzzle editor. No wonder the terrorists hate us.
The Other Steve
Yeah, but it’d make Bush look like a whackadoodle President, and oh… I guess maybe it’s too late.
Is there anybody left besides Barbara that still loves this guy?
Beej
Alright, once and for all-does anyone here really think that all this gnashing of teeth on the right has anything to do with anything except trying to earn points for Bush and Co. with the base that really loves to hate that bastion of sinful liberalism, the NYT?
Richard 23
Aw, so Chaos was in a circle jerk all by himself? Oh too bad.
Pb
The Other Steve,
Al Maviva is back?!
Richard 23
This just in: Rush’s prescription for Viagra was not in a doctor’s name — it was in the name of his male lover. Wow.
MikeLucca
This is what disgusts me about our media: they act as though the First Amendment was a license to commit treason. So-called free speech was never intended to make it legal to release national secrets, it was meant to allow for free expression of moral, religious and artistic sentiments. That sort of freedom of speech we can all support. But this…this is treason.
As Par R and Mac say: Bill Keller belongs in jail. Though I do not think he should be sent to Gitmo.
Krista
(channelling comic-store guy)
Worst-kept national secret…EVER!
Heck. I don’t even live in your country, but it takes a real dull knife to not figure out that financial institutions have ALWAYS flagged suspicious activity, and tipped off the authorities when needed.
Tulkinghorn
Mike:
I am not too clear on the law regarding national security secrets, but I am pretty sure that something needs to be secret before publishing information about it can violate any security laws.
We know the US has spies in Tehran (at least I sure as hell hope that we do). We don’t know who they are or how they are operating, but I am pretty sure I am not now violating the law by here stating that the US has a spy network there. Or am I a traitor for stating the obvious?
It is not unlike the Plame arguments that have been made in certain quarters… if everybody knows a person works at the CIA, then that can hardly be a violation of the law to disseminate the information. Or is this just another case where one standard exists for the party faithful and everybody else is assumed to be domestic enemies of the constitution?
MikeLucca
Everyone knew Valerie Plame was a spy. This is not comparable to that. Joe Wilson used to brag about his wife being a CIA agent, calling her “the spy who loves me”. In this case, real secrets vital to national security have been revealed — in the Plame case, all that came of it was a sort core porn photo spread in Vanity Fair.
I repeat: Bill Keller belongs in jail with Richard Reid and Zacharias Moussaoui.
Nutcutter
Just in case there was any doubt whether
DougJLucca is a spoof …..The Other Steve
Nice spoof.
You have all the right ingredients there. The faux outrage, the attacks against the NY Times(who for some reason you regard as liberal) and so on.
I especially liked this…
Although you should have added something about liberals and Chimpy McHitlerburton.
Pb
This is rich–apparently to inform the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee of this long-standing program, it had to be leaked to The New York Times. Let’s hear it for Congressional oversight!
Sherard
Since this is the leftie argument du jour, perhaps someone can provide ANY link to something that discusses the use of SWIFT for this purpose prior to the NYT articles.
The idea that vague concepts = intricate details is pathetic. But then, that’s typical of the left in this country. Defending this action by the NYT is a kiss of death among all but hardcore lefties in this country. I suggest you keep on plugging.
Ancient Purple
Spoof.
And a terrible one at that.
Davebo
Odd concept of free speech you have there. But hey, you could be a reincarnation of Jefferson.
Here, have some of my “free speech”, it expresses neither morality, religion, or art.
Pb
Sherard,
Glenn Greenwald already did. It’s mentioned in a public report to the UN Security Council from December of 2002. Thanks for playing!
Davebo
The United States will continue to work
with our friends and allies to disrupt the
financing of terrorism. We will identify and
block the sources of funding, freeze the assets
of terrorists and those who support them,
deny terrorists access to the international
financial system, protect legitimate charities
from being abused by terrorists, and prevent the movement of terrorists’ assets through alternative financial networks.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/counter_terrorism/counter_terrorism_strategy.pdf
Pb
Davebo,
If we aren’t going to mention SWIFT directly, then let’s see who tipped off the terrorists *first* that we might be cracking down on their international financial transactions…
From 9/24/2001:
Blabbermouth! Mr. President, you’re making it harder to fight this war on terror!
ppGaz
Yes, Pb, the Greenwald, thing, and I posted yesterday a story that was originally from 2002 which indicated that the Swift monitoring was publicly known going back to 2000.
Also I think (haven’t seen the blurb myself yet) that Richard Clarke’s book from 2004 mentioned it as well. And of course there are the 911 Commission materials. I’ll check the Clarke thing when I get the inclination, or somebody else can look it up. His name is all over the pre-2004 material on the subject.
As I said, the NYT story revealed almost nothing that hadn’t been published before, but is said to “call attention” to the facts already out there. So the crime they committed was “calling attention” to something already known. Yawn.
LBNL, the vetting. The story was run by Administration officials before publication and apparently no mention was made of any legal issues or classified material that was off limits.
So the whole ruckus is a scam … as usual … by the lying turds in the White House, designed to churn up the blogs and the base. This is the kind of shit we can expect from them for the remainder of the election season.
Last week, the phony “Miami terrorists.” This week, the “treasonous” NYT. Every week will feature some bullshit GWOT-related scam thing now until election day.
Steve
I couldn’t have said it better myself. The people who try to claim that these various NYT stories expose operational details are just pathetic, aren’t they?
Nutcutter
That ppGaz guy is great. He should post more.
Davebo
Wow! Turns out Matt Drudge does have a sense of humor after all!
Currently on his site..
Nutcutter
Gold.
Pb
ppGaz,
That ‘Miami terrorists’ thing was hilarious. The scary militant black Haitian Muslim gay immigrant cabal turned out to be some kind of weird band of loser bible study reject slackers. Fear!
Perry Como
These posters are great. It’s tragic how bad administration sycophants are at Photoshop.
The Other Steve
Good News out of Palestine
Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a two-state solution, recognizing the existence of Israel. Now the question will be if these two groups can control Islamic Jihad who disapproves.
Don
Maybe he’s a urologist who specializes in vasectomies.
The Other Steve
From the horses mouth…(that’s a link to the swift.com website, btw)
Who is FATF?
The Other Steve
The Case is Closed on the Stupidity of Republicans.
Can we move onto something else now? I mean seriously, how fucking stupid do you have to be to continue to claim SWIFT and FATF aren’t pretty well publicized organizations when they have their own websites?
The Other Steve
Are we allowed to make jokes about Rush’s apparent problem performing in the bedroom? You know like how can such a big dick not be able to get it up? Things like that.
Perry Como
Greenwald’s take on the whole thing is interesting. I can’t seem to work myself up into a lather over the program or over the NY Times “revelation”. We’ve been tracking international drug dealers using stuff like this for a long time, so I assumed that we had been/are doing the same to terrorists. Can’t say I’m disturbed by the program either.
As Greenwald thoroughly documents, this information has been out in the public for a long time. The amusing bit about this is how all of the nannystatists now want to imprison (or kill) journalists. The ease at which this administration can whip its fawning attack dogs into a lather over such a non-issue is quite interesting, and dare I say, impressive.
What’s less impressive is how the nannystatists support eviscerating another amendment, but it’s not surprising.
The Other Steve
That’s not to say they aren’t dangerous. Many a person who has killed hundreds has turned out to be a lunatic.
But it does sort of put a damper on the Republican claims that we’re facing the second rise of Hitler here. That is, these aren’t thoughful coordinated sociopaths here, but crazed lunatics. Not the most fearful image you can conjure up.
I mean, obviously, they probably are scarey to your typical Republican but that’s because they are cowards and piss their pants when they see a mouse.
Josh Marshall pointing out that part of the indictment mentioned they were looking for terrorist uniforms was golden, though. :-)
Perry Como
Security through obscurity. It works for software…er…maybe not.
VidaLoca
Wolcott, leading the charge…
Perry Como
Limbaugh said he got the pills in the Clinton Library gift shop.
VidaLoca
I knew the Clenis would get the blame somehow. Why is everything always his fault?