The New York Times, the LA Times, and the Wall Street Journal all wrote about the banking surveillance program. Yet the right has focused all their ire on the Times. Why?
Breaking News
Hurricane Ida Targets US Gulf Coast
Oliver Willis
Like Kryptonite To Stupid
-
-
Topics
Kristy Sanchez-Trujillo
T-Mobile Outage
T-Mobile
Megan Gale
Sylvie Van Der Vaart
Clash Of The Titans
Ashley Neufeld
Afton Williamson
Kyrstin Gemar
Tesla Coil
Xperia X10
Cany Vossough
Reza Vossough
Ninel Conde
Julia Louis Dreyfus
Guardians of Childhood
Botox
Chase Utley
Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time
Cherokee
Christopher Lee
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Cleveland Browns
Ernie Accorsi
Reina Flynn
Reid Gray
Cole Hamels
Brett Myers
Quinn Gray
SEPTA
Burlington Northern
Star Wars The Old Republic
Nightmare On Elm Street
Gerard Butler
Amrit Dhaliwal
Louise Linton
Gwen Stefani
Curtis Lavelle Vance
Anne Pressly
H1N1 Vaccine
Melody Ross
Oasis Of The Seas
Disney Cruise
Selita Ebanks
Anthony Sowell
JJ Redick
Axe Body Spray
Christopher Walken
Dragon Age Origins
Which has the larger circulation?
Because they were lead on the story. Sec Snow had gone to both the NY Times and the LA Times (weeks ahead) and pleaded with them to not hurt America by taking away a needed weapon in the War on terror. Keller, who works for a profit making corporation, arrogantly blew them off. Its not who knew, its who was going to hurt America first by going public. The NY Times wanted that ‘honor’ – and to think 9/11 happened on their doorstep.
Dugger “those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it”
Uh- because the NY Times published it first and once the story was published the other Times and the Journal could publish their stories because the cat was already out of the bag and they had less of a dilema in publishing it. (And you work for a organization that follows media? Not familiar with the term “break the story?”)
“The NY Times wanted that honor – and to think 9/11 happened on their doorstep.”
So says Dugger, lead scumbag in the war against his fellow Americans and democratic institutions. Here’s a man who has no shame and will accuse American journalists of wanting to kill their fellow citizens. He does this because he thinks the Bush administration should be able to do anything it wants, whenever it wants without having to tell the American public anything but he doesn’t have a coherent, rational explanation for why.
It doesn’t matter that it was common, public knowledge in the counter-terrorism community that the US government was getting information from SWIFT and other international banking institutions. It doesn’t matter that our real enemies, the terrorists, you remember them, aren’t so fucking stupid as to not know how international banking systems work and that law enforcement agencies would use those systems to tracj their activities. It doesn’t matter that terrorists have a many other means for moving cash around the world including the ancient system of Hawalas. No, forget all that. Bill Keller wants to kill Americans.
Link courtesy of Frank_D, who, it turns out, is slightly less dumb than the Scumbag Twins, dugger and pedro.
Let’s get serious for a moment, do you think Republican leaders would EVER criticize the Wall Street Journal for anything? I mean, they didn’t get where they are without knowing on which side their bread was buttered.
Always great to get frame hyperventilating. The same frame who knows more than the terrorism/financial experts in the Department of the Treasury. Wait. Maybe you once saw a movie on terrorism (Syriana?) and so now you know more than the experts who said harm was done.
At least you didn’t sign your post withe self-derogatory ‘idiot’ this time.
Dugger
Save,
Glad to hear that we can now count MIchelle Malkin, Brent Bozell and all the idiots at The Corner among the Republican leadership. Want to add Ann Coulter to that list?
Yes. http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000044.htm
Sure. http://newsbusters.org/node/3408
Of Course. http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGJkZjYyMTcwNTM1ZDg4MTkyMmExYjQyMGY2Njg3MzM=
Hyperbole is not your friend.
“, part of the way to make sure that we catch terrorists is we chase money trails.”
-George W. Bush, April 19, 2004
The simple fact is that the rightwing movement loves to hate their fellow Americans more than they love their actual American freedoms. They have become so wrapped up in their paranoid, Nazi-like delusions that a small group of people are trying to destroy Christianity and the flag and our beautiful war in Iraq that they have lost all sense of proportion. Hence, the Malkinites are “hyperventilating” (nice projection, Dugger) about “treason.” It’s no surprise that they want to hang liberals, but there’s no reason we shouldn’t call them what they are. You’re not conservatives, Dugger, Pedro, et al. You’re fascists.
“No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.”
-Thomas Jefferson, liberal hyperventilating traitor
delusions [emphasis added - fd] that a small group of people are trying to destroy Christianity and the flag
Have you been living under a rock?
Have you been living in 1933 Munich? Here’s my Frank impression: “THE JE– NO, LIBERALS STABBED US IN THE BACK IN IRAQ! THE JE- NO, LIBERALS KILLED CHRIST! THE JE- NO, LIBERALS ARE CONSPIRING TO DESTROY AMERICA!!!!”
Duggerself deeper
This was public information for years.
The Department of Homeland Security bragged about being able to track banking records.
The Times did their job. they exposed another secret and probably illegal program by our government. That’s their job.
And how could we forget Frank’s classic: “THE JEWS- NO, ARABS ARE HOOK-NOSED PARASITES WHO CONTROL THE WORLD’S ECONOMY!!!”
Hey, Gonzalez has a lot of leeway into what he investigates. It’s no suprise that he won’t investigate Bush’s surveillance program. What would be a surprise is if he’d go after the Times for an obivous non-crime. Why do you think he wouldn’t prosecute if it’s not a crime? Which is it?
I’ll believe that the Times might have broken the law when a U.S. prosecutor brings charges, not when some fascist-in-conservative’s clothes screams that it’s so.
why is what the times did any less illegal than what whomever put Val Plames name out there?
“[I have seen] repeated instances of the publication of what has not been intended for the public eye, and the malignity with which political enemies torture every sentence from me into meanings imagined by their own wickedness”–Thomas Jefferson
So this obviously means that the Bush administration has not broken any laws by using the NSA to monitor our phones. I’m glad you gave us your criteria for when you believe crimes have been committed. Hypocrite.
I think Jefferson was pretty clear. Here’s another quote you can shrilly assert is out of context or (irony of ironies) tortured:
“The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter”
-Thomas Jefferson, liberal hyperventilating traitor
Didn’t stop you from making your own prognostications about Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh …
Nope, and it won’t. But this one’s not a crime, and Gonzalez won’t go after it even though it’s a “slam dunk” according to every freedom-hating Malkinite. Why do you think that is? What’s the simplest explanation, troll?
Thom
Heres what the guy most knowledgeable said:
“You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that “terror financiers know” our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.’
Dugger, Is everybody just lying?
Not lying, but engaging in useful political theater. They know no crime’s been committed, but the President looks like shit to the public right now, so his advisors are ginning up an “enemy” that you petit-fascists can really get into a froth over.
Dugger
You respond by quoting someone else that doesn’t address what I was saying at all? WTF? Again: That we search through banking and other financial records for activities of our enemies is known and has been known for years. My links go to DHS and FBI Web sites that publicly brag about the links.
Snow is the most knowledgeable guy? Is he like god? And you’re going to put your hand to your forehead and play Fainting Mary asking whether they’re lying? Good freaking lord, that’s beyond thick.
“why is what the times did any less illegal than what whomever put Val Plames name out there? “
First Amendment, Peed’.
Look into it.
TomY: You’d have to study hard to be ignorant.
How dare you imply that I meant anything Jews or Arabs.
But if you’re going to tell me that Islam had nothing to with WTC I and II, Madrid, London, Bali, the USS Cole, and much, much more, then I would suggest that your head isn’t buried in the sand.
It’s tucked tightly and neatly into your colon.
explain to me why exposing the “secret” of valerie plame is horrifying, but the secret of how we are tracking the money of terrorists is OK based on the 1st amendment Quaker….
“explain to me why exposing the secret of valerie plame is horrifying,”
Horrifying?
You started out on “illegal.” Now the bar is raised to horrifying?
No dice, Peed’. You asked about illegal, and I explained illegal. What part of “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the press…” do you have a problem with?
Same holds in the Plame case, Peed’.
Fitzgerald undertook an investigation to find out who revealed her job. But the newspapers who printed the leak got a free pass.
1. Pedro is it your understanding that this New York Times story marked the first time that it was made public that the government was examining the records of central banks and international financial exchanges? Yes or no.
2. Based on what’s in the New York Times article could you explain exactly how a terrorist might avoid being detected when he uses the international financial system to transfer cash?
Thom
The man most in the know says the ‘old process’ is still used sometimes and is of great value.
You also would seem to have a major problem with three newspapers (at least) who made this story a prominent feature. Why would they do that if it were common knowledge?
Tell me, why did the liberal newspapers make sucha big dela of it if it was common knowledge. And then why did the Admin go along wi their ‘game’ by begging them not to release it. Are you concerned at all that all of the official and most knowledgeable peole think the data was of use and valuable and major Bush-hating papers thought it was big “newws”?
Dugger
Can any conservative explain why they think that the NYT will not be prosecuted, if a crime has indeed been committed? In the absence of any evidence, the simplest explanation is that there has been no crime, only politics. That’s all the Bush team does, anyways.
Apparently, the Bush administration asked the NYT and LAT to hold the story, but did not do so with the WSJ. Just another data point suggesting this “issue” is about political theater for the backwash of America, not the Malkinite wet dream of “TTTTRRRREEAAASSSSONNNNNN!”
“Why would they do that if it were common knowledge?”
Dugger just because you don’t know shit doesn’t mean that other people, including the terrorists, don’t know it as well. News about this kind of investigative tool was announced by the government itself, through the treasury department and the Department of Homeland Security. There were UN and university reports on the web about the effectiveness of such tools. Indeed, the Treasury Department noted on its webpage in 2004 about how it was going after other means of trackng terrorist finances because the enemy was turning away from traditional financial networks:
Terrorist networks are increasingly turning to cash smuggling to finance their activities, a top U.S. Treasury official says.
In September 22 testimony before a panel of the House of Representatives, Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey said that greater international vigilance of banks and other financial service providers has driven terrorist groups to seek other means of moving money across international borders.
http://usinfo.state.gov/ei/Archive/2004/Sep/22-862152.html
Do you think that terrorists just sit around all day waiting to read about how were trying to catch them in the New York Times? You don’t think that they are actively looking at what our own government says about its own procedures? You want us to believe that Osama Bin Laden, a freaking billionaire, was startled to learn abnout how the international financial system worked when he read about it in the NY Times?
This administration and conservatives in general have been waging war on the free press since day one. This isn’t a national security crisis, this is yet another excuse to browbeat and intimidate journalists. Just like the good fascists that you are, you buy it without a second thought.
You’re scum.
I apologize to humanity for my typing.
1. “New Tone”
2. The AG’s focus will be not on the NYT, but on the leakers.
3. A matter of focus. They’d rather spend their time tracking and catching terrorists than sitting in depositions.
4. Keeping the Peace. Once you start prosecuting the NYT, the entire MSM apparatus gang up on you (even moreso than before) to protect “one of their own” and it’s all-out war.
Once again, conservatives show that their movement is primarily defined by paranoid hatred of their fellow Americans, rather than by love of American values.
If it’s a serious, real crime, the AG will prosecute it. Come back when you have hard evidence, not airy, ephemeral speculation, Farris. In the absence of such evidence, what other possible, reasonable, conclusion is there but that GWB desperately needs a staged enemy to bring up his miserable approval ratings? We don’t need Farris’s convoluted, contorted explanations to explain why the NYT will be called criminals but never prosecuted. This presidency is failing and flailing.
“the press hasn t been TOO beaten down”
And thank fucking god. You dipshits are talking about putting journalists on trial for treason. It really doesn’t get any clearer than that does it? And for what?
A story that doesn’t do anything except inform the American people about what their government is doing in their name. The argument that this story could somehow hamper our efforts to catch terrorists is laughable. Tell me, what’s the single most dangerous passage to be published in the NY Times article? What operational information do the terrorists now have that they didn’t before? All they know is that were tracking financial transactions across international banking systems. They didn’t know that before? Are you kidding?
“This administration and conservatives in general have been waging war on the free press since day one”
Paul (Frameone)
I didn’t really believe that leftists like yourself were in the old Marxist-Leninist mode of truly hating america, a sort of self-hatred if you like.
But with statements like the above, I wonder. You make ridiculous, unfounded statements (the press seems to be printing whatever they want, including stuff that the adminstration “begged” them not to print….seems to me the press hasn’t been TOO beaten down). Then, we are expected to believe that the NYT has our best antiterrorist efforts in their forefront, but we can’t possibly believe that the people we pay to do counter-terrorism can be trusted?
There is no evidence that this plan had anything unconstitutional or illegal in it. The counter-terrorism community BEGGED them not to print the story. What other possible, reasonable, conclusion is there but that people who supported this story want the U.S. led war on terrorism to fail?
“What other possible, reasonable, conclusion is there but that people who supported this story want the U.S. led war on terrorism to fail?”
Oh, I dunno. Here’s one: the fact that the federal government is snooping randomly through bank records is…uh, whaddya call it….news?
Ok Tomy, I hope your logic is consistent (fat chance).
No AG prosecution of Gitmo.
No AG prosecution of wire taps
No AG prosection of an “illegal war”
No AG prosecution of illegal banking activities
So, I can expect you to shut your piehole about all of those activities now?
More “Paulism” from our “Gradual” student paul:
“You dipshits are talking about putting journalists on trial for treason. It really doesn t get any clearer than that does it? And for what?”
For leaking classified information paul. The first amendment is not absolute.
And more….:
“The argument that this story could somehow hamper our efforts to catch terrorists is laughable”
No Paulie, what is laughable is that you expect us to take the word of a second-rate movie critic for a free newspapers for our counter-terrorism decisions. You know Paulie, even your hero Murtha contacted the NY Slimes and asked them not to publish this information? You knew that didn’t you?
Thanks for doing my work for me, Pedro: the AG won’t prosecute Bush’s own real illegalities because of his political loyalties, and won’t prosecute the NYT because it’s a made-up illegality. Clear enough, “Doctor?”
Because they are easy going, good guys. Just more proof that republicans are good natured Tomy….you have the evidence right here. We just want to “get along….”
Still got no evidence, do ya Farris? Hey, why didn’t the WH revoke the NYT’s press pass if they’re “treasonous traitors”? Why didn’t they ask the WSJ not to publish? Still think this isn’t a political stunt motivated by the public’s distrust of the president, Farris?
That is one convoluted, contorted explanation.
“AG won t prosecute Bush s own real illegalities because of his political loyalties,”
Oh and Tomy? The only thing that is “clear” to me is tha you make up facts to support your worldview, not the otherway around….
Because they are easy going, good guys. Just more proof that republicans are good natured Tomy& .you have the evidence right here. We just want to get along& .
So…what you’re saying is that, even though they believe this hurts the WoT, it’s not serious enough to prosecute. Or, to put in simply, the cons don’t take the WoT seriously. That’s a reeeeeeeeeeal nice position to stand on.
It’s also a laugh riot to hear that the cons are “good natured” and “want to get along” from a mentally imbalanced sociopath like drpedro.
Peedro sez: “The first amendment is not absolute.”
Haw!
Check again, Peed’. Fill us in on those exceptions where Congress “may pass laws abridging freedom of the press.”
Here’s one off the top of my head
Have you seen any pictures of kiddie porn in the NY Slimes? Is it against the law?
There are laws abridging freedom of the press
Republicans see the NYT as a convenient whipping boy for political reasons. But let’s be clear: There is no crime.
There.
Is.
No.
Crime.
When anyone has any evidence for a real crime, bring it. Otherwise, it’s just more GOP spin.
Like I said tomy, that is fine as long as that is going to be your standard….I expect to hear not one word from you about “torture” from the US, or an “illegal war” then.
Rightwingers are already calling for Bill Keller to be sent to the gas chamber. Who’s next, Pedro?
“For leaking classified information paul. The first amendment is not absolute.”
Pedro you are obvious, predictable and dumb as dirt. The NY Times did not “leak” classified information, it reported what it was told by its sources. At the same time, the only person who has asserted that he is above the law in this scenario is George W. Bush.
The country you apparently want to live, in which the President can do anything he wants and journalists are jailed for reporting on the governments actions, is not America, pedro. Not by a long shot.
I heard some idiot on Hugh Hewitt’s show suggest that this story is tantamount to the NY Times reporting on the day and locations of the Normandy invasion. Give. Me. A. Break. What specific information did the Times reveal that could allow a terrorist to successfully thwart investigators? According to you merely revealing the existence of the program was enough. But anyone with a serious interest in using the international financial system for illegal purposes would have already known that there transactions were open for scrutiny and probably were being scrutinized. The government itself has announced that it was investigating international financial transaction records. It has also announced previously that it was looking to expand its intelligence of non-mainstream means of transferring cash such as hawalas.
All you want to do is attack the free press. That’s it. And the war on terror is the perfect cover. Given today’s new I can’t wait until we start hearing the wails of American fascists that the Supreme Court is hampering the war effort and needs to be investigated.
“I expect to hear not one word from you about torture from the US, or an illegal war then.”
Expect what you like; it’s clear to all reasonable observers that the White House resists all oversight, and therefore cannot be expected to police itself. You will continue to hear about the very real issue of U.S. torture from me (though I am indifferent to the legality or illegality of the failed Iraq war).
I figured your lefty “logic” wouldn’t hold up very long Tomy…..
Good point Paul. The Slime’s “source” leaked classified information.
I am waiting for the response from regarding the fact that even Murtha asked the times not to publish this information. So it appears it isn’t JUST the bush wh that is trying to supress the press eh Paul?
Finally, all your graduate student conjecture about the damage caused by this exposure is completely trumped by the fact that the people who actually KNOW THE PROGRAM requested(!) the Slimes not publish, people that include liberal democrats, yet in spite of that, we hear the persistent whine, from people who don’t know any better, that it is “unimportant”.
Given the above, pardon me for not paying any attention to my favorite movie critic for a free newspaper’s opinion on the subject of the programs value!
hehehehe…..Quakerina…..
why not just bow out gracefully and say “I was wrong”?
You want me to quote case law regarding kiddie porn?
LOL
Here s one off the top of my head
It’s nice of you to provide it enough flat space for a good takeoff.
Have you seen any pictures of kiddie porn in the NY Slimes?
Why no. Have you?
Is it against the law?
As far as I know, that proposition has never been tested. However, you seem certain that a prosecutor would prevail in court. On what do you base that opinion?
Pedro still hasn’t shown a) that this is a crime; or b) that this isn’t political theater for an administration on the ropes.
But he keeps spinning! Keep going, boy!
You want me to quote case law regarding kiddie porn?
Sure.
Show me a case where a legitimate news outlet has been tried on kiddie porn charges.
I’ll settle for just one.