TIMES DAMAGE REPORT IS DUE (Senate seeks intellence damage assessment on NYT leaks)

NY Post ^ | 6/28/06 | DEBORAH ORIN

[jimbo123]

WASHINGTON - The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday asked America's top spy to assess the damage done to the nation by New York Times leaks of top-secret intelligence.

Sen. Pat Roberts' letter to Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte came one day after President Bush blasted the "disgraceful" Times leaks and said they caused "great harm."

"Unauthorized disclosures of classified information continue to threaten our national security - exposing our sensitive intelligence sources and methods to our enemies," Roberts wrote.

Roberts (R-Kan.) requested "an assessment of the damage" because "we have been unable to persuade the media to act responsibly and protect the means by which we protect this nation."

[jimbo123]

This damage assessment will be an important part of any criminal actions brought against the Times.

[Wolfie]

Who leaked it to the Times?

[From One - Many]

I can hear the whitewash going on the fence in DC out here in flyover country.

[SE Mom]

Here we go...

WTG Sen Roberts!

[finnman69]

Get Fitzgerald off the non-story Valerie Plame hub bub and find the leakers of this!

[jimbo123]

: Senator Pat Roberts
109 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-1605

Phone: 202-224-4774
Fax: 202-224-3514

[JFC]

Tim Russett is taking the side of the NY Slimes... he says Bush is trying to shoot messenger!

Tim, I see your true colors shinning through................

[Polybius]

18 U.S.C. §798. Disclosure of Classified Information. (a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information— (1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or (2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or (3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or (4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—Shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (b) As used in this subsection (a) of this section— The term “classified information” means information which, at the time of a violation of this section, is, for reasons of national security, specifically designated by a United States Government Agency for limited or restricted dissemination or distribution; ......... The term “communication intelligence” means all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients; The term “unauthorized person” means any person who, or agency which, is not authorized to receive information of the categories set forth in subsection (a) of this section, by the President, or by the head of a department or agency of the United States Government which is expressly designated by the President to engage in communication intelligence activities for the United States.

[GBA]

How about a citizen's lawsuit. The government can't go after the NYT without it looking like a constitutional issue. But a civil suit filed by citizens? Don't we, the people, have a say? Why not say it in court?

The NYT has acted irresponsibly and as a result of their actions, I feel less safe and emotionally and psychologically traumatized by the NYT's aiding and abetting the terrorists who want to kill me. I seek monetary damages.

[Txsleuth]

You know what worries me, SE Mom??

Even in Robert's statement, he said, "..we have been unable to persuade the media to act responsibly, and protect the means by which we protect this nation."

There is a LACK of anger or a request for Negroponte to use this assessment of damage to go after the LEAKER!!

Does that mean that Roberts doesn't care, or think that part of this is NOT wrong or important? NO, I think it is that he suspects and fears that to go down that road, would be to put some of his colleagues in jeopardy...

And I am disappointed in that...

[SE Mom]

If your hunch is correct- then we are in much deeper trouble than it appears..

Speaking of possible leakers..I noticed that Sen Rockefeller cast a vote yesterday- did his back recover..after months of "rest"??

[doug from upland]

Do not miss this mocking of the NY TIMES on eBay......please ask a question so I can mock them some more

[Txsleuth]

Well...I guess so...and since the amendment on flag burning only LOST by one vote...I guess they told him to get his bad back, back to Washington...

However, if this leak business starts getting hotter...look for a relapse...LOL

[rightinthemiddle]

Hypocrites!

(copy from powerline blog)

Here is the September 24, 2001 New York Times editorial ("Finances of Terror") (access limited to TimesSelect):

Organizing the hijacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon took significant sums of money. The cost of these plots suggests that putting Osama bin Laden and other international terrorists out of business will require more than diplomatic coalitions and military action. Washington and its allies must also disable the financial networks used by terrorists.

The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies.

Osama bin Laden originally rose to prominence because his inherited fortune allowed him to bankroll Arab volunteers fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Since then, he has acquired funds from a panoply of Islamic charities and illegal and legal businesses, including export-import and commodity trading firms, and is estimated to have as much as $300 million at his disposal.

Some of these businesses move funds through major commercial banks that lack the procedures to monitor such transactions properly. Locally, terrorists can utilize tiny unregulated storefront financial centers, including what are known as hawala banks, which people in South Asian immigrant communities in the United States and other Western countries use to transfer money abroad. Though some smaller financial transactions are likely to slip through undetected even after new rules are in place, much of the financing needed for major attacks could dry up.

Washington should revive international efforts begun during the Clinton administration to pressure countries with dangerously loose banking regulations to adopt and enforce stricter rules. These need to be accompanied by strong sanctions against doing business with financial institutions based in these nations. The Bush administration initially opposed such measures. But after the events of Sept. 11, it appears ready to embrace them.

The Treasury Department also needs new domestic legal weapons to crack down on money laundering by terrorists. The new laws should mandate the identification of all account owners, prohibit transactions with "shell banks" that have no physical premises and require closer monitoring of accounts coming from countries with lax banking laws. Prosecutors, meanwhile, should be able to freeze more easily the assets of suspected terrorists. The Senate Banking Committee plans to hold hearings this week on a bill providing for such measures. It should be approved and signed into law by President Bush.

New regulations requiring money service businesses like the hawala banks to register and imposing criminal penalties on those that do not are scheduled to come into force late next year. The effective date should be moved up to this fall, and rules should be strictly enforced the moment they take effect. If America is going to wage a new kind of war against terrorism, it must act on all fronts, including the financial one.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F6071EFF3F5E0C778EDDA00894D9404482

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Must've forgot they wrote this, eh ?

[rightinthemiddle]

I'm amazed (well, no I'm not) that this isn't getting more coverage. Every GOP congressman should be reading this out loud every chance they get.

[gogeo]

Doug, you're having too much fun.

[doug from upland]

Don't miss this one -- http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=012&item=220000872986&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%3AIT&rd=1

[Digger]

I'm amazed (well, no I'm not) that this isn't getting more coverage. Every GOP congressman should be reading this out loud every chance they get.

This is the MO of the other faction of this corrupt "Two-Party Cartel". You could stretch this silence to almost make the GOP as coconspititors. What's amazing is how the flag buring goes down by ONE vote. The sheeple just got their chain jerked again.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

W should read this editorial on his weekly radio address, then ask the obvious question...