Posted on 06/29/2006 1:54:16 PM PDT by veronica
I would like to see Bill Keller do the perp-walk but he is probably going to plead down to a lesser charge. Has his bail been set yet?
The Germans did not even though hundreds of Canadians
and British did.
Yet it would have been obvious, but Churchill was right to have done it.
Keller and his ilk should be tried and electrocuted, yesterday
or the enemy will know that this administration and Congress are just not serious.
Interesting idea. If enough people did, the legal fees would bury the Times. Awwwwwwwww
Are you saying that it was wrong to be angry at the press for revealing this secret program because the likelihood of the government tracing the money should be obvious so what's the harm in revealing the secret, or that it was wrong for the government to make the program secret because the likelihood of the government tracing the money should be obvious so what's the point in making it secret?
Either way, the press knew the program was secret and that it was a violation to reveal it.
-PJ
You are missing the point. I live in Houston. I know conceptually where Corpus Christie is. However, if I want to get there, I would need a map to tell me how.
Terrorists and bad guys may know conceptually that fund transfers are being observed but this article laid it out so all could see the details and showing how certain individuals were caught. So now smart bad guys know what procedures and banks to avoid.
Why publish this if you don't believe it is illegal or not working? Who can this possibly help besides Al Queda operatives?
Mature adults know that just because you can do something doesn't mean you must do it.
bump
The "secret" was in the program, not the likelihood, that the government was tracing the funds. The details, like which banks were involved in which countries, that subpoenas occurred between agencies and such, did not need to be exposed.
-PJ
If nothing of substance was revealed, and everybody knew about everything already, then what was the point of the NYTimes printing the story? On the front page, no less?
If every detail of the cooperation of foreign governments and banks cooperation with the security forces of the US were already known by all terrorism organizations, then why on earth would anyone bother asking the NYTimes not to print it?
If this is such a nothing, if it was the security equivalent of "the sun will come up tomorrow"--what's the big deal? And why are you so upset, if other people are upset with the Times? What are you scolding about? After all, this is a nothing all the way around, and ordinary Americans are exercized over a bit of trivia that was already public knowledge all over the entire world, if you are correct.
I'm sure no other governments or banking entities in foreign countries are bothered by this either. Probably won't affect their cooperation with US security forces in the slightest.
In fact, I'm sure you hope more non-news is printed by the NYTimes just so we can all get used to seeing stuff like that in print. After all, nobody should be concerned, right???
Right?
Right?
By the way, have I bothered to call you an ignorant n00b yet? Consider it done.
Well, the analogy is weak, but just as the map is available on the internet, the workings of the international system for wire transfers is not a state secret. Now if the press revealed exactly how the government traced the funds (e.g., by publishing the algorythms that analyze the data), then something damaging to national security might have been revealed. But a press report that the government has obtained the wire instructions collected by the central transfer agent should not have surprised anyone. Indeed, I would have been very disappointed had the press revealed that the government was not actively engaged in tracing funds transferred by wire.
Because W doesn't want the bad press! That and he's utterly gutless for accuse traitors of treason!
Oh well. Was wondering why Oregon would allow anyone to stand against the MSM. Thanks for letting me know...
Finally. A member of the press speaking the hard truth... Thank you.
Foreign governments and banking institutions are involved in this disclosure. Not just domestic ones.
Complaint filed in 32 countries against U.S. bank data mining AP via OhMy News ^ | 6/28/06 | staff
A civil liberties group on Wednesday asked 32 national governments to block the release of confidential financial records to U.S. authorities as part of American anti-terrorist probes. London-based watchdog Privacy International demanded a halt to the "completely unacceptable" monitoring of millions of transactions as part of a CIA-U.S. Treasury program. The Treasury has acknowledged that since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks it has tracked millions of financial transactions handled by the Belgium-based Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or SWIFT. Both SWIFT and the U.S. authorities say records were subpoenaed as part of targeted investigations into suspected terrorist activity. The Belgian government said Wednesday that Washington had only subpoenaed data from SWIFT's U.S. office -- but not its global headquarters outside Brussels. However, in its complaint, Privacy International said "the scale of the operation, involving millions of records, places this disclosure in the realm of a fishing exercise rather than legally authorized investigation." The complaint, sent to regulators in all 25 European Union nations as well as Canada, Australia, Iceland, New Zealand, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and the semiautonomous Chinese territory of Hong Kong, asks authorities to “intervene to seek the immediate suspension of the disclosure program pending legal review.'"'All of these countries have the potential to suspend, disrupt, paralyze the system," said the group's director, Simon Davies.
Enough of your propaganda, NOOB.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.