Eric Lichtblau, Meet Your Own Story and Headline

Eric Lichtblau’s story in the New York Times, June 22:

Bank Data Secretly Reviewed by U.S. to Fight Terror
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

Eric Lichtblau today, on CNN’s Reliable Sources:

"“USA Today”, the biggest circulation in the country, the lead story on their front page four days before our story ran was the terrorists know their money is being traced, and they are moving it into—outside of the banking system into unconventional means. It is by no means a secret."
---snip----

Here, courtesy of Chris Fotos, is a bullet-point list of quotes from the story saying that the program was secret:

Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database…

Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several secret efforts to trace terrorist financing….

Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified.
---snip---

While the banking program is a closely held secret, administration officials have held classified briefings for some members of Congress and the Sept. 11 commission, the officials said….
Swift’s 25-member board of directors, made up of representatives from financial institutions around the world, was previously told of the program. The Group of 10’s central banks, in major industrialized
countries, which oversee Swift, were also informed. It is not clear if other network participants know that American intelligence officials can examine their message traffic.

----snip---

Hint for Mr. Lichtblau: when they get you under oath, you’ll be much better off if the lies are less obvious than this.

More quotes from the evil Eric Lichtblau on "Reliable Sources", claiming the program wasn't even secret:

"LICHTBLAU: Well, I'll leave that judgment to other people. But on the point that Hugh made, as far as the damage to national security, you know, I'd have to take issue with -- with the assessment of what he's saying is a widely shared belief, that this has in some way alerted the terrorists to something they didn't know.

It has been common knowledge from 9/11, from President Bush on down, that they're using every means available to trace financial transactions of terrorists. President Bush has talked about shutting down the money pipeline, finding the money, seizing the money. His aides have made that message over and over and over again.

It's so commonly known, in fact, that there have been numerous stories by myself and other reporters in the last four and a half years about how the -- how the terrorists are aware that their money is being traced and are moving it out of financial institutions.

So the harm to me is -- is an abstract one, at best."

Of course Hugh Hewitt wasn't going to let the weasely Lichtblau get away with that nonsense, as in:

"KURTZ: There is also a web site by this organization, which is called SWIFT. So that it was not a complete secret.

But Hugh Hewitt, I have a funny feeling you'd like to respond to that.

HEWITT: I do, and there are two responses. One, it's the difference between knowing that people are out to catch speeders in most cities and knowing where the speed traps and the radar and the cameras are.

And No. 2, in the story itself, in Eric's own story, it talks about how this program has operated and that no one knew about it. The CIA didn't know about it.

And as a result -- and by the way, don't believe me. Believe Doyle McManus, the Washington bureau chief of the "Los Angeles Times", who admitted on my program that it is conceivable that this program helped terrorists elude capture. Once you've got that admission, it is impossible for the "New York Times" or the "Los Angeles Times" to balance the harm it did.

And unless Eric wants to tell us that he knows the mind of every single terrorist in the world, what they know and what they don't know, how they operate, how they train, how they go about killing people, he's making an absurd statement that I think convicts him as not knowing much about intelligence; perhaps a lot about journalism but almost nothing about how intelligence in law enforcement works."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0607/02/rs.01.html

I love it. The more they talk, the more it becomes clear just what the Treason Times staff's real agenda here was. It had NOTHING to do with their "duty as Journalists" at all. This was nothing more then another DNC Shadow Goverment directed hit on the Bush team.

Note to all future Republican Govements. PURGE all Democrats out of the Civil Service as soon as you take office. Democrats have demonstrated during the Bush years they clearly care more about their political dogma then their duty.

It is not clear if other network participants know that American intelligence officials can examine their message traffic.

By all means, let's err on the side of what-the-hell. I mean, it's not like we're talking about a WAR or anything...these are only terrorists, which to some are freedom fighters, so really, we shouldn't take sides here, right?

We really should be more understanding--how would these NYTimers be able to face their white wine-sipping friends at their Saturday night parties on the Hamptons if they actually kept secrets from freedom fighters? THAT is what these people REALLY care about.

(How do I know this? Ask yourself this: Would one of these reporters from the New York Times reveal that a secret police sting operation was underway watching houses in the Hamptons or the most fashionable areas of NYC, disguised as mailmen in hopes of catching thieves preying on the New York rich? You bet your sweet butt they wouldn't.

But reveal secret actions to stop terrorism? They can't STOP revealing them.

"The more they talk, the more it becomes clear just what the Treason Times staff's real agenda here was. It had NOTHING to do with their "duty as Journalists" at all. This was nothing more then another DNC Shadow Goverment directed hit on the Bush team. "

Oh yes.
And they have forgotten the first rule of holes is to stop digging.
They have contradicted themselves so much over the past few days, that it's going to be a lot of fun, if they ever did get indicted.

"Note to all future Republican Govements. PURGE all Democrats out of the Civil Service as soon as you take office. Democrats have demonstrated during the Bush years they clearly care more about their political dogma then their duty."

Agree completely.
I think President Bush was too polite, when he didn't immediately get rid of Clinton's people.

So in other words, the NYTimes "sexed up" its own reporting. Lets see, where have we heard that before? I recalled when the media acused the government of sexing up and cherry picking information. Yesterday Keller said the terrorists all knew about this because they were smart enough to figure it out. They also said everyone knew about it except congress....I presume because Keller was saying that they are too stupid to have figured it out. Caught red handed in lies, they only lie some more to cover their sorry clymers.

Civil Service employees have protection from political purges. That is why, in years when it looks like there will be party changes, political appointees apply for protected CS positions and usually get them. It is called burrowing and both parties do it. If the senior CS managers are of the same party as the burrowers, they won't even be moved to nonsensitive positions or assigned to remote field offices.

From what I have read and heard over time, the best that can be done is to make the culture of whatever agency so unappealing to the moles that they resign. Even then, they are likely to become the "former government agency official" who becomes a media source and then writes a tell-all book designed to sandbag the opposition administration. Given the MSM control of publishing these days, the book is carefully orchestrated with the TV talk shows in the guise of book promotion. Back before we had any conservative publishers or media, conservative former officials were effectively silenced by being ignored. Even now, that is largely true. The Internet has changed that part for the better.

I don't think there is a thing the President could have done about these leakers except what seems to be happening now: wait until they make an egregious error and actually break a law.

We can make the media pay. All the administration can do is find the leakers and charge them with espionage if they really went so far that it could be winnable case. They could subpoena the reporters to testify, but usually that just allows the media to grandstand on the First Amendment and the *sacred* nature of journalistic sources.

This is civilian guerrilla warfare and it is just as difficult to fight as the military kind.

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.