Posted on 07/03/2006 11:54:14 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
Monday, July 3, 2006 In defense of the New York Times Posted: July 3, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Vox Day
I am no fan of the New York Times. It is a pompous, outdated media organization that combines a dedication to poisonous ideology with a predilection for mediocre art and faux eurostylism. Its reporters are columnists who write opinion columns that pass for news stories, while its columnists are talentless divas whose ignorance of politics and economics is only exceeded by their unfamiliarity with world history.
The New York Times is the fever swamp from which a myriad of infectious and debilitating memes spread throughout the mainstream media and into the mind of America. All of this is obvious to even the occasional observer, I merely mention it so that the reader will understand that my defense of the old hag is a reluctant one.
Like many of the commentators who have waxed apoplectic following the New York Times' revelations of the administration's financial spying on the SWIFT system, I was surprised by the breaking news. However, my surprise was due solely to the fact that it passed for news, considering the panoply of data-mining operations in which the U.S. government is already known to be involved.
From Carnivore and Echelon to the giant government database currently being constructed by the credit card companies in fact, at first glance, I thought that's what the New York Times was reporting the Clinton and Bush administrations have made great strides at turning America into the Panopticon of dystopian science fiction visions. Indeed, much of what went into Patriot Acts I and II was first conceived by the Clinton administration in 1993, as Al Gore's concept for a Directorate of Central Law Enforcement presaged George Bush's new Department of Homeland Security.
The only significant difference is that the shock of 9-11 enabled the Bush administration to do what its predecessor could not in ramming a giant, pre-prepared assault on American liberties through the Congress. And like the Patriot Acts, the SWIFT program will do nothing to protect national security, despite all of the posturing and ignorant howling on the part of the administration's defendants in the supposedly conservative commentariat.
Arnaud de Borchgrave of the Washington Times reports that the total expenditure for the attacks on the two U.S. embassies, the USS Cole, 9-11, the Madrid train system and the London Underground was $625,000, spent over a period of eight years. SWIFT transfers amount to $6,000,000,000 daily, so this spy program isn't comparable to looking for a needle in a haystack, it is closer to looking for a needle in Nebraska. It defies credibility to argue that this program will locate a single terrorist given the way in which Muslims prefer using the Islamic hawala system to wire transfers, much less that its exposure somehow threatens American national security. And despite all the barking by the media hounds, no one has even tried to argue that this "vital program" has, in fact, done so.
According to the administration's logic, every dollar spent by terrorists justifies subjecting $28 billion to U.S. government oversight. Needless to say, it will not be long before that oversight will be expanded to search for everything from deadbeat dads to tax evaders and to perform industrial espionage in the age-old tradition of expanding government power. Only 100 years ago, federal agents were unarmed and possessed no arrest powers. Now, in the name of protecting us, they are claiming carte blanche to stick their federal noses into every financial transaction in the world.
In fact, the outrage expressed by the administration and its apologists most likely stems from the way in which the exposure of this program eliminates any possibility of European support for the neocons' much-sought war on Iran. Since European banks seldom issue checks, most transactions are done via cash, postal account or bank transfer, and some of those transfers now undergoing U.S. review belong to the very European people and politicians whose support for an Iranian excursion is being sought by the administration. That support, always unlikely, would appear to be nonexistent now given this latest demonstration of the administration's total disregard for their laws and property.
One can only imagine how Americans would shriek in understandable fury if it were the United Nations or the Chinese going through their financial transactions with a fine-toothed comb. The SWIFT program is a useless, ill-conceived and ultimately dangerous abuse of power by a government so heavily dependent upon foreigners financing its gargantuan debts.
International terrorism requires little financing, but a spendthrift government requires an almost unthinkable amount on a daily basis. The New York Times did well to report on how the Bush administration is running the foolish risk of infuriating those who finance its fiscally irresponsible ways in nominal pursuit of terrorists it will never catch.
Vox Day is a novelist and Christian libertarian. He is a member of the SFWA, Mensa and the Southern Baptist church, and has been down with Madden since 1992. Visit his Web log, Vox Popoli, for daily commentary and responses to reader email. |
Oh sure.
A financial John Murtha. Just great.
Blame Bush.
There is NO defense!
Even after it has been reported many times how terrorists HAVE been located (Bali, etc.) by this program, this "expert" makes this claim. Bzzzz!!!! WRONG!
Vox Day
Good grief. I'm not entirely sure what libertarians stand for, but apparently they're against nearly everybody and everything.
Vox Day for Pres, or CIA Director, or head of the FBI, let's see how many terrorists he catches, kills, convicts, and obstructs!
In many cases, the Libertarianism comes first, with repentence being sought under a Christian banner later in life although many of them succumb to the tempations to move on into "Libertineism" and pass on before Salvation can be sought.
. Can't think of a single instance of it happening the other way (although some of these jokers might well think a baptism somewhere turned them into Christians first).
If anyone doubts my words, please note that this guy is trying to justify the New York Time's treasonous acts.
There are two types of libertarians, and only one type is sane. The first are the anarchists, like this gentleman, who think that the government should have absolutely no power. The second type, the Glenn Reynolds type, want to reduce government down to providing security and only the most basic of services. The second type realizes that you still have to defend yourself.
Just like liberals, the anarchist-libertarians are the outspoken minority.
Libertarians are an unfunny joke!
A libertarian argument follows:
The government acting in a capacity acknowledged to be their chief responsibility, the defense of the nation, used their resources to devise a program with intricate details for tracking the financial maneurverings of its enemies. This devised program cost them resources: time, money, intellectual investment.
As such, this program was "the government's intellectual property."
That property was stolen from the government and transferred into the hands of another party, who knowing that the property did not belong to them, and knowing that it was perishable, decided to intentionally ruin that property of another.
This is a basic property issue.
The NYT is guilty of receiving known stolen property and intentionally destroying it for their own profit/purposes to the harm of the property owners.
going to be interesting to hear the howls here if at some date hillary is president and there is some incremental expansion of the subject material being sought with all this data mining.
I am surprised to see so little discussion about such a scenario, as it is almost a given that any power government gets will be expanded on over time far beyond its original intent.
if you are going to support giving government a new power, whether it be this one, or any other, it is best to always consider how you would feel if a worst-case scenario politician were in power asking for this new ability.
With regard to the SWIFT issue, I am somewhat surprised anyone is suprised by this being done. I don't think it is even news, or if it IS news, it is because fedgov managed to actually implement such a program in less than 5 years.
I doubt your words.
You are assuming all libertarians are soulless anarchists, which they are not. You are falling into liberal-think by assuming that an outspoken minority represents the whole.
As for what libertarians stand for... Apparently they stand for a wide variety of things, excepting the defense of this nation. I used to consider myself a libertarian. I don't see a damned thing wrong with a limited government that protects our rights vs the behemoth we have today that sees itself as our master, and grants itself permission to regulate our lives.
I don't know that they are the minority anymore. The party seems to have been infiltrated at the national leval and they all are starting to sound like a bunch of barking moonbats.
Someone said he was tied up somewhere, but he'd be here as soon as possible.
Been waiting for years and years and years.
The Libertarian in question ALSO claims to be a Christian. Since that's simply not possible, there's no reason to believe him about anything else.
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.