Posted on 06/26/2006 8:23:26 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Bush slams leak of terror finance story
10 minutes ago
President Bush on Monday sharply condemned the disclosure of a secret anti-terrorism program that taps into an immense international database of confidential financial records. "The disclosure of this program is disgraceful," he said.
"For people to leak that program and for a newspaper to publish it does great harm to the United States of America," Bush said. He said the disclosure of the program "makes it harder to win this war on terror."
The program has been going on since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. It was disclosed last week by several news organizations.
Using broad government subpoenas, the program allows U.S. counterterrorism analysts to obtain financial information from a vast database maintained by a company based in Belgium. It routes about 11 million financial transactions daily among 7,800 banks and other financial institutions in 200 countries.
"Congress was briefed and what we did was fully authorized under the law," Bush said, talking with reporters in the Roosevelt Room after meeting with groups that support U.S. troops in Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"Certainly nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But the New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public's right to know in some cases might override somebody's right to live," Snow said. "And whether, in fact, the publication...could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans."
SPOT ON TONY!
Al Quaeda read the story on page one on Friday morning.
Nobody knew who SWIFT was until the story was published. Maybe the financial world and its bankers did, but I assure you not many outside this rarified group did.
With freedom comes responsibility but this traitorous leftist media undermines the WOT all the time.
I can imagine Reagan doing just that, and I can visualize his sad demeanor while telling his fellow Americans that a tragic blow has been struck against America and our ability to combat those that seek to destroy us. (a picture of the NY Times front page in the background).
He'd have 80+% of America ready to string the NYSlimes and their leakers from the highest rafters of the White House for their deliberate sabotage and treason! (sigh) I sure miss Ronald.
" agree and I believe it is time for the president to go nationwide with a televised address to the citizens of America and the world to explain precisely what this program did, the authority behind it, the safeguards in place, the oversight provided and all its successes.
He needs to clearly relate to the public that this enormously successful weapon in the ongoing fight against terrorists has AGAIN lost a valuable weapon and this loss has increased the danger to all of us."
I was thinking queer as a $3 bill, but your conclusion is good enough for me
Please, you're being insensitive.
I know. Was a brief outburst of rage and all. I should have found another way to make fun of his metrosexuality. The poor guy may not be able to help the fact that he looks like an ass pirate.
National Review calls for Bush to revoke the Times’s press credentials:
The president should match this morning’s tough talk with concrete action. Publications such as the Times, which act irresponsibly when given access to secrets on which national security depends, should have their access to government reduced. Their press credentials should be withdrawn. Reporting is surely a right, but press credentials are a privilege. This kind of conduct ought not be rewarded with privileged access.
Moreover, the Justice Department must be more aggressive than it has been in investigating national-security leaks. While prosecution of the press for publishing information helpful to the enemy in wartime would be controversial, pursuit of the government officials who leak it is not. At the very least, members of the media who report such information must be made to understand that the government will no longer regard them as immune from questioning when it investigates the leakers. They should be compelled to reveal their sources, on pain of contempt.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDVhYWQzMmQ3YWRlNzFkYjRmZmY4ZTQzZmUwZjJhZjI=
You go, Cowboy. Kick their _ _ _.
I was going to suggest "Goo Gobbler" but it seemed that may be more insensitive then what you said to begin with. I don't know....all this political correctness to consider...I'm soooo confused.
In short, the press can print what they wish.
On Mia's thread you posted this comment - and for reason's unknown, I can't seem to reply to you on that thread.
You're right on such a small technical level that for all practical purposes, you're wrong. First, you're right the New York Times can print what they want. They can print slander, lies, whatever - no one can stop them from printing what they please. But, and this is a big one, they can be sued. Taken to court. Jailed.
They can print what they want but they must take responsibility for what they print. Do you think the New York Times can print copywrited material they haven't paid for? Yes, they can. Can they be sued for it. Yes, they can. Here's what you can't do with a newspaper, you can't put a government censor in the newsroom to see what's being published. You can't censor ahead of time.
Thank God for that - Thank God there are no censors in the newsrooms -- and thank the writers of the constitution and freedom loving members of the Supreme Court while you're at it.
But not having censors in the newsroom doesn't mean that anything goes, or that anything can be printed without consequences. Sometimes the consequence is someone gets sued. Sometimes a consequence is someone goes to jail. In this case, it's possible the New York Times committed treason. If so, they can be arrested tried, and jailed. They are not above the law. Not above the law because they own a printing press.
It would have been better if GW mentioned the "T" word for once. Maybe it hasn`t occurred to our President, but in every war there are always traitors...Like the old adage goes; "In times of need you find out who your true friends are" and pointing out the ones who back stab is the first step towards stopping them. These people are enemies of the US, they are not Americans, they never had any interest in the US except for using it, and it may have been fun and dandy in peace time calling this treason stuff "free speech", but in wartime this bulls**t has got to stop.
However, the 1st amendment seems pretty air tight to me. I'm open to correction.
However, I do not think they are immune from laws that require every American to divulge their sources on classified leaks. That is not a law by Congress "abridging freedom of the press." Like I said, they can still print whatever they wish.
The A.G. was on Rush's show today and literally laughed at the idea of prosecuting anyone for anything.
Thought we were 'a very far away' from something like that, and does want to look at it, but is no where near even thinking of talking about the idea of prosecution.
"it's possible the New York Times committed treason."
at minimum, they are accessories after-the-fact in whatever crime the leaker(s) could be convicted of.......and very possibly Conspiracy to commit that crime and Obstruction of Justice if they refuse to testify before a Grand Jury in the investigation of the actual leaker.
Have you ever wondered why the MSM doesn't come after us directly?
Mapes and Rather just sit quietly while we talk about what rascals they are - and these powerful people never took us on? Doesn't it seem, well, odd?
Remember the old days, all the things freepers said about Bill and Hillary. No one ever came after us. Nothing happened.
And now, the New York Times -- they refer to "the bloggers", but they're not picking off a few of us to be held up for shame and humiliation. That would certainly discourage us. Big time. The MSM will take on President Bush in a heartbeat, but not Buckhead? They'll take on heads of countries, but not xzins? Ever wonder why that is?
Here's a hint - it's NOT because they're such nice people. It's not because they haven't noticed us. And it's not because they don't know how to do damage to us, because they do know how to damage us.
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.