Why no threads about treasonous New York Times revealing national secrets again?

[Drake Tungsten]

I take this back. Congrats.

No need; your comment was right on the money at the time it was made. No normal man could have revived it.

[Ramo]

As Drake pointed out, there is a big difference between knowing that they are trying to track your finances and knowing exactly how they will do so.

Given that SWIFT encompasses virtually every commercial bank, I don't see why. It's not like the program targetted the records of a narrow range of institutions. So thanks to the NYT, the terrorists learned to avoid major financial institutions and are dumb enough not to have known that before hand?

[Victor Galis]

Well... so the administration is attacking the press head on now . Between this and the flag burning amendment, and the anti-gay stuff, I finally figured out the Conservatives...

They hate us for our freedoms

[Imran Siddiqui]

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Ramo

As Drake pointed out, there is a big difference between knowing that they are trying to track your finances and knowing exactly how they will do so.

Given that SWIFT encompasses virtually every commercial bank, I don't see why. It's not like the program targetted the records of a narrow range of institutions. So thanks to the NYT, the terrorists learned to avoid major financial institutions and are dumb enough not to have known that before hand?

Don't the Muslims have some informal network for moving money anyway? I seem to remember hearing about that awhile back.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Lots of hard cash is moving via courier apparently. The arguement that this is not damgaing as the terrorists already were wise to this is not so clear however considering the previous success this program had.

If I recall correctly it was the only area where the 9/11 commission gave A marks to the administration. So much for that.

[Gatekeeper]

Yes, they do.

There was a series of articles in the media exposing that network sometime in 2005 — I'm writing this off the top of my head, so I can't link to the articles in question ... sorry about that. The network is ancient and rooted in tradition. It relies on back channels to deliver funds, including human and animal carriers. Suffice to say, it's not as effective as wire transfers.

Gatekeeper

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

It's fascinating how the administration and its supporters have targeted the New York Times because the same story also ran in the Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal and neither paper has gotten as much flak as the NYT has.

The New York Times had the story first and broke it first over the objections of the Administration. I don't see why they wouldn't catch most of the blame.

The NYT did break the log jam, so to speak, but the other papers would have done so eventually anyway. The LAT and WSJ invested too much time and resources to have spiked the story. The NYT merely took the bullet for them.

I know how this works when multiple media sources are sitting on a major story — they basically do a "let's see who blinks first" kind of game in terms of who will publish first. Once there's even a whiff that the "other guy" is going ahead, the others will leap to beat him if at all possible. It's kind of like an avalanche — it starts small and slow, but balloons at warp speed.

The fact that the U.S. government has been targeting terrorists' financial networks has been one of the worst-kept secrets of the Global War on Terrorism (TM), thankyouverymuch.

So you think it's a good idea to give terrorist networks specific information on how we're attempting to track their funds? It's one thing to generally know that the United States is trying to monitor your financial transactions. It's another thing altogether to know how the United States is doing so and which financial institutions they are making use of in the process. Knowing the former doesn't give you an advantage in successfully slipping your money past American eyes. The latter most certainly does.

You seem to assume The Other Side (TM) is run by idiots. I don't. They've got supporters in foreign governments and companies, including banking firms. IOW, I think they know more than Uncle Sam is willing to admit, even moreso with how the government has been hyping about how it's targeting financial assets and transmission methods.

On a more personal level, I'm concerned that's what being used today against TOS will eventually be used stateside against citizens. It's well-known that Bush, Cheney and company really prefer an all-powerful executive branch over the other two federal branches. That's a recipe for trouble. I had my concerns about Bush, et al, prior to Sept. 11, 2001, but they've been magnified — domestically and in terms of foreign policy — ever since the invasion of Iraq.

And I won't even go into the reprecussions this will have on any current or future intelligence operations with skittish foreign institutions who may not want their cooperation with American authorities to become common knowledge...

You make a legitimate point. That said, I think Bush, et al., have already stained America's image overseas to the point that they might have lost the cooperation of certain agencies no matter what.

I guess time will tell.

Gatekeeper

[Drake Tungsten]

You seem to assume The Other Side (TM) is run by idiots.

No, I don't. I think they're a very intelligent and capable enemy, actually, which is why it's dangerous for the New York Times to give them free intelligence data on the classified US programs meant to track them.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

where was the outrage in the US governement then?

CIA and probably the State Department. Minority party in both houses of Congress.

Well Drake since you're so concerned about illegitimate leaks, were you one of those upset with the leak concerning the CIA agent?




be honest

[chequita guevara]

I honestly don't think that the other side was using American bank to handle their finances.

[Kuciwalker]

Which is why this program surveilled foreign banks too...

[Drake Tungsten]

Well Drake since you're so concerned about illegitimate leaks, were you one of those upset with the leak concerning the CIA agent?

I was never very upset about it; it didn't and still doesn't seem very important. That being said, I always supported the prosecution of any officials found to have knowingly leaked classified information in that case. I would support the same here. Would you?

[Ramo]

Lots of hard cash is moving via courier apparently. The arguement that this is not damgaing as the terrorists already were wise to this is not so clear however considering the previous success this program had.

Again, SWIFT encompasses virtually every commercial bank. The NYT article is equivalent to Bush saying that we're monitoring terrorist finances in terms of giving intel to the enemy. So I guess that means that our treasonous Leader was revealing national secrets again?

[DinoDoc]

Then what was the news value of the story if everyone already knew it?