Tweet
No, the general public is not aware of the extent of the servalience activities. Thus the articles by the New York Times and the LA Times. What's really funny is how you keep repeating right wing talk radio shows without thinking about them.
-
Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate. -
The fact remains that the New York Times did not expose any sources or methods which Al Qaeda hadn't already responded to years ago. Al Qaeda stopped using western style banks and started using Islamic money couriers in 2002-2003. They did so because they knew the west was watching normal bank accounts.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
I'm sure if you had asked a random person "do you think the government monitors international money transfers" or something similar, they'd say yes, based on every spy TV show or movie ever made...Originally posted by Oerdin
No, the general public is not aware of the extent of the servalience activities.
... what?What's really funny is how you keep repeating right wing talk radio shows without thinking about them.Comment
-
Mark Shields pointed out in Friday's Newshour that in the '04 campaign, Bush put out a press release saying that we intercepted a hundred and forty-something million dollars in terrorist money transfers. It's that treasonous Bush at it again.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
If you asked people whether they think the government can monitor bank transactions, most people would say yes.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I'm sure if you had asked a random person "do you think the government monitors international money transfers" or something similar, they'd say yes, based on every spy TV show or movie ever made...
If you asked them whether the government actually monitors bank transactions, most people would not know.
The most important thing, particularly in a democracy, is that people have the right to know about these programs so that the people can decide whether these programs are acceptable.
The free flow of information is vital to any democracy.Golfing since 67Comment
-
Should they have decided on the acceptability of the Normandy landings? The atom bomb?Comment
-
... just like the terrorists.Originally posted by Tingkai
If you asked people whether they think the government can monitor bank transactions, most people would say yes.
If you asked them whether the government actually monitors bank transactions, most people would not know.Comment
-
The point is, can you trust anything a Republican says these days? Seriously.Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
If the terrorists are supposedly too lazy to listen to pay attention Bush bragging about his monitoring of terrorists' financial networks and the vast sums of money that he says that he has intercepted (and presumably word of mouth from their colleagues who notice this happening to their money), why exactly should an NYT article to the same effect make any difference?"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
And it is the same effect, there's no doubt about that, since once more, SWIFT encompasses virtually every commercial bank. The NYT article doesn't give terrorists any more information than Bush hasn't already given (and really should already know regardless of what anyone in gov't or the press says about our actions), i.e. to avoid major financial institutions."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
You keep making this argument and it's equally stupid each time. OMFG A REPUBLICAN SAID IT therefore it must be false!Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The point is, can you trust anything a Republican says these days? Seriously.Comment
-
Then why run it as front page news simultaneously on several national newspapers? By your reasoning, I ought to see "SKY IS BLUE" above the fold on tomorrows WaPo.Comment
-
Because we (though some people who are knowledgable of international banking may have made this inference) didn't know the specific mechanism. What the right refuses to understand is that knowledge of the specific mechanism doesn't give the terrorists any advantage, since again, SWIFT encompasses virtually every commercial bank."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Knowledge of the specific mechanism isn't particularly useful to us, either, then.Comment
-
Not really. It may or may not have legal or privacy issues. Now it can be debated in the public sphere. The wonders of the press.
Stop DinoDocing and make a point. The program's secrecy was vital because outing it made national news? Riiiiight.
Last edited by Ramo; July 2, 2006, 04:24."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
Comment