# I pit the short-sighted self serving twits at the New York Times **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 27, 2006, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359 "2006-06-27T17:01:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/261 "2006-06-29T21:33:35Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Admist all the noise with **magellan01’s** latest bone-headed accusations, did I miss the post where **Evil One** apologized for his misguided OP, given that the White House and the WSJ already yapped about SWIFT years ago? I haven’t seen any response since my post (in which I provided a link to show that, yes, there are sources other than the Daily Kos documenting this element of the story). ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2006, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/262 "2006-06-29T21:34:42Z")
> [@KJ](#): > > I agree that 9/11 is relevant to the discussion. If you’re trying to get people to understand why someone would start a program like this, I fully understand _why_ they might do it. But you lose me when you make the jump from “We should be doing whatever we can to stop future terrorist attacks” to “We should be doing whatever we can to stop future terrorist attacks, including spying on our citizens and possibly violating the constitution.” A classic example of The Politician’s Fallacy: 1. We must do something. 2. Proposal X is something. 3. Therefore, we must enact Proposal X. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/263 "2006-06-30T01:07:01Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I think that about some things up. No, what really sums it up is, you don’t have anything worth saying. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/264 "2006-06-30T01:11:36Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > God forbid we recall the event and remind ourselves what we are fighting against and what is at stake. > > And just for the record, it’s not just the pictures some find so “inconvenient”, complaints of the mere mention of the event have gone out throughout the thread at any mention. And while I understand the inclination to rail against a gratuitous appe to emotion, in this discussion it is absolutely relevant. Just ask yourselves: "why might the governement have even contemplated such a program? > > And then try to answer it honestly. No, it’s because scumbags like you always wrap it around yourselves to justify anything and eveything, and to try and squelch any logical discussions. Go fuck yourself with a chainsaw. I’m from New York City, so don’t play that 9/11 shit on me. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/265 "2006-06-30T01:16:58Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Admist all the noise with **magellan01’s** latest bone-headed accusations, did I miss the post where **Evil One** apologized for his misguided OP, given that the White House and the WSJ already yapped about SWIFT years ago? Yeah, but it still “secret” when it will serve political purposes running up to the midterm elections, and to try and throw some weight around. Good leaks, bad leaks and all that. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/266 "2006-06-30T02:04:52Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > But that’s not even slightly comparable. The mafia analogy was to demonstrate the value of keeping surveillance secret. Nothing more. > [@Apos](#): > > Again: the only actual new public information that was released was that this program may have been violating the finance laws of several foriegn nations and raises major privacy concerns. I don’t see how that helps terrorists in the slightest. The secret program has been effective. Now that peolpe know about it, it will be less so. This has been covered earlier, so I suggest you go back and review it. > [@Apos](#): > > And on top of that, it seems that this program was considered basically obsolete in 2004: the terrorists had ALREADY caught onto what was going on and had stopped using the channels that this watches. The source of actionable intelligence had basically dried up. Apparently, the American people are always the last to know. As I mentioned in that other thread, that’s what may explain the administrations half-hearted protestations. Still, I think it is up to the administration, who ever is in power to determine which security measure should be kept secret. > [@Apos](#): > > And as it further turns out: attempts to quash this story have been described as “half-hearted” on behalf of the actual intelligence community. To me, that pretty much says in screaming red letters that the sole purpose of the secrecy at this point was yet again simply political ass-covering. Could very well be the case. As I’ve said, the administrations tepid response might very well mean that keeping it secret is not as valuable as one would think. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/267 "2006-06-30T02:10:29Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > The secret program has been effective. Now that peolpe know about it, it will be less so. This has been covered earlier, so I suggest you go back and review it. You might want to go back and review the dozens of cites in this thread pointing out that the program has never been “secret” in any way, and has been openly discussed by Bush himself and other members of the administration multiple times. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/268 "2006-06-30T02:31:01Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > No, it’s because scumbags like you always wrap it around yourselves to justify anything and eveything, and to try and squelch any logical discussions. Go fuck yourself with a chainsaw. I’m from New York City, so don’t play that 9/11 shit on me. This is just precious. Let me post what you were replying to so I can aprreciate the profound depth of you imbecility without having to scroll around: > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by **magellan01** > God forbid we recall the event and remind ourselves what we are fighting against and what is at stake. > > And just for the record, it’s not just the pictures some find so “inconvenient”, complaints of the mere mention of the event have gone out throughout the thread at any mention. And while I understand the inclination to rail against a gratuitous appe to emotion, in this discussion it is absolutely relevant. Just ask yourselves: "why might the governement have even contemplated such a program? > > And then try to answer it honestly. Where to start. Okay, first, with the request for you to answer a question about what you wrote honestly you respond, “No”. That’s just wonderful right there. But let’s move on. Next you foam at the mouth (without addressing my points) about “scumbags like me always wrapping it (9/11, I assume) around ourselves”. Now do you mean me? Is that something I do? If so, I’ll ask you for a cite. And not just one, because I \*always \*do it. If you did not mean that I always do that, why did you try to lump me in with those that do. Revenant Threshold was unclear along the same lines earlier and had the decency to clarify himself saying that I was not part of that group. Now you are free to disagree with that, in which case, I’ll look forward to those cites. Let’s see, what next? Oh— So, to paraphrase, “scumbags like me who try to squelch any logical discussion.” This is my favorite part. You stupid, dumb fuck. Read what you wrote. Digest the meaning of the words. Then look at your post in its entirety and compare it to the post you quoted and responded to. My words, the words you responded to, were a calm, reasoned argument. But your response is just shit spewing out of your mouth, name calling, broad brush accusations and no refutations of the points I made. Do you have any idea ho lame that is. It is clear to me know, you are an immature little shit. Oh, and wait, you’re from New York. Which means… right, nothing. It’s as valid a point as the fact that I too am from New York. Big fucking whoop. You’re nothing but a pissy little shmuck that likes to talk tough. If you have something relevant to say to counterr my position, let’s hear it. Otherwise, slide your head up another half-inch so your sphincter gets a nice tight seal around your neck. Any more of your nonsense will not be addressed. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/269 "2006-06-30T02:36:09Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > You might want to go back and review the dozens of cites in this thread pointing out that the program has never been “secret” in any way, and has been openly discussed by Bush himself and other members of the administration multiple times. This is a longish thread. Are there any posts in particular you’d like me to take into account? ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/270 "2006-06-30T02:40:11Z")
Hey\*\* magellan01\*\*, have I called you a corpse humper today? If not, please consider yourself so called. Everybody is telling you the same thing I did, just in less colorful metaphor. Allow me to restate your argument: _3,000 people were killed in a terrorist attack nearly 5 years ago. This means the current administration is always right, anyone who dares to question their divine wisdom is a traitor, and no red blooded American needs to worry about Constitutional rights. I trust the Government, and you should too. Remember 3,000 people. Here’s pictures. It was horrible. I’m skeered. Big Daddy Bush make the bad mans go away._ Further indulge me with a restatement of my own argument: You’re a dumbfuck. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/271 "2006-06-30T02:41:50Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > The secret program has been effective. Now that peolpe know about it, it will be less so. This has been covered earlier, so I suggest you go back and review it. “Had” being the operative word. It apparently has not been very useful for two years. > [@](#): > > By the beginning of 2004, Suskind says, the finint operation was in a “state of increasing obsolescence.” The money store had closed down, the Palestinians had gotten wise to Western Union, and the “matrix,” as he calls the overall finint operation, was becoming less and less effective. > > Take this for what it’s worth. But if Suskind is right, the SWIFT program probably hasn’t been producing much actionable intelligence for over two years. NYT editor Bill Keller claims that government efforts to prevent exposure of the program were “half hearted,” and if he’s right, maybe this is the reason. Maybe it had outlived its usefulness long before the Times discovered it. [http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006\_06/009100.php](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_06/009100.php) More information that suggests this may have been a politically strategic “leak” by the administration, knowing that cowardly morons like yourself would hop up and down about the mainstream media and join in on the refrain of “There ought to be limits to freedom.” Nut up and join America, little buddy. Sure, it can be challenging, but it’s worth it. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/272 "2006-06-30T03:33:38Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Still, I think it is up to the administration, who ever is in power to determine which security measure should be kept secret. One of the secret secrets to keeping something secret is to not issue press releases and speeches outlining your secret plan. Obviously that rule has been kept secret from this administration (and still remains a secret to its less intelligent defenders), who for the umpteenth time in this thread was the source of this information, years and years before the NYT article. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/273 "2006-06-30T03:58:44Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Further indulge me with a restatement of my own argument: Sure, here it is: " …humping corpse…Bush bad…all Bush do bad…fuck corpse… ." I should concoct some appeal to the masses, as well. But, as I am aware that is a weak, fallacious debating tactic, there’s no sense to it. And please don’t take that to mean that I characterize your contributions as debate. ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/274 "2006-06-30T04:06:43Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > One of the secret secrets to keeping something secret is to not issue press releases and speeches outlining your secret plan. Obviously that rule has been kept secret from this administration (and still remains a secret to its less intelligent defenders), who for the umpteenth time in this thread was the source of this information, years and years before the NYT article. Well, to be fair in the arena of secrets being kept secret, I’ll state again this isn’t the first time anything involving security has been leaked to the press. Pick up any newspaper or periodical and you’ll see scores of anonymous quotes willing to tell everything short of the combination of Fort Knox. Leaks, for the most part, aren’t the result of who’s in charge. Most often it’s a result of just too many people with info. Think of how bloated the government is. There’s no way in hell you can expect secrets of any kind to stay secret. You’re always going to have someone that just has to pick up a paper, see a quote, and go through the day knowing it was him/her. You think this administration is secretive? At this rate it will be seen in 10 years as one of the most transparent. There are very few secrets anymore. Whether leaks are good or bad only history will tell. Decades ago secrecy proved to be a pretty good asset in some issues the US and Europe had to deal with. There was propaganda, less than honest press conferences, and even misinformation reported. Not in an effort to pull one over on the citizens, but rather to keep those not so friendly from knowing too much. Worked well for the most part. I’m certainly not calling for a state-run news system. We do need the important news. And it needs to be free. But dammit we don’t always need to know the minutiae of everything. The reason we elect leaders is to decide the important stuff, and then report to us with what is happening and what they’re doing. That’s gone by the wayside. Now we learn from aides and staffers and rivals and lackeys with no accountability nor an onus to prove the info is in anyway factual. For many calling on a biased media, I think it’s more about the reporting being often unreliable and, frankly, opinion and speculation. It seems if the papers kept the news on the front page and hearsay/opinion on the editorial pages it would be a good start. And to everyone with “inside information”, unless you’re emulating Deep Throat, think twice about talking to any organic being with a press card just to be the one that gets quoted. ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/275 "2006-06-30T04:27:39Z")
> [@duffer](#): > > Well, to be fair in the arena of secrets being kept secret, I’ll state again this isn’t the first time anything involving security has been leaked to the press. Pick up any newspaper or periodical and you’ll see scores of anonymous quotes willing to tell everything short of the combination of Fort Knox. Leaks, for the most part, aren’t the result of who’s in charge. Most often it’s a result of just too many people with info. Have you been reading the thread? We’ve posted numerous links that show it was the President himself who “leaked” this “secret” years ago. It wasn’t a secret, therefore there wasn’t really a leaker. If there was a leaker, it was the President and his staff when he made speeches about it, issued press releases, etc. This “outrage” is all just smoke and mirrors for the magellan01’s of the world to swallow and get upset about. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/276 "2006-06-30T04:31:50Z")
> [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > As for the more reasoned arguments; I don’t believe i’m able to change anyone’s mind on this issue. As much as i’d like to be, I am not as good a debater as some in this thread, and i’d rather leave the convincing to them, who know more about this issue, than to attempt to do so myself. In my argument with you, however, I _do_ feel that I know what i’m talking about, so I feel comfortable in addressing your posts. Since you seem intent in ignoring the words I write, I think continuing our coversation is useless. I will comment on this though, as it makes no sense to me. Some groundwork: You feel that the mention of 9/11 is legitimate and should be included in the debate. You feel the pictures are not legitimate in the debate. Most everyone else thinks that pictures are not legitmate in the debate. And plaenty are saying so. You say that others asre better debaters than you, and you leave them to do the convincing. Yet you are trying to argue the same point about the pictures they are. Yet, regarding the other issue, about mentioning 9/11, you offer no resistance to any of the posters who disagree with something you say you feel strongly about. Instead, you’ve mentioned it only to me, one of the few who agree with that position. It seems that if the paragraph above, as well as what you’ve said in other posts in this thread, is true, you would 1)Leave the plethora of better arguers to convince me and 2) step up and counter their arguments regarding the mentioning of 9/11. Hmmm. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/277 "2006-06-30T04:40:54Z")
**Magellan01** , dude…nobody jumps ON a sinking ship. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/278 "2006-06-30T04:42:07Z")
> [@duffer](#): > > …You think this administration is secretive? At this rate it will be seen in 10 years as one of the most transparent. There are very few secrets anymore… It would help if you knew what you were talking about, > [@](#): > > [U.S. Reclassifies Many Documents in Secret Review](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/21/politics/21reclassify.html?ei=5088&en=370552525a85278d&ex=1298178000&pagewanted=print) > By SCOTT SHANE, February 21, 2006 > > WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 — In a seven-year-old secret program at the National Archives, intelligence agencies have been removing from public access thousands of historical documents that were available for years, including some already published by the State Department and others photocopied years ago by private historians. > > The restoration of classified status to more than 55,000 previously declassified pages began in 1999, when the Central Intelligence Agency and five other agencies objected to what they saw as a hasty release of sensitive information after a 1995 declassification order signed by President Bill Clinton. It accelerated after the Bush administration took office and especially after the 2001 terrorist attacks, according to archives records. > > But because the reclassification program is itself shrouded in secrecy — governed by a still-classified memorandum that prohibits the National Archives even from saying which agencies are involved — it continued virtually without outside notice until December. That was when an intelligence historian, Matthew M. Aid, noticed that dozens of documents he had copied years ago had been withdrawn from the archives’ open shelves… , before you say shit like this. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/279 "2006-06-30T05:01:13Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > You might want to go back and review the dozens of cites in this thread pointing out that the program has never been “secret” in any way, and has been openly discussed by Bush himself and other members of the administration multiple times. Well, I wwent back and looked at all those links and I could not find where Bushlt aked abou the prrogram. Back in 2001 he talked about a Financial Tracking Program, but SWIFT was not mentioned. If I missed something, which I very well may have, feel free to point to it. And for the record, my position here, and int the other thread in GD, is that the administration should be the one to decide what is secret. It’s not ideal, but I’d rather the people we voted for make the call than any newspaper. We elected them, and only them, to do that job. If you don’t take that position, you are, by default, allowing a private organization to make national security decisions. And I can’t be an advocate of that. Regarding this particular case, again, I see no choice but to let the administration make the call. If you don’t, you allow the NY Times to make it. Making national security policy decisions is not their job. Now as I’ve said both in GD and here, it seems that that adminsitration’s protestations were half-hearted. So maybe the secret program had dimished in effectiveness and they really didn’t care about it being revealed. Maybe they see this as an opportunity to stop the leaking that’s been going on. And I think that is a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![lawoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/35a633/32.png) [@lawoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawoot)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2006, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/280 "2006-06-30T05:19:38Z")
Don’t know of this has been linked to yet or not… [Keith Olbermann](http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/06/28/keith-strikes-back-against-nyt-bashers/) against the NYT bashers - shows clips of bush talking about this program maybe a dozen times since 9/11, plus also talks about SWIFT’s publicly-accessible website, and SWIFT’s _magazine_. Yuppers, sounds super-top-secret to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=15)