# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/101 "2006-06-27T21:42:27Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I agree. But as you acknowledge, we would have caught more people if it was secret. And we’d have a far greater risk of abuse of that power without any public oversight. Such is the trade-off inherent in a democratic government of laws. In any case, if you don’t actually feel that public knowledge of the program requires its cancellation, I think you and **Evil Captor** would argue your point far more effectively without the dishonest spin, e.g.: > [@magellan01](#): > > Now, why would you want to stop a program that was preventing terrorists from carrying our their plans? > [@Evil Captor](#): > > the twits at the Times decided to essentially end the program by calling attention to it. ---
**Author:** ![NicePete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ee7513/32.png) [@NicePete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NicePete)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/102 "2006-06-27T21:42:37Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Sure. Surveillance works better when the person being watched dosn’t know he is being watched. Are you of a different opinion? Mmmm, not necessarily. Depends on what your purpose is. If deterrence is your goal, you’re better off with obvious surveillance. If you want to catch someone in the act, you’re better served by secret surveillance. In this case, aren’t we trying to deter the activity? Don’t we want to keep the terrorists from being funded in the first place? You could argue that making this program widely known has made it _more_ effective. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/103 "2006-06-27T22:05:08Z")
> [@wring](#): > > fuck you. and not in a good way. but I doubt that you know a good way. Temper, temper, little one. If the discussion is too frustrating for you, take a nap. > [@wring](#): > > see - I didn’t vote for the lying scumbag. And so I **do** get to be on the high fucking donkey 'cause I was one of the ones suggesting that the rationales for invading Iraq were less than the ‘slam dunk’ the lying scum claimed them to be. Well, good for you. Now you can keep jerking off about the decision to go to war or deal with the reality that we are there and that there are still people who would like to blow up another 3,000 of us… And just to refresh your memory the 3,000 people that were killed by the terrorists on 9/11 happened before we went to war. It’s the reason the subject actually came up. By the way, I was right about Miami Heat wining the NBA championship, even when they were down 0-2. Just thought I’d mention it. > [@wring](#): > > It seems clear that the VP and Scooter actually gave the info to the reporter. VP isn’t being prosecuted 'cause he didn’t lie (much) afterward about having given her name. Several reporters testified under oath that they got the name from those guys. Try to keep up. Pay attention to the second word you wrote here and think about why you included it. And was Libby or anyone else convicted of that crime? Has he even been charged with that crime? Has it been established by the prosecutor that a crime has even been committed? On top of that, I am quite shocked that you—someone who holds the rights of the people to be so sacrosanct would assume guilt. Or do you not believe that a man is innocent until proven guilty? > [@wring](#): > > I know it’s confusing since the word ‘secure’ means more than one thing. You’ve claimed that there was congressional oversite over these matters, therefore, no reason to be concerned. and that allowing the people et al to know about it risks national security. But, you see, there is a third alternative - judicial oversite - as in warrents. as in the SOP of our criminal justice system, that except in very narrow circumstances, to get access to info like this program sought, you need to 'splain your case to a judge, including such info as who is being investigated, why you need the info, why you suspect wrongdoing and so on. And if the judge agrees, voila, you have your warrent, permission as it were, to get the info you claim is necessary. Congressional oversite isn’t the same things. Still, as is implied by the NY Times, no laws were broken. So why the tizzy? We’re debaating. Or is that not what you thought happened on debate boards? > [@wring](#): > > Either: Congress issues a rubberstamp and doesn’t examine individual cases (in which case the potential for governmental abuse is astoundingly high) **or** they’re given the same amount of detail a judge would have, and therefore why not use a judge. there’s lots more potential for leaks from several hundred Congress critters than from a judge. therefore, the informaiton that a search is being done is (and here’s the part that apparently confused you) is _less secure_ w/congressional oversite than through traditional means. From what I understand, the SWIFT program was dealing with big bunches of transactions, and I don’t think a judge has any power to grant permission when looking at transactions that occured outside the U.S. by non U.S. citizens. > [@wring](#): > > you reallly are a trollish waste of oxygen aren’t you? A waste? Nah. In fact, I seem to have been of some use here reminding people of why we’re even having this discussion. You remember, don’t you: the fact that 3,000 people were murdered in NY, Pennsylvania and Washinton, D.C. on 9/11? ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/104 "2006-06-27T22:08:30Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Hmmm… Live free or die. Someone should put that on a license plate or something. 🙂 [Someone did, silly.](http://www.pl8s.com/n/newh.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/105 "2006-06-27T22:12:35Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > I think you and **Evil Captor** would argue your point far more effectively without the dishonest spin, e.g.: Don’t you mean **Evil _One_**? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/106 "2006-06-27T22:13:53Z")
> [@NicePete](#): > > No, that’s not it. Would you give up your right to know about how your government is abridging your rights and invading your privacy in order to fight terrorists? Kind of a Catch 22. Because you don’t know if they’re abridging your rights unless something is revealed. And I maintain that natioanl security will always involve secrecy and the classification of information. That said, I would gladly err way on the side of letting them keep national security secrets secret. > [@NicePete](#): > > This is where we differ. I am not willing to give a President much leeway. I am basically mistrustful of our (or any) government and I most certainly distrust this President. > > Maybe it’s because I’ve worked around politicians and government. Maybe it’s my age (one of my first current event-type memories is watching the Watergate hearings on TV.) I don’t know. But I have very little innate trust for our elected officials and think that they need to be very closely watched. In my experience they are interested in one thing only – getting power and holding on to it. Let me clarify my position. I don’t trust politicians in the least. I think they’re all professional liars, who, as you say, are only interested on holding on to and increasing their power. But the fact remains that they are the ones that are tasked with our security. And I feel I have to trust them. I have no choice,. The only other option I see is second-guessiing them at every turn and having them reveal everything. And that wil NOT make us safer. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/107 "2006-06-27T22:16:30Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Good for you. Don’t presume to speak for everyone else. Some us prefer not to give up ANY of our rights. Ditto. But you are aware that this is a debate board, right? We’re all exspressing our _opinions._ ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/108 "2006-06-27T22:17:41Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Don’t you mean **Evil _One_**? > > 😉 Shit! I always get the Evil posters mixed up. Sorry, **Evil Captor**. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/109 "2006-06-27T22:26:18Z")
> [@Evil One](#): > > And what would be your plan to try to preempt terrorist attacks? One that would be in keeping with your political philosophy? Get Bush and his fellow Republicans out of power for one; the last thing they’ll do is try to hinder terrorism. It’s to their political benefit, after all, and the Republican leadership cares nothing for the lives or welfare of Americans. Then go after Osama for real, instead of going through the motions and using him for an excuse to invade countries and torture people. > [@Evil One](#): > > I knew this would come up. As I hit “Submit Reply”, I realized that I hadn’t made this point clearly enough. > > What I meant to say was that the program was not hidden from Congress. It wasn’t bleack-hearted men using the Constitution as toilet paper as they conspire to breach yet another civil liberty. The Republican Congress, and many of the Democrats, _are_ “black-hearted men using the Constitution as toilet paper”. Why would I trust Congress to defend me, my rights or the country ? > [@Evil One](#): > > That said…I still don’t see the compelling journalistic reason to expose this program and end it by default. Because it’s more likely to be used to profit Bush and the Republicans that track terrorists. > [@Evil One](#): > > I think the difference today is the fact that a lot of the political opponents of the president view the fact that we are in a war with internal quotation marks above the word “war”. They can’t bring themselves to face the fact that we are trying to kill people before they kill us. We _aren’t_ in a war, except in Iraq, and we could end that by leaving. The terrorists aren’t a serious threat, and never have been. 9-11 was not a threat to America; it was an excuse for the Republicans to push their agenda. > [@Evil One](#): > > I am choosing to take the Bush administrations statements about this program at face value. Then you are being foolish. Never trust a liar. > [@Evil One](#): > > It’s enough to kill the program and potentially endanger lives. That’s why I would love to see the government crack down hard on leakers of classified information. Period. Regardless of the ideological justification of the leak. You mean like incidents of torture, or killing the retarded in scientific experiments; those sorts of things ? You wish to give the government absolute veto on what is published ? > [@magellan01](#): > > If only those were the only choices. How does dead fit into your preferences? Like the 3,000 who died on 9/11. It really happened, you know. And 9-11 happened on whose watch ? At _best_, 9-11 is an example of Bushite incompetence; I consider it likely they let it happen for the political benefit. Either way, it’s one more example of why they shouldn’t be trusted. > [@Sarahfeena](#): > > I was about to post the same thing. Not to mention that it is brought up so often because thank GOD, it is **the only event of its kind for us to point to in this country** and say, “that is why we need tools for fighting terrorism.” Bolding mine. Ever hear of the Oklahoma City bombing ? The widespread lynchings of blacks by the Klan ? Terrorism in America is hardly unknown. The difference is, now the Bushites are in office, and they needed a bloody shirt to wave to justify their vile agenda. > [@Sarahfeena](#): > > Well, I think they were working on preventing terrorism then, too. 9/11 was a failure of intelligence…but all intelligence doesn’t fail. It wasn’t a failure of intelligence. They were told, and did nothing. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/110 "2006-06-27T22:28:54Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > And we’d have a far greater risk of abuse of that power without any public oversight. Such is the trade-off inherent in a democratic government of laws. Yes, but you are assuming abuse. Like it’s as fact that it will happen. The program was being used fgor quite a while and not only were/are there no accusations of abuse, the government instituted safeguards proactively. > [@Giraffe](#): > > In any case, if you don’t actually feel that public knowledge of the program requires its cancellation, I think you and **Evil Captor** would argue your point far more effectively without the dishonest spin, e.g.: Huh? The issue is effectiveness. Cancellation would render it 0% effective, yes, but it’s effectiveness has still be compromised. You’re attempting to couch it in those terms is what is dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/111 "2006-06-27T22:33:13Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yes, but you are assuming abuse. Like it’s as fact that it will happen. Look, I know there have been all kinds of tears in the space-time continuum lately, but since when are _conservatives_ arguing that we should trust the government in all cases? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/112 "2006-06-27T22:34:38Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yes, but you are assuming abuse. Like it’s as fact that it will happen. I wouldn’t trust a convicted child molestor around children, either. Give the government power, and it will be abused if it can do so, and it _always_ can if it’s secret. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/113 "2006-06-27T22:35:51Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Look, I know there have been all kinds of tears in the space-time continuum lately, but since when are _conservatives_ arguing that we should trust the government in all cases? \< snickers \> Since _they_ are the ones in control of the government, of course. Government is only evil if non-rightys are allowed a say. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/114 "2006-06-27T22:38:23Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > And 9-11 happened on whose watch ? At _best_, 9-11 is an example of Bushite incompetence; I consider it likely they let it happen for the political benefit. Either way, it’s one more example of why they shouldn’t be trusted. _Ding, ding. Ding, ding. Medication time, medication time. Ding, ding. Please stop all basketweaving, finger painting, and dicussions with historical figures and report to the dispensary. Ding, ding. And yes, **Der Trihs** , you can keep you tin foil hat on again. Ding, ding…_ ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/115 "2006-06-27T22:39:32Z")
I wonder how Bush can act all outraged about leaking vital national security secrets and still maintain a straight face, given that he still keeps Karl Rove on his staff (The Plame leak). ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/116 "2006-06-27T22:39:34Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > I wouldn’t trust a convicted child molestor around children, either. Give the government power, and it will be abused if it can do so, and it _always_ can if it’s secret. So, Are you advocating that the governement shold have ZERO secrets? ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/117 "2006-06-27T22:45:44Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Yes, but you are assuming abuse. Like it’s as fact that it will happen. The program was being used fgor quite a while and not only were/are there no accusations of abuse, the government instituted safeguards proactively. I’m not assuming abuse. I said there was greater _potential_ for abuse without public oversight. Also note that you’re quoting our exchange about police tapping the phones of criminals, not the current program. > [@magellan01](#): > > Huh? The issue is effectiveness. Cancellation would render it 0% effective, yes, but it’s effectiveness has still be compromised. You’re attempting to couch it in those terms is what is dishonest. In the OP, **Evil One** equated the Times’ public disclosure of the existence of the program with the automatic ending of the program. You spoke up in strong agreement with him, sadly shaking your head over the bodies of 9/11 while asking others why they’d want to end such a successful program. It tends to lead one to conclude that you agree with his initial assertion that this public revelation will force an end to the surveillance program. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/118 "2006-06-27T22:46:11Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Do you realize what a hypocrite your appear when you say that? If its hypocrisy that concerns you, you might consider the hypocrisy of a powerful media outlet that expects to have unlimited access to sensitive information and an unquestioned right to reveal such informations as it pleases, while expecting at the same time to have an unlimited right to keep secrets of its own from both the government and the general public. One wonders what the Times would have to say if someone published the names and pictures of their sources on a website. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2006, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/119 "2006-06-27T22:47:54Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Look, I know there have been all kinds of tears in the space-time continuum lately, but since when are _conservatives_ arguing that we should trust the government in all cases? But I’ve not argued that. I probably distrust government as much as any poster here (make that _sane_ posters). I’ve stated that when it comes to national security that we have very little choice _but_ to trust those in power. A degree of secrecy is inherent in national security. ---
**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 27, 2006, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/120 "2006-06-27T22:52:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I don’t trust politicians in the least. > > … > > And I feel I have to trust them. Let me know how that works out for you. > [@](#): > > The only other option I see is second-guessiing them at every turn and having them reveal everything. And that wil NOT make us safer. Well, it makes us safer from our own politicians. Which, to me, is of much greater concern than being safe from terrorists. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=7)