# 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:** 8
**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, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/141 "2006-06-27T23:46:22Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > You are being deliberately obtuse. It’s not deliberate. I can’t think of a single way for people to use the international banking system differently than they are likely already using it. You indicated you thought it was likely they would find another way. Help an unimaginative brother out. ---
**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, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/142 "2006-06-27T23:52:39Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > No, I’m not. We have a well-developed framework for identifying and protecting information which needs to be kept secret in the interest of national security. How to make a nuclear bomb, where our CIA agents are stationed, etc. The fact that we don’t make a secret of our having nuclear bombs or a CIA hasn’t hurt us in the least. Okay. So the government can have secrets. Good. Now, then, why was it so important that this one be revealed? and what was gained? > [@Giraffe](#): > > Would the CIA be more effective if its existence had never been revealed? Possibly. Simiarly, would we catch more criminals if we had a secret police force? Again, possibly. Do you think either of these is a good idea? Should we have, as a general operating procedure, a secret force watching us all the time? No. Should we be able to erect secret forces in order to achieve tightly defined goals? Yes. I’d say we should have one going after pedophiles. And, certainly, terrorists. ---
**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, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/143 "2006-06-27T23:55:07Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Should we have, as a general operating procedure, a secret force watching us all the time? No. Should we be able to erect secret forces in order to achieve tightly defined goals? Yes. I’d say we should have one going after pedophiles. And, certainly, terrorists. Then I think we’ve reached a philisophical impasse. While the activities of some government entities need to be kept secret, I strongly disagree that the entities themselves should ever be secret. To me, it’s too high a price to pay. ---
**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, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/144 "2006-06-27T23:55:24Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Now that you mention it, in _The Teeth of the Tiger_, Tom Clancy talks about just such a program…and the book was published in 2003. If Clancy can figure out something like that is possible, I’d imagine the terrorist financiers could grok the concept as well. But it isn’t a question of a general concept, it’s a question of specific information. If the government knows that terrorists are using banks A, B and C to launder funds for their operations, they can monitor the situation and perhaps acquire valuable information about what the terrorists are up to. But if the terrorists know that banks A, B and C are being watched, they can move their operations to banks X, Y and Z. Weeks, months or years worth of intelligence may be lost while the government re-acquires the target, assuming it ever can re-acquire the target. It’s one thing to know that you are almost certainly being watched; but having specific details as to how you’re being watched is much more valuable to you. It is exasperating that anyone would claim not to understand this. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/145 "2006-06-28T00:00:09Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Who said there is no difference? There are many, many differences. Do you think that this is some brillaint revelation on your part? Must something be identical to another thing for it to be relevant? :rolleyes: No, but in this particular case there’s virutally no equivalence whatsoever. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/146 "2006-06-28T00:05:53Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > It’s not deliberate. I can’t think of a single way for people to use the international banking system differently than they are likely already using it. You indicated you thought it was likely they would find another way. Help an unimaginative brother out. If you think your cover’s been blown, you just create or find a different cover. If you think your accounts in one set of banks are being watched, you set up new accounts in different banks. If you think that the cops are watching the guy who launders your money, you find someone else to launder your money. If one neighborhood gets too hot, you move to another neighborhood. Is that really so hard to understand? Why in the world do you think they have to find an entirely new method to move their funds? It is very hard for me to believe that you aren’t being willfully stupid. ---
**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 28, 2006, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/147 "2006-06-28T00:07:35Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > 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? And I’m sure they’d LOVE the fact that their memories are being exploited by people like you, asshat. **Der Trihs** , you’re an embarassment to most of us lefties here. Shut up. **Leaper** , for fuck’s sake, not everything is either or. Perspective, goddammit. Jesus, way to mix the slippery slope with the excluded middle-not everyone can combine logical fallacies so beautifully as you have. ---
**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 28, 2006, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/148 "2006-06-28T00:08:36Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > If you think your cover’s been blown, you just create or find a different cover. If you think your accounts in one set of banks are being watched, you set up new accounts in different banks. If you think that the cops are watching the guy who launders your money, you find someone else to launder your money. If one neighborhood gets too hot, you move to another neighborhood. Is that really so hard to understand? Why in the world do you think they have to find an entirely new method to move their funds? Because, as I understand the situation, the Times did not report that the U.S. is monitoring Bank of America. It reported that the U.S. is monitoring all international banking transactions between the U.S. and somewhere else. How do you switch banks in that scenario? ---
**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 28, 2006, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/149 "2006-06-28T00:10:43Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > If you think your accounts in one set of banks are being watched, you set up new accounts in different banks. How stupid can you be? I would assume they’re watching all of the banks. Not to mention, that sudden withdrawals would be a major red flag. Jesus, you’re thick. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/150 "2006-06-28T00:11:11Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > No, but in this particular case there’s virutally no equivalence whatsoever. > > Try again. The equivalence is that sanctimonious, self-important fools damage valuable intelligence assets. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/151 "2006-06-28T00:18:35Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > How stupid can you be? I would assume they’re watching all of the banks. Not to mention, that sudden withdrawals would be a major red flag. > Jesus, you’re thick. If you really can’t comprehend that the terror networks have the services of people intimately familiar with world financial systems as well as assistance from states such as Syria and Iran to help them find ways to move their money around, then you are the one who’s being thick. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/152 "2006-06-28T00:21:37Z")
> [@Evil One](#): > > It’s been a couple of days since the story broke…and since nobody else has taken the plunge, I guess I will. Actually, it has been discussed pretty thoroughly in **GD** since the story broke. As to the claims put forth by those who wish to take Bush and company at their word: The fact that the administration and one of their Congressional lapdogs has made a big deal about going after the NYT while ignoring the fact that the WSJ was not even asked to withhold the story pretty much puts the lie to the idea that the administration’s complaints are serious. It is mere partisan showmanship. Appealing to competitive spirit or capitalism does not justify it. If it was truly a matter of national security, the WSJ should have sat on the story–or, at least, waited until the NYT story had already hit the streets and then been careful to publish no more information than the NYT instead of rushing to get their story out on the very same day. (And at the very least, if it had truly been a matter of national security, the government agency that made impassioned in-person pleas to two separate newspapers to suppress the story should have at least dropped a phone call or an e-mail to the WSJ–which they did not.) A story this big (or, at least, as big as it has become with the whining by the adminstration) is not really going to bring in less advertising revenue by having been published 24 hours later. The program is not dead. There is no reason to believe that it is even compromised. Exactly the same transactions that were tracked by SWIFT last week will be tracked by SWIFT next week and the only way to avoid it is to send hundreds of couriers around the world with briefcases stuffed full of cash–and that would actually bring more such transfers to the surface as they got nailed in airport after airport, revealing not just the bank accounts but also the senders and receivers. By doing this openly, there will be fewer cases where a Spain or an Italy will be forced by their voters to withdraw from the “War on Terror” because the voters are tired of having their country linked to the illegal machinations of the rogue government in Washington, D.C. (And if this story had been broken by _El Mundo_, _Il Tempo_, _Stern_, or _Le Monde_ and they had not emphasized that no laws were being violated (that we know of, yet), there would have been a lot more pressure on various European governments to take action to prevent SWIFT from complying with the U.S. requests.) ---
**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 28, 2006, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/153 "2006-06-28T00:22:04Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > The equivalence is that sanctimonious, self-important fools damage valuable intelligence assets. You mean like [the](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010924-1.html) [President](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010924-2.html)? Or did you mean the [Undersecretary of Treasury for Enforcement](http://lists.state.gov/SCRIPTS/WA-USIAINFO.EXE?A2=ind0111a&L=fpc&P=1236), perhaps? These are not the secrets that you are looking for. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/154 "2006-06-28T00:47:01Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > And I’m sure they’d LOVE the fact that their memories are being exploited by people like you, asshat. Newsflash for the dishonest and the dense: mentioning does not equal exploiting. In case you haven’t noticed, we’re have a debate a a program that’s trying to stop another 3,000 people from being blown up. Just how fucking dumb can you be? ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/155 "2006-06-28T01:43:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > 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? Libby has been indicted. In other words, Fitz felt that there was sufficient evidence of deliberate misrepresentation to go for a “he lied to me” charge. > [@magellan01](#): > > Still, as is implied by the NY Times, no laws were broken. So why the tizzy? Because some people, inckluding the National Review (wow. I’m impressed) was calling for arrests and charges. Also, the real wingnuts were calling it treason and demanding long prison terms. > [@magellan01](#): > > 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. If so, it would be very useful. It could not only be used to catch terrorists, but also organized crime bosses. However, depending on whose reports you belive, there are tens of thousands of bank acounts being followed. Are there really that many Jackals or Godfathers out there? It doesn’t even have to be a secret program. I also have doubts about the security of the information (re the lost records from the Veterans Administration, and the records of national guard members that “disappeared”. It’s easy to flag large transactions. Just look for big dollar values, or whatever the signs of money laundering are. Then, get a warrant. Now that would be reasonable - however the dragnet apporach is no good. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/156 "2006-06-28T01:50:37Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Libby has been indicted. In other words, Fitz felt that there was sufficient evidence of deliberate misrepresentation to go for a “he lied to me” charge. Yes, nut no one has been charged with what he claimed. And there may not have even been a crime, leaving Libby to serve time for lying in a case in which no crime was committed. > [@SteveG1](#): > > Because some people, inckluding the National Review (wow. I’m impressed) was calling for arrests and charges. Also, the real wingnuts were calling it treason and demanding long prison terms. Charges for what? The comment you responded to had to do with the recent financial tracking program. > [@SteveG1](#): > > If so, it would be very useful. It could not only be used to catch terrorists, but also organized crime bosses. However, depending on whose reports you belive, there are tens of thousands of bank acounts being followed. Are there really that many Jackals or Godfathers out there? It doesn’t even have to be a secret program. I also have doubts about the security of the information (re the lost records from the Veterans Administration, and the records of national guard members that “disappeared”. It’s easy to flag large transactions. Just look for big dollar values, or whatever the signs of money laundering are. Then, get a warrant. Now that would be reasonable - however the dragnet apporach is no good. They claim that it has worked. And I haven’t heard that refuted. Do you know different? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/157 "2006-06-28T02:48:45Z")
> [@](#): > > **DMC** : > I’m actually somewhat confused by the outrage. Do those of you who think the NYT did the wrong thing actually believe that it was a secret that we tracked foreign assets suspected of being used for terrorist funding, and also the money laundering used by such parties? > > Seriously? Apparently they do. No one addressed this comment: > [@](#): > > **Marienee** : Because it seems to me that I recall the President saying that we were going to do exactly this a couple of years ago. I _think_ that it may have been on _Hardball_ today that they showed a clip of President Bush saying that the Treasury Department was monitoring international financial records. I will see if I can find a transcript or catch a rerun. The clip may have been from last September. There was also a book published around June 20 that mentioned the financial monitoring. It takes quite a while to put a book through the publishing process so the info has been around for some time. I’m for outing any President that _appears_ to be in violation of the Constitution or is unable to explain sufficiently to the editors and publishers the necessity for longterm lying to the American public. I certainly turned on a very liberal President for his war-related lies during the Sixties. ---
**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 28, 2006, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/158 "2006-06-28T02:50:28Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > If you really can’t comprehend that the terror networks have the services of people intimately familiar with world financial systems as well as assistance from states such as Syria and Iran to help them find ways to move their money around, then you are the one who’s being thick. You don’t actually know anything about international finance, do you? You’re pretty much just making shit up in an attempt to smear liberals, right? Right. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/159 "2006-06-28T02:56:54Z")
> [@](#): > > **magellan01** : Charges for what? Treason. Violation of the Espionage Act. Amazing. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2006, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359/160 "2006-06-28T03:02:07Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > Apparently they do. No one addressed this comment: Post #139. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-short-sighted-self-serving-twits-at-the-new-york-times/362359.md?page=9)