If they have connections with people who are that well placed in the financial system, they already knew every jot and tittle of what was “revealed” in the [I}Times*.
That’s the point I made earlier, to which nobody has made any attempt at responding – either they are simply users of the financial infrastructure (in which case they don’t have the ability to do anything meaningfully different, except to shun banks altogether) or they have people “on the inside” of major financial institutions (in which case they already knew all the “secret” details of how the monitoring works, via various government liaisons with their employers).
But they didn’t, and it wasn’t treason, and you’re full of shit.
It’s beginning to sound like the program was never secret.
So what’s the big deal? Just election year flogging of one of the right’s favorite whipping boys?
To those who say the system is now useless: Why? We know about security cameras in stores, does the fact that shoplifters know they exist mean that they shouldn’t be there any more?
To those who say 9/11, 9/11, 9/11: Shut up, shut up, shut up. Being attacked does not grant the attackee perpetual victimhood nor permanent possession of the moral high ground. Give it a rest.
I wish it were possible for all the whiny ass titty babies who are so willing to give up apparently any civil liberty and allow any atrocity in the name of security to move away somewhere. How about Security Blanket Island?
The we could let America get back to being the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
It takes bravery to live in freedom, or more specifically to let others live in freedom. Big swingin’ balls. If you don’t have the sack for it, fuck off. Yeah, that’s right, I’m actually making a love it or leave it argument. Why do you hate American liberties?
I think there may be something to the idea, as suggested by Lemur866 that the administration leaked this one themselves. Not only does it serve the purpose of the administration, but also simply due to the massive sourcing that the NYT apparently did on the story. As noted by Kevin Drum, they talked to “nearly 20” current or former government officials, and the LA Times talked to “more than a dozen.” Why else would so many officials or former officials talk about a clandestine project?
If the program was working, and it was legal, then it would be a credit to the administration that implemented it. How does it serve the alleged anti-Bush agenda of the New York Times to publish a story about one of his successes?
I quoted Evil One, but if anyone else wants to take a crack at that question, go ahead.
Update: Congressional Pubs are now crafting a resolution to condemn the NYT for breaking this story.
Curiously, the WSJ doesn’t seem to be mentioned.
Marienee mentioned it previously and I posted direct links to the relevant government webpages in post 153 and there are still people sniping at the Times for the “leak” of top secret information that George Bush publicly announced a long time ago.
The Bush: I am going to track and disrupt the financial network of terrorism.
<5 years later>
The Times: The president has a program that tracks the financial transactions of suspected terrorists and their allies.
The Bush: omigodwtf, those liberals at the Times have put us all in danger.
The sheep in a sphincter-hold: The Times is exposing a program that’s trying to stop 3,000 people from blowing up!
:rolleyes:
Did anyone see The Daily Show last night? I thought they got this issue just about right. If you want to see the segment, go here and click on the link “A Times to Kill.”
I particularly liked:
I did a quick scan of GD and missed it.
What is your source for this information? If it’s something other than Daily Kos and it’s true, then that would completely change my opinion of the Bush administration. To complain about breaking the story is legitimate. To target the Times at the exclusion of others is, as you say, partisan showmanship.
One possible explanation is that the administration sees the Times as the organization that broke the story and that when other outlets published it, the genie was out of the bottle.
However…
If the administration knew the WSJ was sitting on the story and said nothing to them, then that is dishonest partisan bullshit behavior.
The initial story in the first link provided by magellan01 in the GD thread mentions that the WSJ had not received a call to suppress.
FinnAgain has provided a link, just a bit ago, to a story in Editor and Publisher in which Tony Snow dodges the issue of why the WSJ has not been pursued in successive White House news conferences on successive days.
Okay toughy, what part of the post you cited makes me full of shit? Please be specific. Also, as this is a debate board, you may want to address the content of my post to you.
You know, I think an issue should be argued on it’s merits and we shouldn’t trot out something to make it an emotional issue. But WTF?!?!?!? We’re talking about a program that was instigated by the blowing up of 3,000 people on 9/11, with the specific goal of trying to prevent a similar, or worse, disaster from happening. Now, either you don’t want this mentioned because it focuses the discussion on the importance of security. Or maybe you forgot just what happened. In which case:
If you don’t like it, too fucking bad. Go put your head back in the sand.
magellan01, I sympathise with what you’re trying to say here, but posting pictures of the World Trade Centre? That’s emotional blackmail and totally unneeded to make your point. Shame on you.
I posted them to make a point. If you don’t like it, too fucking bad to you too.
A point that couldn’t be made without those pictures? I really doubt it, unless your point actually was “clearly these people have genuinely forgotten the events of 9/11”.
Hopefully the point you were trying to make is that you’re a piece of shit asshole, because otherwise you missed the mark.
Ditto, ditto, ditto. What a shit heel.
This post…
THIS part. Nobody was accused of leaking or reporting military strategy or tactics. Nobody was accused of leaking or reporting troop movements. So, like I said, you are full of shit. Nobody told the Germans we broke their enigma code. Don’t argue about what didn’t happen as if it justifies The Great Decider’s latest hisy fit, and act like I’m going to wander off on that tangent.
You’re a fucking moron. Fuck yourself, you piece of shit.