Osama Bin Forgotten

[kach22i]

Originally posted by fastpat
There is no "War on Terrorism", if there was the US Air Force would bomb the biggest terrorist camp on the planet, the Pentagon.

I wish I had this on a sign for the 4th of July parade I was in.

Just kidding.

[RoninLB]

Originally posted by techweenie
I find it interesting that the LA Times and WSJ both published information aobut the SWIFT program and only the NYT is somehow to blame? Reminds me of the condemnation of France when 60+ countries also didnt' buy the lies about Iraq.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?threadid=291148&highlight=WSJ

Originally posted by RoninLB
According to Tony Fratto, Treasury's Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, he first contacted the Times some two months ago. Mr. Fratto went on to ask the Times not to publish such a story on grounds that it would damage this useful terror-tracking method.

Secretary John Snow invited Times Executive Editor Bill Keller to his Treasury office to deliver the same message.

Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, the leaders of the 9/11 Commission, made the same request of Mr. Keller.

Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte also urged the newspaper not to publish the story.

The Times decided to publish anyway, letting Mr. Fratto know about its decision a week ago Wednesday.

Mr. Fratto says he believed "they had about 80% of the story, but they had about 30% of it wrong." So the Administration decided that, in the interest of telling a more complete and accurate story, they would declassify a series of talking points about the program.

Treasury contacted WSJ reporter Glenn Simpson to offer him the same declassified information. At no point did Treasury officials tell the WSJ not to publish the information. What Journal editors did know is that they had senior government officials providing news they didn't mind seeing in print.

Times' Keller's argument that the terrorists surely knew about the Swift monitoring is his own leap of faith. The terror financiers might have known the U.S. could track money from the U.S., but they might not have known the U.S. could follow the money from, say, Saudi Arabia. The first thing an al Qaeda financier would have done when the story broke is check if his bank was part of Swift.

In this asymmetric war against terrorists, intelligence and financial tracking are the equivalent of troop movements. They are America's main weapons. The Times itself said as much in a typically hectoring September 24, 2001, editorial "Finances of Terror": "Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities." Isn't the latter precisely what the Swift operation is?

The obligation of the press is to take the government seriously when it makes a request not to publish.

[Moneyguy1]

I would posit:

The obligation of the press is to question the government when it makes a request not to publish (and then act accordingly).

By accordingly I mean prudently and with consideration of the publication's effects.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by RoninLB

[Mulhollanddose]

Sometimes I laugh at my own posts.

[techweenie]

What's the source on this? Your own post?

Since the government announced it was using international financial tracking resources to 'fight terrorism;' since SWIFT is a completly public entity that discloses its tracking of money; since the use of the SWIFT program was referenced at least once before a couple of years ago in the NYT -- why is it suddenly a big deal? Maybe because it's suddenly politically useful to rile the yokels?

Maybe because making the "leak" not the content the issue, the Bushies can avoid looking intrusive?

[Moneyguy1]

Now tech, that is unfair...

Entering into a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Play nice!!!

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally posted by techweenie
But wasnt' this thread about Bush de-prioritizing the search for the Criminal of the Century?

Uh, no; it was more about your inability to read and understand the whole article.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by Moneyguy1

[RoninLB]

Originally posted by techweenie


What's the source on this? Your own post?

WSJ

if you still believe the WSJ lied you could search out the info with George Soros or MoveOn.org.

Why not? They're on the cusp of taking over the Dem party when/if they succeeed with taking down Dem Sen Joe Liberman in this coming election. Rewriting history is easy. Just ask them what you want done.

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by RoninLB
WSJ

if you still believe the WSJ lied you could search out the info with George Soros or MoveOn.org.

Why not? They're on the cusp of taking over the Dem party when/if they succeeed with taking down Dem Sen Joe Liberman in this coming election. Rewriting history is easy. Just ask them what you want done.

In one thread weenie loves the WSJ and in another it bites him on the rear. Will be fun to see him waltz around this one!

[Moneyguy1]

If the source (WSJ) is objective and (relatively) unbiased, every reader will be upset with it at one time or another.

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by procon
Some of us laugh at all your posts.

Which one is you?

[Mulhollanddose]

Those sheep look real nervous...what did you do to them?

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by procon
Nothing, other than telling them you were bringing up the rear.

So you speak sheep huh?...Do you think that "bahhhhhh" means "yes"?

[dd74]

Originally posted by Joeaksa
Thats the attitude that the NYT took and now they very well may go to jail over it. Turning our countries secrets over to everyone is against the law and they knew it.

Doing it while we are involved in a war threatens the lives of our military members worldwide, and civilians here in America. What are you going to say when someone here in America is killed by these terrorists? Oh well, it was news and they needed to sell papers...?

"Oh well, it was news and they needed to sell papers...?" Is that in deference to some saying: "Oh well, Iraq is full of oil so 9/11 needed to happen?"

I doubt anyone has the nerve to claim either example as for why we are in Iraq. I think where blame can lie is with the person who leaked this to begin with.

You know, all that casting stones in glass houses stuff...

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by dd74
I think where blame can lie is with the person who leaked this to begin with.

Agreed, however that does not relieve the NYT of their responsibility.

The press still has a responsibility to be judicious about what they print, especially in times of war. This program was not illegal and was working very well. There was no scandal involved, no coverup to expose. The NYT was just jumping on the bandwagon to try and pin another one on Bush and this one backfired. I think the editor, owner and writer of the story should be prosecuted along with the leakers.

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Agreed, however that does not relieve the NYT of their responsibility.

The press still has a responsibility to be judicious about what they print, especially in times of war. This program was not illegal and was working very well. There was no scandal involved, no coverup to expose. The NYT was just jumping on the bandwagon to try and pin another one on Bush and this one backfired. I think the editor, owner and writer of the story should be prosecuted along with the leakers.

Totally agree and its hard to argue with the above, the truth. Hope that they rot in Leavenworth Federal Prison for a long time.

[Rodeo]

You'll hear little more about this supposed "scandal" from the admin, since its much ado about nothing. Rove's ploy was to get the faithful all worked up over the "liberal press," and to once again divert attention away from the staggering incompetence of this administration, in fighting terror, in occupying Iraq, in rebuilding New Orleans, in managing the federal budget, in preserving our freedoms while maintaining our security, and in everything else it attempts.

It worked for the faithful, but not for anyone that can think for themselves. Not for anyone that realizes that the program was "classified" to keep it from the American people, not from terrorists.

So did you hear that the Bush admin closed the CIA office that was dedicated to catching ObL?

[tobster1911]

Originally posted by Rodeo

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by fastpat
If you can't tell the difference between a newspaper exposing government wrongdoing and an official government leak to smear a credible source of other government wrongdoing, you are imbecilic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. I'm afraid Pat's analysis, as frank as it is, is spot on.

2. Nice diversion from the topic. Bush quietly closed the CIA office dedicated to finding ObL. If it wasn't for NPR, no one would know about it. When the move was exposed, the admin boasted that closing the office was actually a re-affirmation of their commitment to catch ObL.

No one pointed this out so I will. Do you two really believe that closing a task force is "government wrongdoing"? Please explain that one to me. You may not not like it but that hardly makes it wrongdoing.....

Considering the statement is made by anything-I-dislike-is-wrong-Pat I suppose you probably do.