Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

LA / NY Times Disclosure


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> LA / NY Times Disclosure Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 4:58:36 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline 		To me this story represents the sharpest of double edged swords.

For those uninformed. The NY Times in conjunction with the LA Times and the Wall Street Journal, broke a story regarding how the United States uses, or now used, bank record surveillance to investigate potential terrorist cells. In this case, Congress was fully briefed on the program, unlike the phone call story, and there is nothing illegal in the monitoring. Through monitoring these activities the US discovered an Al-Qaeda member laundering $200k through a Pakistani Bank.

Look, I'd be the first to point out that as long as the Administration does nothing to secure the physical borders of this country their security efforts are lax. But this story will hurt the free press. The public outcry will be overwhelming if a forthcoming terrorist attack occurs in the US that could have been prevented if this investigatory tool was kept secret. Imagine if the organizers of 9/11 were monitored in such a way? The money forwarded to them for piloting lessons may have initiated their capture. I'm expecting the Administration to use that exact example should a terrorist attack occur.

Sensationalism is used to sell newspapers, in this instance it can be used to bring them down. I don't even see the excitement about this story in the first place. Again, remember the masses won't read into this beyond the talking head tag lines. Prohibitions placed on the press can be perceived as warranted. Scary....

The story is still breaking. Here are a couple snippets and the story links:

quote:

The cooperative serves 7,800 financial institutions in more than 200 countries. Its database, officials say, has provided valuable information about ties between suspected terrorists and groups financing them, and directly led to the capture of Al-Qaeda operative Riduan Isamuddin, believed to have masterminded the 2002 bombings in Bali, Indonesia. Officials say it has also helped identify a US man convicted of helping an Al-Qaeda member launder 200,000 dollars through a Pakistani bank. "What we were doing was the right thing. Congress was aware of it, and we were within the law to do so," said Bush. "If you want to figure out what the terrorists are doing, you try to follow their money. And that's exactly what we're doing. "And the fact that a newspaper disclosed it makes it harder to win this war on terror," said Bush. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/26/060626164552.42jdcx2d.html


quote:

Quote from Tony Snow: But certainly nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But the New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know in some cases might override somebody’s right to live, and whether in fact the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans....
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002728197


quote:

Stories about the money-monitoring program also appeared last week in The Wall Street Journal and Los Angeles Times. King said he thought investigators should examine those publications, but that the greater focus should be on The New York Times because the paper in December also disclosed a secret domestic wiretapping program. He charged that the paper was "more concerned about a left-wing elitist agenda than it is about the security of the American people." When the paper chose to publish the story, it quoted the executive editor, Bill Keller, as saying editors had listened closely to the government's arguments for withholding the information, but "remain convinced that the administration's extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest." After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Treasury officials obtained access to a vast database called Swift _ the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The Belgium-based database handles financial message traffic from thousands of financial institutions in more than 200 countries.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/25/D8IFB4VO1.html

Profile   Post #: 1
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 5:05:20 PM   
candicane


Posts: 1
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline 		I would have guessed the govt was doing this.

Newspapers are on the way out.

I do agree with securing the border.

The thing is- with neocons - laws -rules apply only when they see fit.


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 5:20:57 PM   
ladychatterley


Posts: 132
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline 		The difficulty is the Administration is doing all these para/extra legal things (to put it nicely).

Correct me if I'm wrong <wink> but I thought that the legislative branch was supposed to write the laws and the executive branch was supposed to enforce them.  Furthermore, I thought that if the executive branch didn't like a law (say, FISA, or a law against torturing people) they should argue, in public, for why it should be changed, but they can't just ignore the law.  But then, most of what I learned camed from this quaint document (The Constitution of the United States) even quainter, I'm told, than the Geneva Convention.

Oh, and if we don't get net neutrality, then most of probably won't be able to access this page, or Move On.org, or Daily Kos or Democracy for America or some page with the Bill of Rights on it.  Do we really want the corporations controlling what we can read?  Do you trust AT & (we just changed our privacy policy so we own your confidential information and if you don't like it, but use our service after last Friday you are SOL)T to decide what you can download?  Works for China and they are out-performing us every year, so I don't see a problem.

(in reply to candicane)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 6:30:23 PM   
Estring


Posts: 3314
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		This program was approved by Congress (Dems and GOP), there was nothing illegal about it, which even The New York Times acknowledged. They will do anything to hurt President Bush, even if it compromises our safety.

_____________________________

Boycott Whales!

(in reply to ladychatterley)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 6:46:03 PM   
ladychatterley


Posts: 132
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline 		Yeah, the Wall Street Journal has a well known liberal bias...
Why are they trying to prosecute the Times and not WSJ when they were all doing it together?

(in reply to Estring)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/26/2006 11:58:25 PM   
Kedikat


Posts: 680
Joined: 4/20/2006
Status: offline 		Wouldn't it be nice if they tried to nad some drug money launderers? Hard drugs, worldwide probably cause more misery than terrorists. Maybe snag the odd white collar crook stashing or shifting millions in pension funds?
Possibly even use the information to tax some mega corps at something close to what they should.


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 12:40:38 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline 		It is a gross violation of civil rights.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 7:23:29 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
It is a gross violation of civil rights.

Whose?

quote:

Estring: This program was approved by Congress (Dems and GOP), there was nothing illegal about it, which even The New York Times acknowledged. They will do anything to hurt President Bush, even if it compromises our safety.


Al,
There is justification because it's anti-Bush. That seems to be the consensus answer. I wish I could be surprised. The activity was a tool to protect US citizens. The answer that made the most sense was comparing it to newspapers publishing the location of sobriety check points. I accept that argument, but differentiate it from the potential of mass destruction, versus personal destruction.

The fact that the LA and NY Times are liberal newspapers is not debatable. The WSJ is pragmatically capitalistic and their report was pointed to the financial and market ramifications. Basically reporting on the NY Times report and how it impacted the financial markets. 

I don't understand how a legal, congress approved program was a NY Times worthy story for any other reason than to attack a Bush security program. My concern is that the reaction will be more restrictive press, more secrecy. When the NY Times gets caught sensationalizing it puts them in the same category as the Enquirer.

We talk about trust all the time and how it is an asset that can be spent only once. If we don't trust the source of our news, news becomes gossip. If a Watergate type story was broke by the NY Times how much creditability can we give it? How many would just look at it and say; "Well, the NY Times is just attacking the President again." There is problem I see in this story, but I guess I'm in a very small minority.  

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 7:56:47 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
It is a gross violation of civil rights.

Whose?
The civil rights of the two hundred million USA people Bush wants to assfuck: Yours. You don't seriously believe that one CIA-financed 'terrorist' is the target, do you? You are the target. You are mighty eager and proud to cooperate as well, seeing that you already have your pants lowered. Bush must be walking all day with a hard on: he gets to assfuck two hundred million USA citizens every day and they are eager to accomodate him.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
The activity was a tool to protect US citizens.

Muhahahaha!
 
Say, I happen to own the Eifel Tower in Paris, France. Unfortunately, I had to leave France and now am looking for a buyer. You seem like a fine chap and I am willing to sell the tower to you for a fair price. Mortgage your house and make me an offer. I am sure that we can make a deal.

< Message edited by Rule -- 6/27/2006 7:58:06 AM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 8:09:27 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

Wouldn't it be nice if they tried to nad some drug money launderers? Hard drugs, worldwide probably cause more misery than terrorists. Maybe snag the odd white collar crook stashing or shifting millions in pension funds?
Possibly even use the information to tax some mega corps at something close to what they should.




This posts ROCK!!!!!   Good job!  :-)

(in reply to Kedikat)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 8:35:44 AM   
lisa1978


Posts: 224
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Kansas City
Status: offline

quote:



We talk about trust all the time and how it is an asset that can be spent only once. If we don't trust the source of our news, news becomes gossip. If a Watergate type story was broke by the NY Times how much creditability can we give it? How many would just look at it and say; "Well, the NY Times is just attacking the President again." There is problem I see in this story, but I guess I'm in a very small minority.  



New York Times is a liberal newspaper. I will not argue that point. At the same time people who do not like there term liberal or the perceived values that liberal have, already have lost their freedom. If you believe you love your country more than a Democrat because that is what Republican politicians in their sound bites want you to believe then I am truly scared at the direction this country is going. The New York Times is one of this country's most respected newspapers and has had historical significance. In fact, it was the New York Times reporting that supposedly got Nixon so upset that he set up the break in to the Dems headquarters in the Watergate hotel in the first place.

Politicians, particularly the right have been attacking newspapers more fiercely for the last twenty years. In fact, that is how we got Fox news and the scores of right wing magazines like New Republic. The Washington Post, which did break Watergate is considered a liberal newspaper to the Republican party.

What source is credible? If you are taking your queues from politicians and agenda pushers from either side you have already lost your freedom of independent thought. Like you have written many times in this forum so perfectly, Mercnbeth, all people need to read from both sides to get all perspectives.

As far as this banking story goes, to me it is just another political motivated attack. Bush and the Whitehouse have been saying for years now they have been going after the terrorist money. We have had several stories told to us by the Whitehouse about successful events that have uncovered, confiscated, and shut down terrorist money. If we truly think that the terrorist do not know that the U.S. was not doing everything that was reported or at the very least did not plan as if they were, we have severely underestimated them and that is just sad and dangerous.




_____________________________

It hurts sometimes more than we can bear. If we could live without passion, maybe we'd know some kind of peace. But we would be hollow. Empty rooms, shuttered and dank. Without passion, we'd be truly dead.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 9:32:51 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
It is a gross violation of civil rights.

Whose?
The civil rights of the two hundred million USA people Bush wants to assfuck: Yours. You don't seriously believe that one CIA-financed 'terrorist' is the target, do you? You are the target. You are mighty eager and proud to cooperate as well, seeing that you already have your pants lowered. Bush must be walking all day with a hard on: he gets to assfuck two hundred million USA citizens every day and they are eager to accomodate him.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
The activity was a tool to protect US citizens.

Muhahahaha!
 
Say, I happen to own the Eifel Tower in Paris, France. Unfortunately, I had to leave France and now am looking for a buyer. You seem like a fine chap and I am willing to sell the tower to you for a fair price. Mortgage your house and make me an offer. I am sure that we can make a deal.


Rule,
You make the perfect adversary for the Administration. Regardless of the subject your response can be predicted. Based upon that you are easily manipulated. I'd wager that I'd have a better chance selling you the Hollywood sign than me the Eiffel Tower, because I can plan my sale based upon your entrenched view.

You'll search long and hard to find a more skeptical and cynical person than me. Yet, although I have absolutes if they no longer fit the facts I'm not so stubborn to maintain them.

Whether you have blind faith or blind distrust the end result it you are still blind. 
quote:

A wise man gets more use from his enemies than a fool from his friends. Baltasar Gracian


I'll put the question to you. What would be your prophylactic defense against our adversaries? Not a political or philosophical defense, but a physical prevention device or investigative tool? This was a legal activity. Made legal by administrations in place long before 9/11. It goes back to the last lost "war" on drugs. If you ever find yourself with $10,000 of cash make sure you deposit it in two separate deposits of $9,999.00 and $1.00 or you'll be subject to similar scrutiny by your bank. From what I can find, most of the tools being used have been pulled from the war on drugs game plan. That worked great based upon how hard it is to get drugs in the US.
 
I'm not putting value to the tactic. I concur that our adversaries are smart enough to avoid activities that would put their activities under they microscope. That is exactly the point I hoped to make in this post. Why then is it news as far as the NY Times is concerned? It's political editorializing at best. At worse it will be the catalyst and rationalization for more secrecy. The NY Times was one of the first who shouted at the Administration it was their fault that 9/11 happened because of the lack of a coordinated intelligence effort. Now they argue the other side of the issue. But instead of discussing that or providing an alternative, just like this thread, it's become another polarizing debate about President Bush. They used to say the Russ Limbaugh was the biggest Bill Clinton supporter because without him he'd have no show. Well, is the same true with those in opposition to President Bush? Is he the only issue worthy of debate, let pragmatic facts be damned?
 
So, what would you do? No phone taps on international calls, no scrutiny of international monetary transfers? Is there any activity you deem warranted? Of course you could be of the group that believes everything that happened in the past 5 years was orchestrated by the US Government. In that case I guess the defense would be handing out foil hats.

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 10:13:51 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline 		Rule ought to look a little closer to home if he is worried about rights. The EU has pressured Switzerland to reveal bank information on people suspected of money laundering for various reasons. Britain already has simlar laws and I think Rule comes from Holland who have ID cards and insist on its citizens and foreigners resident in Holland to register at the local town hall and are NOT above checking out people's bank account by the 'appropriate' agencies.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 10:19:24 AM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		Do a google search with "New York Times bashing President Clinton" or "New York Times bashing Senator Clinton" and you get like a thousand hits, including links to old articles where they rake incumbent Democrats over the coals.
 
The media isn't liberal, and interested in supporting the Democratic agenda. The media is in the business of selling papers, and we have a Republican administration that makes itself a really good target.
 
This crying by Conservatives about how everyone is out to get them, is really starting to wear thin. If they don't want the "attention" of the media, then they should keep out of the game.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 10:21:32 AM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		By the way ... the same holds true of Democrats bitching that FOX, etc ... are out to get them.
 
No Einstein ... they are out to make money. If you can't deal, don't run.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 11:05:12 AM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Rule, 
I'd wager that I'd have a better chance selling you the Hollywood sign than me the Eiffel Tower, because I can plan my sale based upon your entrenched view.

You are probably right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
You'll search long and hard to find a more skeptical and cynical person than me. Yet, although I have absolutes if they no longer fit the facts I'm not so stubborn to maintain them.

I am patient. When you eventually discard them, you wil find me awaiting and welcoming you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Whether you have blind faith or blind distrust the end result it you are still blind.

Quite. But then: it is my unique ability to see more than normal people do.
 
quote:

A wise man gets more use from his enemies than a fool from his friends. Baltasar Gracian

Perhaps. If so, I am not wise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
I'll put the question to you. What would be your prophylactic defense against our adversaries? Not a political or philosophical defense, but a physical prevention device or investigative tool?

You mean those CIA-financed terrorists? Fire everyone who has ever worked for the CIA or any other secret service and every politician (Actually, they should be killed and their corpses dragged into the river Potomac.).
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
This was a legal activity. Made legal by administrations in place long before 9/11. It goes back to the last lost "war" on drugs.

There never was any 'war' on drugs. If there had been, it would have been won within six months.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
most of the tools being used have been pulled from the war on drugs game plan. That worked great based upon how hard it is to get drugs in the US.

How hard is that when a USA president flies in the airplane of a drugs smuggler? I still think that I may sell you the Eifel Tower.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Why then is it news as far as the NY Times is concerned? It's political editorializing at best. At worse it will be the catalyst and rationalization for more secrecy. The NY Times was one of the first who shouted at the Administration it was their fault that 9/11 happened because of the lack of a coordinated intelligence effort. Now they argue the other side of the issue.

Indeed. Nothing in politics happens by accident. Whatever is causing agitation is meant to do so with the purpose to manipulate the public. That also applies to 9/11.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
But instead of discussing that or providing an alternative, just like this thread, it's become another polarizing debate about President Bush. They used to say the Russ Limbaugh was the biggest Bill Clinton supporter because without him he'd have no show. Well, is the same true with those in opposition to President Bush? Is he the only issue worthy of debate, let pragmatic facts be damned?

There is no difference between politicians, whether they are left or right, tall or short, republican, democrat or whatever, pink, blue or purple. They are all in it together and playing the public like the dumb voting cattle it is.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
So, what would you do?

I would make you president of the USA. Or Arpig, or Gauge or NTUY or any of the others that I have gotten to know here that exhibit some sense - whether they agree with me or not.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
No phone taps on international calls, no scrutiny of international monetary transfers?

Quite. None.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Is there any activity you deem warranted?

None. Any such activity would lethally harm the citizens of the USA and take away their civil rights.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Of course you could be of the group that believes everything that happened in the past 5 years was orchestrated by the US Government. In that case I guess the defense would be handing out foil hats.

I do not believe anything. I know it was. *Here is your foil hat.*

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 11:21:38 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline 		Rule,

Appreciate your response. You'd be surprised of the common ground between us. But even better, it indicated a subtle and sarcastic sense of humor that makes me homesick for NYC. Are you a native of Amsterdam, or an ex-patriot of New Amsterdam?

When we visit your city we would love to have you as an escort and adviser. In fact we need to talk before the visit to make sure we don't miss anything in planing, especially in the red light district. Is there a great hotel within stumbling distance of the clubs and the "coffee" houses?

Back on topic, I'll add you to the list not able to respond to the; "What would you do?" But an Administration made up of the names you mentioned, and some others who I enjoy debating, whether in agreement or dis, with on CM may not be such a bad idea. We sure as hell need some alternative to choices presented by either party.

Send the foil sized to a 7 1/2 head!

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 12:57:05 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Rule ought to look a little closer to home if he is worried about rights. The EU has pressured Switzerland to reveal bank information on people suspected of money laundering for various reasons. Britain already has simlar laws and I think Rule comes from Holland who have ID cards and insist on its citizens and foreigners resident in Holland to register at the local town hall and are NOT above checking out people's bank account by the 'appropriate' agencies.

I am extremely worried. The requirement for id-cards always precedes a large scale genocide. I can taste a war and a genocide in the near future during which tens of millions of European and North-African people will be slaughtered. I fear that in The Netherlands alone up to two thirds of the population may be slaughtered. It happened in Cambodia and therefore it may happen anywhere.

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 1:20:34 PM   
andal


Posts: 34
Joined: 1/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule


I am extremely worried. The requirement for id-cards ***always*** precedes a large scale genocide...<snip> It happened in Cambodia and therefore it may happen anywhere.
*** emphasis mine
Let's see, I've had my Texas driver's license for how long?  I always WONDERED what that factory by the railhead in downtown Fort Worth was, and why they were building new chimneys!!!! 

Maybe you need to adjust those rabbit ears on your tinfoil hat there, pardner.  The only large scale killing going on in Texas is in cattle.

(in reply to Rule)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: LA / NY Times Disclosure - 6/27/2006 1:28:41 PM   
Rule


Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: andal
The only large scale killing going on in Texas is in cattle.

See? They are practising!

(in reply to andal)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> LA / NY Times Disclosure Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109