New York Times Damages US Security Efforts *AGAIN*

[BoogyMan]

Bank Data Secretly Reviewed by U.S. to Fight Terror (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/washington/22cnd-intel.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5065&en=6ea0fee64e216599&ex=1151640000&adxnnl=0&partner=MYWAY&adxnnlx=1151068409-gzlD55pyMQo1eCxxoz8+Pg)

Another program that is no longer secret.

WizBang has a pretty good commentary on this breach (http://wizbangblog.com/2006/06/23/the-new-york-times-publishes-classified-national-security-secrets-once-again.php) of national security with a good listing of links to other blogs who are similarly disgusted.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Ya, we must protect america by letting the government do whatever it wants!

[Labrocca]

This is really got to stop. Someone has to start getting arrested for these leaks. It's one thing to be a whisteblower and contact the judicial branch but it's another to simply leak it to the press and most likely for financial gain too.

[BoogyMan]

[attachment=20]
Ya, we must protect america by letting the government do whatever it wants!


Alonzo, if you are sending money to known terrorists, you *SHOULD* be watched.Â*Â*Turn off the emotional response and take a look at this issue in the cold light of reality and you might be able to see the value of this program.

The New York Times is no more than an enemy of the state whose management has openly declared war on the security of this country.

NYT Editor Bill Keller said:

We have listened closely to the administration's arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We 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.

What public interest does this serve?Â*Â*Banking records are not subject to privacy concerns as ruled by the supreme court in 1976.Â*Â*What the NYT has done is no different than what Ethel and Julius Rosenberg did and should be dealt with in the same way!

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Damn skippy.

I was just about to add that these kinds of banking investigations are 100% legal and do not require a boondoggle oversight like FISA judges.

I would love to see the NYT and LAT shut down permanently.

They were asked to sit on the story and refused. They are unquestionably terrorist propagandists.

[Old Corps Gunny]

If the media refuses to respect a request not to "out" a classified operation vital to the security of the nation, then perhaps it is time to subpoena the reporter and have him give up the name of the leaker. If the reporter refuses, lock him up. This instance was not a case of government abuse of power, but a valid tool used to follow the money trail to identify terrorist cells. Unfortunately, the edge on this particular tool has been badly blunted just to up daily circulation of the NYT.

[lily]

Old Corps Gunny

If the media refuses to respect a request not to "out" a classified operation vital to the security of the nation, then perhaps it is time to subpoena the reporter and have him give up the name of the leaker.Â*Â*If the reporter refuses, lock him up.
I suppose that's one solution.....it would garner sympathy for the Times and probably a lot more subscriptions. It still wouldn't solve the problem......which is, this administration has a problem with leaks. Wouldn't it be wiser to go after and find out who the leaker is, internally? I mean, they have every agency at their disposal. Doesn't give me much faith in the government.......I know that finding the tallest man in Afghainstan (bin-Laden) might be a problem..........but somebody right under your nose???

[BoogyMan]

I suppose that's one solution.....it would garner sympathy for the Times and probably a lot more subscriptions. It still wouldn't solve the problem......which is, this administration has a problem with leaks. Wouldn't it be wiser to go after and find out who the leaker is, internally? I mean, they have every agency at their disposal. Doesn't give me much faith in the government.......I know that finding the tallest man in Afghainstan (bin-Laden) might be a problem..........but somebody right under your nose???


Why should the NYT get a pass on what is now 3 secrets that it has outed with impunity? Everyone in the chain of responsibility should be dealt with harshly.

[lily]

Why should the NYT get a pass on what is now 3 secrets that it has outed with impunity? Everyone in the chain of responsibility should be dealt with harshly.

While I would agree with you in theory.......I think it would trample on freedom of the press. I don't think the terrorists that are laundering money are that stupid, that something like this coming out is some great secret. If it netted so many, just like NSA, then we would have heard a list of names, and Bush, Cheney and Rumsfailed grinning, with a banner.

What really does bother me, is when the "wiretappings" started, it was such a big hul-a-baloo.........yet NSA has been mentioned in tons of movies, most notably Sleeper Cell.........now if Hollywood knows about this, wouldn't you think real live terrorists would?

First it started out, it was just overseas calls they were monitering.
Then it came out, that well.....we have to moniter domestic calls going overseas.
The next we hear, they've got a record of every call made to every single number.

Little alarms go off in my head now, when things like this come out.

[BoogyMan]

TRAMPLE THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS?!?!

What part of freedom of the press guarantees the NYT a pass on treasonous exposure of critical secret programs?

[lily]

Has anyone tried them for treason? You think it's treasonous. I don't. I think it's pretty much well known that banks track your transactions.

[Labrocca]

Yeah but this is tracking INTERNATIONAL transactions...those in EU or the Middle East may have considered themselves safe to do bank transactions. Now they will only be more careful which will make them harder to catch.

[lily]

mmmmmmmmm I kind of doubt it. When coming out in it's defense, I'm sure we would have heard of gobs of money they tracked and how they stopped some terrorist.

........again, I don't think anybody is that stupid, to think that there is no paper trail (computer trail) on bank transactions.

[Drocket]

Yeah but this is tracking INTERNATIONAL transactions...those in EU or the Middle East may have considered themselves safe to do bank transactions.Â*Â*Now they will only be more careful which will make them harder to catch.

Yeah, I'm sure its just international transations, because the Bush administration is EXTREMELY careful and discrete. Just like the phone-tapping program only targetted international calls. Ok, maybe some domestic calls, but only under VERY limited circumstances. Ok, fine, it was pretty much everyone. I'm sure that won't happen again, though.

[bobbylien]

You idiots use the word treason too much. The media has always and will always try to expose anything they can. Its the responsibility of the government to catch the leakers, not the newspapers who print the story. Many newspapers posted this story, it wasnt leaked specifically to the NY Times. If we have a leaker in the government, we need to stop him/her. The press needs to be able to post whatever it wants in a free society.

Come on, did the terrorists think their funds weren't being tracked before this was released?

[bobbylien]

Yeah, I'm sure its just international transations, because the Bush administration is EXTREMELY careful and discrete. Just like the phone-tapping program only targetted international calls. Ok, maybe some domestic calls, but only under VERY limited circumstances. Ok, fine, it was pretty much everyone. I'm sure that won't happen again, though.

You don't know anything about that program, don't make accusations until you get proof.

[Old Corps Gunny]

Intelligence agencies aren't in the business of trumpeting their victories; that would just warn the groups that they're targeting. Normally the credit is given to the military or law enforcement. Even though a "ton of movies" has been made about the NSA, you must remember where those movies came from and consider how accurate those movies are. Do you honestly believe that the Director, National Security Agency/Central Security Service opened the doors to some screenwriter? Not likely.

[BoogyMan]

You idiots use the word treason too much. The media has always and will always try to expose anything they can. Its the responsibility of the government to catch the leakers, not the newspapers who print the story. Many newspapers posted this story, it wasnt leaked specifically to the NY Times. If we have a leaker in the government, we need to stop him/her. The press needs to be able to post whatever it wants in a free society.

Come on, did the terrorists think their funds weren't being tracked before this was released?


Treason is as treason does. What the NYT did is inexcusable, freedom of the press or not. You just don't go after governmental programs that are secret that destroys our ability to engage the enemy, no matter what the front, without consequences.

[sbannon]

You know, I'm outraged about these leaks too. Not because I think some real secret has been revealed. I honestly don't believe the terrorists don't know we (and other nations) are doing everything possible to track all of their activities. I don't believe that the publishing of this gave them a "duh" moment of realization, and the belief that we're fighting an enemy that ignorant is a dangerous presumption.

However, it's still to our benefit to keep specific details about our methods secret.

Yet, once again everyone is quick to condemn the NYT for publishing news, and yes, when the story was handed to them (which is an important detail here) it was news.

Why, once again isn't anyone demanding accountability from the administration (which handed the story to the NYT) but instead calling the publishing of a news story by a news publisher treason?

It's like saying the person who leaked isn't the bad guy, the NYT is the evil one for not keeping a secret?

I'm sorry, I don't understand this twisted mentality. There are laws, some were broken... not by the NYT though--by the person who leaked the story to them... and in our nation of laws we just continue to offer free passes to the leaker...why? Because it's more fun or fits some agenda to trash the NYT instead? Is that really the direction any of us want to go? Where laws become trivial to partisan politicking?

[AlonzoMourning23]

You don't know anything about that program, don't make accusations until you get proof.


Just out of curiosity, when was the last time we were correct in giving the administration the benefit of the doubt?

[BoogyMan]

Sbannon,

I haven't heard anyone say that *ONLY* the NYT is culpable. I and others want every one in the chain of responsibility for these leaks dealt with and dealt with harshly.

Have I missed a posting somewhere?

[bobbylien]

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time we were correct in giving the administration the benefit of the doubt?

You never have given them the benefit of the doubt so.. never.

[AlonzoMourning23]

You never have given them the benefit of the doubt so.. never.


And you know that how?

[PittsburghAfterDark]

I'll second that.

You never give the U.S. government of this or any era the benefit of the doubt.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Ok, tell me when the administration was attacked for something and evidence showed they should have been given the benfit of the doubt, and I'll tell you when I gave them the benefit of the doubt. One of the times involves the Iraq war.

[sbannon]

Sbannon,

I haven't heard anyone say that *ONLY* the NYT is culpable. I and others want every one in the chain of responsibility for these leaks dealt with and dealt with harshly.
You're correct BoogyMan, I've also seen the LAT get a finger pointed at it in this thread too, which unless my reading skills have failed me you began with the title "New York Times Damages US Security Efforts *AGAIN*"

Why wasn't that title "Arrest the leakers -- and shame on the NYT" instead? Because that would be finger pointing at your own wouldn't it? Don't answer that, it was rhetorical and you've back-peddled enough in the comment I quoted already.

[BoogyMan]

Why wasn't that title "Arrest the leakers -- and shame on the NYT" instead? Because that would be finger pointing at your own wouldn't it? Don't answer that, it was rhetorical and you've back-peddled enough in the comment I quoted already.


Why???Â*Â*You have to ask why???Â*Â*Because the mouthpiece of the leakers is most primarily AGAIN the NYT.Â*Â*To try and frame it otherwise is ludicrous and to try and limit the consequences is a mind trick of an abject partisan.Â*Â*This is simply moronic.

[lily]

Intelligence agencies aren't in the business of trumpeting their victories; that would just warn the groups that they're targeting.Â*Â*Normally the credit is given to the military or law enforcement.Â*Â*Even though a "ton of movies" has been made about the NSA, you must remember where those movies came from and consider how accurate those movies are.Â*Â*Do you honestly believe that the Director, National Security Agency/Central Security Service opened the doors to some screenwriter?Â*Â*Not likely.


.......and you don't think, some guy, sitting in his house, typing up a movie script can think of this and a terrorist laundering money won't? Someone who's life depends on not screwing up? No agency had to open their doors, anyone with an ounce of imagination and a smidgen of brains would know this.

[lily]

sbannon



Why, once again isn't anyone demanding accountability from the administration (which handed the story to the NYT) but instead calling the publishing of a news story by a news publisher treason?
What I find oddly funny is......that when Judith Miller was "leaking" stories to the New York Times, everyone in this administration loved the Times.

It's like saying the person who leaked isn't the bad guy, the NYT is the evil one for not keeping a secret?

I'm sorry, I don't understand this twisted mentality. There are laws, some were broken... not by the NYT though--by the person who leaked the story to them... and in our nation of laws we just continue to offer free passes to the leaker...why? Because it's more fun or fits some agenda to trash the NYT instead? Is that really the direction any of us want to go? Where laws become trivial to partisan politicking?
B-I-N-G-O

Why isn't this administration looking for this leaker? If giving out the information about this, NSA and secret prisons is so damaging, why waste their time being outraged at the NYT..........hell, they should be happy this leaker isn't selling every so called secret to the enemy.

The New York Times, like every other paper, when writing this kind of story has to get an ok from the White House. Well, the White House didn't give their ok on this story or the others I mentioned.......wouldn't you think they would have a clue by now?

[sbannon]

Why??? You have to ask why??? Because the mouthpiece of the leakers is most primarily AGAIN the NYT. To try and frame it otherwise is ludicrous and to try and limit the consequences is a mind trick of an abject partisan. This is simply moronic.

BM, the NYT is not a mouthpiece, it's a news publisher who was given a news story that they then... if you can image this... published. As news publishers often do with news stories.

You're twisting logic and truth to meet your needs here. The crime and disgrace begins far from the NYT's offices. It lies in Washington D.C.

Let me ask you this, if you get an annoying prank phone call from some jerk do you blame your telephone company for being the vehicle for the call? Of course not. The telephone company is only doing what it's supposed to do, carrying the call transmission. Same applies to the NYT, they're doing what they're supposed to do, printing the news.

The NYT hasn't made up these leaks, they didn't initiate them. Administration officials delivered them on silver platters. There's the crime.

[Nathan Brazil]

So what've we got here? The NY Slimes published a story about something that's allegedly secret, again?

Are they the ones that broke the story about the government tracking telephone numbers? Wow. That was a shocker, after hearing for years how the terrorists had been curtailing their telephone usage because the NSA could eavesdrop on the calls, we're suddenly surprised to know that the NSA could track the telephone numbers, too. That's a really impressive secret.

What, the government was possibly listening in on international calls, too? Can someone explain what violation of liberty was happening there? I mean, even that maggot Jane Harman was admitting that this form of wiretapping was inside the law. And, again, it's not like we all dont' know the technology exists, anyway.

And now we have the NY Slimes publishing a story to the effect that the government's been watching where the money's going. Well, hallelujah, at least they're finally watching how some money is being spent. If only we can get the government to start tracking how it spends OUR money with the same concern, and we'll be set, right?

Gee, they were talking all over the place after September 11th how the government was watching monetary transactions.

Can we all step back and get a little perspective on these stories?

The NY Slimes is posting this supposedly inflammatory "news" because:
a) The Surrender Monkeys on the staff have a hard-on for the Republicans, and want to make them look bad, and if printing stupid no content news will do that, that's what they'll do.

b) They know the Democratic base that forms most of their readership is stupid enough to think these stories represent something new, and the politicians, also knowing this, can play up some brand new pretend outrage to wave against the Republicans.

c) And the Republicans, not too much brighter than the Democrats, after all, react to the reaction instead of reacting to the intent, exactly as the NY Slimes expects.

So, one should look at these stories in their full context and seek to understand the real motivations of all the parties. The posts I've seen so far are exactly the reflexive jerking the media needs to thrive.

[BoogyMan]

Sbannon,

If someone gives you a gun and you shoot and kill someone with it, who is the murderer? THAT is the example you should consider.

My goodness how far are you willing to twist logic and common sense to defend what is quite possibly the most reckless organization in this country.

Try again. Egads.

[sbannon]

So Nathan, you also believe the blame lies with a news paper that prints news stories and not the administration officials who leak them? Because I read your posting twice and didn't see one word of condemnation against the actual source of the leaks in any of these cases...

I do agree with you on one point, some folks do need to "get a little perspective".

Could the NYT have sat on the story? Sure. Would we be better off if they had? Maybe, or maybe not.

Still, the real issue here--and very serious threat to national security--seems to be administration officials and government employees who leak the government's secrets, don't you think?

[sbannon]

BM, that's not a real or fair comparison. The gun (in your example) is a benign entity and no crime has occurred until I would pull the trigger.

But in this case, leaking classified information is not a benign act and the crime actually occurred when the story was leaked, not subsequently published.

[EXDIA53]

Since the administration has told us several times SINCE 9-11-01 that they are "following the money', let's really look at what that means.Â*Â*Realistically, there are two ways to transfer money from one country to another. First, you can make a bank (wire) transfer, or you can put a lot of currency in a gym bag, and hope you don't get caught.Â*Â*Of course there are a lot more inventive ways, but they are not conducive to multiple uses.Â*Â*The wire transfer, if executed between banks inÂ*Â*nations in North America, Western Europe or the Middle East, requires SWIFT.Â*Â*Due to the fact that there are several people in Al Qaeda who are quite knowledgable about international banking, thinking that they didn't know the US was looking at SWIFT is completely beyond stupid.
It would be like a chief of police at a press conference saying that they are looking for a murderer on the basis of a license plate number, and then people going crazy because the press reported that cops used motor vehicles' records to fimd the car's owner.
In short, Bush, Cheney and others have told the media they are "following the money".Â*Â*SWIFT is the way money is transferred between nations.Â*Â*If you are upset, you just didn't know enough about international banking and securities transfers.

[BoogyMan]

BM, that's not a real or fair comparison. The gun (in your example) is a benign entity and no crime has occurred until I would pull the trigger.

But in this case, leaking classified information is not a benign act and the crime actually occurred when the story was leaked, not subsequently published.


Sbannon, regardless of your insistance, it is COMPLETELY germain to the discussion. I will agree with you that a crime was comitted beforehand. So let me modify my premise. Someone hands you a stolen gun and you murder someone with it. Who is guilty of murder? The premise is simple and is completely germain to the situation.

It doesn't matter how the times got the information, it was a treasonous act to publish it. It was also a trasonous act to leak it.

[Nathan Brazil]

So Nathan, you also believe the blame lies with a news paper that prints news stories and not the administration officials who leak them? Because I read your posting twice and didn't see one word of condemnation against the actual source of the leaks in any of these cases...

I do agree with you on one point, some folks do need to "get a little perspective".

Could the NYT have sat on the story? Sure. Would we be better off if they had? Maybe, or maybe not.

Still, the real issue here--and very serious threat to national security--seems to be administration officials and government employees who leak the government's secrets, don't you think?


Considering that I don't think any of the stories are worth buying a bottle of Kaopectate for, why should I care about the people leaking them? Needless to say, what I said was that the stories are being used to manipulate people. It appears to be working wonderfully.

[BoogyMan]

I keep hearing that everyone already knew what was going on with this and find that to simply be a very poorly thought out analysis of the situation.

Consider this. The enemy knows that we are coming after them in Iraq with tanks and other vehicles. Now we have the NYT coming along with an article that in great detail describes the vehicles we are using and points out their most serious weaknesses.

This is closely akin to what was done by the NYT. Yes, the enemy had an idea that we were watching their monetary transactions but now they know exactly how we are monitoring those tranactions.

In WWII the Germans knew that there would eventually be an attack on their strongholds in France but they did not know exactly where or when. In the context of the discussion the NYT would have published info about where the attack would come and the most likely time for it to happen.

[bobbylien]

Stop using rediculous comparisons. This is nothing like any of those things boogyman. This is just Fox News looking for ratings.

[BoogyMan]

Stop using rediculous comparisons. This is nothing like any of those things boogyman. This is just Fox News looking for ratings.


Fox News?Â*Â*Gads, anything a liberal disagrees with simply has to be a Fox News inspired comment.

Speak to me again when you can complete a thought in response to the commentary with which you disagree.

[Old Corps Gunny]

Fox News looking for ratings? I suppose the NYT wasn't looking to sell papers? I stated in an earlier post that every effort should be made to identify and prosecute the leaker, even if that means subpoening (is that the right spelling?) the reporter and requiring him/her to give up the source. A comparison was made to a crank caller and the telephone company; the telephone company doesn't monitor calls and block crank calls. The news media does screen and decide which stories will be published. Has it occurred to anyone that this program was still yielding results, else the administration wouldn't have REQUESTED Keller to sit on the story? The issue is responsible journalism as opposed exposing a legal classified operation merely to up daily circulation.

[Athena]

[attachment=20]
Ya, we must protect america by letting the government do whatever it wants!


Alonzo, if you are sending money to known terrorists, you *SHOULD* be watched.Â*Â*Turn off the emotional response and take a look at this issue in the cold light of reality and you might be able to see the value of this program.

The New York Times is no more than an enemy of the state whose management has openly declared war on the security of this country.

NYT Editor Bill Keller said:

We have listened closely to the administration's arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We 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.

What public interest does this serve?Â*Â*Banking records are not subject to privacy concerns as ruled by the supreme court in 1976.Â*Â*What the NYT has done is no different than what Ethel and Julius Rosenberg did and should be dealt with in the same way!




The public interest it serves is to alert us of why the federal government mandated to the banks that we validate our addresses when opening an account.Â*Â*It is not just terrorist who have something to worry about it, but everyone one of us.Â*Â*We have allowed the federal government way too much power and should take strong steps to end these powers to tract citizens, through their banking and medical affairs.Â*Â*The enemy we have to fear most is the one within, and those of you who accept these new federal powers to track individual, scare the hell out of me. The problem is not just those who are creating these government powers to track individuals, it is also those who see nothing wrong with what is happening.

[bobbylien]

Stop using rediculous comparisons. This is nothing like any of those things boogyman. This is just Fox News looking for ratings.


Fox News? Gads, anything a liberal disagrees with simply has to be a Fox News inspired comment.

Speak to me again when you can complete a thought in response to the commentary with which you disagree.

You have to be a liberal to think Fox News is full of crap? I'm a conservative. Sorry I don't fit your definition of conservative.
Like bush + watch fox news + pro iraq war + hate gays for no reason at all = conservative ... Doesn't fit us all.

[BoogyMan]

Bobby,

This post is truly not worthy of a response as it is disengenuous in nature and crafted to obtain a hostile response that it won't get from me.

I particularly like how you try to drag the completely false "hates gays" argument into a debate that has nothing to do with it.

These are the tactics of one who has lost the debate and is thrashing about in the darkness of his own vacuum of ideas.

[bobbylien]

Bobby,

This post is truly not worthy of a response as it is disengenuous in nature and crafted to obtain a hostile response that it won't get from me.

I particularly like how you try to drag the completely false "hates gays" argument into a debate that has nothing to do with it.

These are the tactics of one who has lost the debate and is thrashing about in the darkness of his own vacuum of ideas.

I was responding to your twisted and stupid ideas of conservatives and liberals. Not every conservative agrees with you on everything and when he/she doesnt agree, you call him/her a liberal. You can't just assume my political beliefs by reading this thread.

[BoogyMan]

I was responding to your twisted and stupid ideas of conservatives and liberals. Not every conservative agrees with you on everything and when he/she doesnt agree, you call him/her a liberal. You can't just assume my political beliefs by reading this thread.


Why dont you remind me what my "twisted and stupid ideas" were? Looking back over the postings in this thread it seems that you have a penchant for assumption.

[Newscaster]

You ask if the liberal media is helping the terrorists. Have any of you taken a good look at the media today. It is hardly liberal. One or two newspapers, primarily the New York Times, stay liberal but most of the others, and that includes the TV networks, have rolled over and are playing deaf, dumb and dead so as not to upset the corporate types who are decidedly NOT liberal.

As for you attacks on the Times, consider this. They write a story about a system in use for several years and known by pretty much everyone in Washington and are vilified for telling secrets. Secrets my a$$. TRacking money thru bank transactions has been going on for years and was never a big secret. But lets assume it was a secret. It was leaked and the leak had to come from within the Bush administration, maybe even from the White House itself. If lkeaking such news helps the enemy, you'll never find the culprit in the offices of the NYT. Look in the offices of the White House.

It is the job of the media to tell what is happening. That has always been its mission. But they get the news either from going out and watching a story develop or......someone tells them about it.

[BoogyMan]

You ask if the liberal media is helping the terrorists. Have any of you taken a good look at the media today. It is hardly liberal. One or two newspapers, primarily the New York Times, stay liberal but most of the others, and that includes the TV networks, have rolled over and are playing deaf, dumb and dead so as not to upset the corporate types who are decidedly NOT liberal.

As for you attacks on the Times, consider this. They write a story about a system in use for several years and known by pretty much everyone in Washington and are vilified for telling secrets. Secrets my a$$. TRacking money thru bank transactions has been going on for years and was never a big secret. But lets assume it was a secret. It was leaked and the leak had to come from within the Bush administration, maybe even from the White House itself. If lkeaking such news helps the enemy, you'll never find the culprit in the offices of the NYT. Look in the offices of the White House.

It is the job of the media to tell what is happening. That has always been its mission. But they get the news either from going out and watching a story develop or......someone tells them about it.


It is the job of the media to report news, not do their best to undermine our government and endanger out operations against the enemy.Â*Â*Once again with Newscaster obfuscation is the rule of law.Â*Â*What was known widely is that we were trying to monitor money movement.Â*Â*This story told EXACTLY how it was being monitored and where the monitoring was being done.Â*Â*Newscaster you have lost this debate and ignoring the previous postings in this thread and reposting already debunked garbage shows your desperation.

[Newscaster]

Boogy, I would answer you but talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

Have a nice day.

[lily]

This story told EXACTLY how it was being monitored and where the monitoring was being done.
Re-read the original New York Times article. Then google SWIFT. Do enough clicking on the links and you'll find out that there is nothing the New York Times wrote, that isn't right there on their site..... One big hint would be the lack of "outrage" from anybody in this administration, after the first "out-cry".

I just looked out my window and the sky is not falling.

[BoogyMan]

This story told EXACTLY how it was being monitored and where the monitoring was being done.
Re-read the original New York Times article. Then google SWIFT. Do enough clicking on the links and you'll find out that there is nothing the New York Times wrote, that isn't right there on their site..... One big hint would be the lack of "outrage" from anybody in this administration, after the first "out-cry".

I just looked out my window and the sky is not falling.


What lack of outrage are you referring to Lily?Â*Â*If you honestly think there is no outrage you are either listening only to Air America or have extremely restricted access to modern news delivery capable technology.Â*Â*You are simply wrong here Lily.

[lily]

If I'm wrong....please give me a link to read where anyone in this administration is saying ANYTHING about this.

I'm not talking about some senator, who's trying to get re-elected. I'm talking Bush, Cheney or Rumsfailed......the three that came out the hardest.

[BoogyMan]

If I'm wrong....please give me a link to read where anyone in this administration is saying ANYTHING about this.

I'm not talking about some senator, who's trying to get re-elected. I'm talking Bush, Cheney or Rumsfailed......the three that came out the hardest.


You ask for proof and then in an effort to limit the coming storm from a poorly thought out challenge you tell me not to give you proof.

Go away.

[lily]

BoogyMan



You ask for proof and then in an effort to limit the coming storm from a poorly thought out challenge you tell me not to give you proof.
Why don't you just come out and say that you have no proof, other than some struggling Republican senator that thinks he has a "cause"? On the other hand, I gave you proof, that this is common knowledge. I can tell by the time it took you to reply, that you didn't even bother reading.

Yes........this is such an important subject, that less than 100 showed up for Maulkin's protest........rather noteworthy......no senator's names mentioned. Just some fool dressed like bin-Laden. One would think if this was so earth shattering, hundreds would show up and I would think that at least one of those so called proofs that you were denied showing me, wasn't even there!

Go away.

I'm not sure...........do you have the authority to say who posts and who can't? Seems I haven't gotten a PM from anyone in authority saying for me to stop posting here or a ______ through my name, saying I'm banned.

Tell me.........when you typed Go away.......were you stomping your foot and holding your breath, like a petulant child, when he's told there is no Santa Claus? .............cuz Bub.........there ain't no story here.

[BoogyMan]

Gads, Lily, posts like the last one are the reason I love debating people like you.

You have given me a good giggle.

I think you should do some serious reading.Â*Â*The admin appears to be going after the leakers first, there will be consequences.


I'm not sure...........do you have the authority to say who posts and who can't? Seems I haven't gotten a PM from anyone in authority saying for me to stop posting here or a ______ through my name, saying I'm banned.

Tell me.........when you typed Go away.......were you stomping your foot and holding your breath, like a petulant child, when he's told there is no Santa Claus? .............cuz Bub.........there ain't no story here.

Nice baiting job, you know good and well that "go away" was a dismissal of your hypocritical tactics that are typical of the idea-poor weary debater who cannot get off his point even when he knows he is wrong.

Now, try reading:

US Readying Crackdown on Leaks (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-07-12T003233Z_01_N11276431_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-HOEKSTRA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22)

This is just a start.

[sbannon]

Not for nothing, but the article you linked to BM was created from statements made by A Representative who is seeking re-election this November--the exact sort that Lily referred to.

Also, neither the Justice Department nor the CIA would support any of Rep. Hoekstra's claims made in the article. Certainly I understand that could just be the old "we don't comment on ongoing investigations" line, but it still serves to remove any credibility the article might have had.

Basically, it's just some Representative [who's facing a challenge in Michigan this November] saying "We're doing something about this" without any evidence of substance to support the claims. Otherwise known as Lip Service.

[BoogyMan]

Not for nothing, but the article you linked to BM was created from statements made by A Representative who is seeking re-election this November--the exact sort that Lily referred to.

Also, neither the Justice Department nor the CIA would support any of Rep. Hoekstra's claims made in the article. Certainly I understand that could just be the old "we don't comment on ongoing investigations" line, but it still serves to remove any credibility the article might have had.

Basically, it's just some Representative [who's facing a challenge in Michigan this November] saying "We're doing something about this" without any evidence of substance to support the claims. Otherwise known as Lip Service.


Yet again, show me proof, but don't show me proof.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

http://peiklk.smugmug.com/photos/81250141-S.jpg
http://www.sweetwaterhsa.com/~terryc/NYT_Traitors.jpg

[lily]

Gads, Lily, posts like the last one are the reason I love debating people like you.

You have given me a good giggle.

I think you should do some serious reading.Â*Â*The admin appears to be going after the leakers first, there will be consequences.


I'm not sure...........do you have the authority to say who posts and who can't? Seems I haven't gotten a PM from anyone in authority saying for me to stop posting here or a ______ through my name, saying I'm banned.

Tell me.........when you typed Go away.......were you stomping your foot and holding your breath, like a petulant child, when he's told there is no Santa Claus? .............cuz Bub.........there ain't no story here.

Nice baiting job, you know good and well that "go away" was a dismissal of your hypocritical tactics that are typical of the idea-poor weary debater who cannot get off his point even when he knows he is wrong.

Now, try reading:

US Readying Crackdown on Leaks (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-07-12T003233Z_01_N11276431_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-HOEKSTRA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22)

This is just a start.



Boogy.......which one of us is confused? You were ranting about the New York Times and now you give me an article about Hoekstra, who wants to go after the leakers, not the media.......which I said should be done on page one of this discussion....

Now as I said andÂ*Â*Sbannon also mentioned, Hoekstra is a Representative trying to get re-elected.......who just happens to be from the state I am from........you might want to read his "leaked"Â*Â*article about the CIA andÂ*Â*Bush not giving him information. He's the last person anyone would want to use for a rebuttal.

[BoogyMan]

Boogy.......which one of us is confused? You were ranting about the New York Times and now you give me an article about Hoekstra, who wants to go after the leakers, not the media.......which I said should be done on page one of this discussion....

Now as I said andÂ*Â*Sbannon also mentioned, Hoekstra is a Representative trying to get re-elected.......who just happens to be from the state I am from........you might want to read his "leaked"Â*Â*article about the CIA andÂ*Â*Bush not giving him information. He's the last person anyone would want to use for a rebuttal.


I think if you will go back and read the whole thread you will find that I wanted everyone involved in this mess dealt with, STARTING with the NYT. I know you want to try and frame this discussion in narrow terms without regard to the entirety of the thread but its not going to happen.

[lily]

Ok...then you choose. As I've shown you, the New York Times is such a non story, that less than 100 people showed up for the big demonstration. I've heard zip about it on any news program, nor read about it in any paper. Unless of course, you'd like to discuss why no one is upset about the Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post for writing the same story? I don't think that's been discussed too much......what do you think?

We both agree on this administration going after leaks........the banking leak, NSA leak.......hey how about that Plame leak? Does that one count, since it was the "big boys' themselves that did that one? How about the leak to the New York Post, that let 5 of the NY tunnel bombing get away? Wanna talk about that?:D

[BoogyMan]

Lily,

You have made quite a few assumptions and I guess we, being at a logical impasse, will have to wait to see what happens. I believe that you are way off base and only time will tell.

As for the leaks and the Plame affair. Once again you are making huge assumptions. Only time will tell and I will glady accept any effort at humility on your part when I am proven right. :)

[lily]

Lily,

You have made quite a few assumptions and I guess we, being at a logical impasse, will have to wait to see what happens.
That sounds fair.
Â*Â*I believe that you are way off base and only time will tell.
........ah and we were doing so good!

As for the leaks and the Plame affair. Once again you are making huge assumptions. Only time will tell and I will glady accept any effort at humility on your part when I am proven right. :)
Hey......I'm easy.......I've said I was wrong before, right here on this very forum..........now can I expect the same from you, if you are wrong?:)

[BoogyMan]

You sure can! :)

[lily]

You're a fair man, Boogy. I look forward to debating with you again.