| Author |
Message |
    
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1826
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 11:47 am: | 
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Are you MOL libs intentionally ignoring this? At least "civil liberities violations" sounded better then "a matter of public interest..."
"Public Interest" or not, I wouldn't want to be best friends with the NYT...
-SLK |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3586
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 11:55 am: |
|
It was treason to out Valerie Plame. Double standards are taking hold of the Republican Party, once again. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1571
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 11:55 am: |
|
yes. I am all for them letting us know what is going on. As far as I am concerned I want to know this information. I want terrorists to know that we are watching everything.
I am glad that our government is following the money, finally. The SWIFT network is a secure network that takes care of bank to bank and brokerage transactions between countries. I dont think that the ny times has tipped terrorists off to anything that they dont already know.
I am in full support of following these transactions whereever they lead.
|
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3048
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 11:57 am: |
|
Didn't the WSJ run this story, too?
What is the big deal about this? This resembles another put up job to disable the press.
So the terrorist were like: "Ok, they may monitor these cash transfers, but they will have to get a warrant or court order, so let's go ahead and make the transaction."
"But, boss, according to the NYTimes, they DON'T need a warran!"
"Oh, thank god for the timely warning. Let's not make the transfer and thereby evade their net."
That doesn't seem likely. The news isn't that they are monitoring banks transactions, it's that they are doing it without legal oversight.
Besides, it seems like a well-balanced article:
But all the programs grew out of the Bush administration's desire to exploit technological tools to prevent another terrorist strike, and all reflect attempts to break down longstanding legal or institutional barriers to the government's access to private information about Americans and others inside the United States.
Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several secret efforts to trace terrorist financing. Much more limited agreements with other companies have provided access to A.T.M. transactions, credit card purchases and Western Union wire payments, the officials said.
Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified. Some of those officials expressed reservations about the program, saying that what they viewed as an urgent, temporary measure had become permanent nearly five years later without specific Congressional approval or formal authorization.
Try getting that kind of even-handedness from the Washington Moonie Times, or whatever you guys read.
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15213
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 12:00 pm: |
|
What a joke this "disclosure "is. Old news.
|
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2189
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 12:17 pm: |
|
maybe Bush should prosecute himself. he told the "evildoers" back in '01 that the U.S. is monitoring their finances:
http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/financial-pr.cfm |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3049
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 12:41 pm: |
|
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Posters_at_rightwing_board_threaten_to_0626.ht ml
So, where do you guys get your marching orders? Does someone say "I like the way you post. We'd like to help you with some talking points. We'll send you some stuff each morning, welcome aboard"? It's uncanny how the wingnuts, from professional party hacks down to "here's my two cents" types always say the same things, and always avoid the same things. |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3050
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 12:43 pm: |
|
Even the "Slimes" thing is unoriginal.
"Indictments, arrests and imprisonments are very much in order here. Not to put too fine a point on it, but just how much treason is our president prepared to tolerate?"
The thread quickly took on the quality of a lynch mob, with posters attempting to outdo one another in their level of imaginary violence:
"I can only hope I get to see the video of Sulzberger's beheading!  "
"If the government won't act, perhaps some private citizens will."
"Tar, feathers? You are the very definition of the term 'restraint'. I was thinking more along the lines of the Muslim solution."
"String em up, right next to Murtha's sad carcass."
"They need to hang for this, but it's not PC for me to type this in RESPONSE to their treason."
The inevitable climax of this rhetoric of hatred was a post declaring the Times to be THE ENEMY, followed by additional responses in which they were described as fair game for private vengeance:
"The Slimes [sic] and its puppets in the MSM ARE THE ENEMY. They simply hate America as it is. They want a socialist-homosexual utopia. Thus, they are simply aiding and abetting their faithful followers abroad and here. They are giving intel to their friends of gee-had. They are the enemy. Problem is, many Americans simply do not know or care."
"Any retired snipers out there?"
"They are, without a doubt our enemy. We need to treat them as such."
"I think it will be dangerous for a Slimes [sic] reporter to step foot out of Manhattan." |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1828
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 12:55 pm: |
|
Themp-
Those wingnuts are just that...nuts, but I personally experienced similar talk on the left wing sites (democratic underground, etc.) too.
Funny how no one wrote an article on left wing nuts hatred though...hmmmm
-SLK
Whether you agree/disagree with the publication of the article, you must understand that the NYT has an image problem with middle America ("who side are they on anyways?") which accounts for a dwindling readership.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11963
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 1:38 pm: |
|
Yep it is good politics to slam the NY Times. That along with "cut and run", planned troop reductions and the rest of the stuff will win the midterms for the GOP!! |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3052
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 1:39 pm: |
|
"Whether you agree/disagree with the publication of the article, you must understand that the NYT has an image problem with middle America ("who side are they on anyways?") which accounts for a dwindling readership. "
That's the classic move - shuttling from hands-off sociologist to hot-blooded moralist and back again. So, the right won't condemn Coulter when she says the 9/11 widows enjoy their husbands' deaths ("love her or hate her, her words seem to resonate with the American people"), but they would gladly kill Ward Churchill (who I agree is a complete idiot). Then all the sudden they are sociologists when it comes to the Times - "for whatever reason (that we've carefully cultivated) the Times has a problems with middle America, so there must be a problem there if it is so perceived".
|
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1829
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 1:51 pm: |
|
Bob K/themp-
Take my words and use them as you will. I am just the messenger.
BTW, many people on the right condemmed Coulter's remarks. And who said anything about killing Ward Churchill (the moron he is)? However true Coulter's remarks were she could of pampered her words to some degree.
And you don't think the opposite occurs in left wing circles? You have an example of it right in this thread. See tulip's first response.
Open your eyes people...the NYT has a political agenda and even admitted to it. Just because you agree with it doesn't make it right.
-SLK
|
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5543
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 2:01 pm: |
|
"However true Coulter's remarks were she could of pampered her words to some degree."
Okay, I'll bite. Exactly what part of Ms. Coulter's widow comments were "true"? |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3587
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 2:07 pm: |
|
Blame everyone for my views, slk. Yup. They're mine, and mine alone, thanks. I don't know anyone in SOMA. |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1831
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 2:18 pm: |
|
(ignoring nohero)
tulip-over your head again as usual.
Your first post, at least the way you typed it, implies that since the Bush administration engaged in an alleged treasonous(sp)act of outing Plame then it is justified for the NYT to engage in treasonous acts as well.
Wrong.
-SLK
BTW, your views are not original tulip-typical left wing knee jerk crap.... |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1846
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 3:57 pm: |
|
SLK,
I think the Times story is excellent. I don't trust the government and know that it needs to be held in check as much as possible. I find the big-government conservatives currently in power--and their cheerleaders--to be particularly harmful.
You are more likely to be hit by lightening than you are to be in a terrorist attack. So what is Bush doing about the dangers of electrical storms? |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1832
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 4:40 pm: |
|
dave23-
I agree these big govt republicans (not necessairly conservative) are unfortunate. Thier fiscal responsibility is truly heartbreaking.
I am not saying you should trust the govt. but I just don't get the NYT insistence on putting everything Bush does in a bad light.
And to answer your question... There is really only way to avoid being hit by lightning-stay inside! Unfortunately there are fewer options to protect oneselves from a terrorist act.
I don't buy that anyways. A lightning strike is by chance. A terrorist attack necessairly isn't...
-SLK |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 801
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 6:34 pm: |
|
Great job by the NYT in now undercutting the value of their political endorsements.
Great job in serving it up for Karl Rove in the upcoming political races.
Easy to stick the " anti-american" label on the Times based on what they did on a program disclosed to Congress.
Prediction: The NYT Editor's head will roll at a convinient time, much like "Gunga" Dan Rather's did at CBS |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3059
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 12:19 pm: |
|
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/06/show_me_the_mon.html#mo re
"Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, asked U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte to report particularly on any damage to President George W. Bush's domestic spying program and another secret program by the Treasury Department that tracks private bank records.
"Numerous, recent unauthorized disclosures of sensitive intelligence programs have directly threatened important efforts in the war against terrorism," Roberts, a staunch White House ally, said in a letter to Negroponte.
"Whether the president's Terrorist Surveillance Program or the Department of Treasury's effort to track terrorist financing, we have been unable to persuade the media to act responsibly."
Here's how it's going to work. In record time (say, by next week sometime) we'll have our damage assessment. We'll hear terrible stories about terrorists who didn't make that wire transfer, who stopped calling their mother in Dearborn. We'll even hear stories about how said terrorist was mid-terrorist plan, but now he got away and he's out there stalking us, all because James Risen and Eric Lichtblau ruined Cheney's favorite spying program. We'll see them ratchet up the One Minute Hates some more, because the NYT has personally compromised our safety.
But I don't think it'll work. I don't think it'll work because there's really no way you can perform a damage assessment on these programs. We know the real terrorists had moved away from tappable communication after Richard Shelby revealed we were tapping them, way back in 2001. And they've moved to hawalas, or something even less formal, to transfer their money (particularly since Bush himself has mentioned SWIFT before.
Which means they're going to have to make it up. They're going to have to invent a story by next week about all the evil doers the NYT has let escape.
And the problem, for them, is that their stories aren't working anymore. The best story they've invented lately involves seven poor men looking to scam free boots off an FBI informer. That story was immediately laughed into disrepute. And we now know their other big stories--the danger of Zarqawi, the importance of Abu Zubaydeh--were all cruel hoaxes.
This story will be no better. And the more they keep telling these transparently stupid stories, the more their own credibility will suffer." |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3521
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 2:03 pm: |
|
Again... the WSJ reported this story too. Where's the ire toward them? |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 640
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 5:18 pm: |
|
The WSJ reported that the Salzburger plaything reported the story.
No original content.
jd |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3437
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 9:13 pm: |
|
Actually, I believe the WSJ reported the story on the same day that the NY Times and the LA Times did. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5190
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 10:18 pm: |
|
According to both sites' online versions, the stories appeared June 23. |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 75
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 1:34 pm: |
|
From the BBC's Greg Palast writing for Buzzflash...long but worth a read:
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/06/06/con06276.html
June 28, 2006
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Greg Palast
The Right Wing has gone hog-••• wild over The New York Times' "shocking" report that the Bush Administration is actually tracking terrorists' money transfers. Oh my!
The fruitcakes are in flames! "Stand them in front of a firing squad or put them in prison for the rest of their lives," says one pinhead on Fox TV.
For what? The stunning news that the government is hunting the source of al-Qaeda's cash? "Osama! You must stop using your ATM card! Condi Rice is reading our bank statements!"
Somehow, I suspect bin Laden already assumes his checkbook is getting perused.
It is worth noting that the fanatic screeching for a "firing squad" is a guy who claims to be a former CIA agent. No one can confirm his claim of course, but this character, Wayne Simmons, has made his career blabbering away juicy intelligence secrets to sell himself as an "expert," stuff far racier than the Times' weak report. Well, hypocrisy never stood in the way of the Foxes in the news house.
You want to talk "treason"? OK, let's talk treason. How about Dick Cheney telling his creepy little hitman 'Scooter' Libby to reveal information that led to the naming of a CIA agent? Mr. Simmons, do you have room in your firing squad schedule for the Vice-President?
And no one on Fox complained when the Times, under the by-line of Judith Miller, revealed the secret "intelligence" information that Saddam was building a bomb.
Yes, let's talk treason. How about this: Before the 9/11 attack, George Bush's intelligence chieftains BLOCKED the CIA's investigation of the funding of al-Qaeda and terror.
The "Back-Off" Directive
On November 9, 2001, BBC Television Centre in London received a call from a phone booth just outside Washington. The call to our Newsnight team was part of a complex pre-arranged dance coordinated with the National Security News Service, a conduit for unhappy spooks at the CIA and FBI to unburden themselves of disturbing information and documents.
The top-level U.S. intelligence agent on the line had much to be unhappy and disturbed about: what he called a "back-off" directive.
This call to BBC came two months after the attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Towers. His fellow agents, he said, were now released to hunt bad guys. That was good news. The bad news was that, before September 11, in those weeks just after George W. Bush took office, CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) personnel were told to "back off" certain targets of investigations begun by Bill Clinton.
The agent said, "There were particular investigations that were effectively killed."
Which ones? His reply was none too comforting: Khan Labs.
On February 11, 2004, President Bush, at an emergency press briefing, expressed his shock -- shock! -- at having learned that Dr. A. Q. Khan of Pakistan was running a flea market in fissionable material. But, we knew that from the agent's call -- nearly three years earlier. As the intelligence insider told us, the Khan investigation died because the CIA was not allowed to follow down the money trail ... to Saudi Arabia.
Apparently, the Saudis, after Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait in 1991, switched their funding for an "Islamic bomb" from Iraq to Pakistan. Dr. Khan used the Saudi loot to build and test his bomb -- then sell off the blueprints and bomb-fixings to North Korea and Libya. This was, one might say, a somewhat dangerous situation. But Bush's spymasters made it a policy to "See No Saudi Evil" -- so the investigation died.
What You "Ought Not to Know."
Closing the agency's eyes to the Khan bomb was not the only spike. That same week in November 2001, unhappy FBI agents "accidentally" left an astonishing dozen-page fax on the desks of our NSNS colleagues. It was marked, "199-I -- WF" and "SECRET."
The code "199-I" means "national security matter" in FBI-speak. It was about what the FBI deemed "a suspected terrorist organization." What made the document special -- and earned the anger of the two agents who "lost" it for us -- is that it indicates that the "suspected terrorist" activities were not investigated until September 13, 2001, despite a desire by agents to investigate these characters years earlier.
Who was exempt from investigation? That was on page 2 of the 199-I document. The FBI was hunting in Falls Church, Virginia, for "ABL," Abdullah bin Laden, nephew of Osama. They were also seeking another relative, Omar bin Laden (or "Binladden" in the alternative translation of the Arabic name). But by September 13, when the restrictions on agents were removed, the bin Ladens were gone.
Why did buildings have to fall before the FBI could question the bin Ladens? Because, frustrated agents noted, the "suspected terrorist organization" was funded directly by the Saudi Royal family.
The suspect group, the World Association of Muslim Youth, operated soccer clubs -- and a whole lot more. For example, there was its shuttle operation for jihadi warriors to Bosnia and, foreign intelligence agencies told us at BBC, alleged involvement of WAMY members in bombings.
In the face of these accusations, the Saudi supreme dictator, King Abdullah, praised WAMY, saying, "There is no extremism in the defending of the faith." That's his opinion.
Abdullah bin Laden brought WAMY to the USA where, in a summer camp in Florida, little kids were given instruction in baseball and in the glories of hostage-taking (no kidding).
But the FBI's investigation of the bin Ladens and their group was out of the question so long as the Bush Administration kept intelligence agencies from following the funds transfers of the House of Saud.
That November night in 2001, when we were about to televise the 199-I memo, my BBC producer, Meirion Jones, sought out the FBI's comment, assuming we'd get the usual, "It's baloney, a fake, you misunderstand, it ain't true."
But we didn't get the usual response.
Rather, FBI headquarters in Washington told us: "There are lots of things the intelligence community knows and other people ought not to know."
"Ought not to know"?!?
We ran the story of the Bush Administration's impeding investigations of the funding of terror. BBC ran it at the top of the nightly news in Britain and worldwide. It hit the front pages of newspapers around the globe -- except in the USA. In America, The New York Times and our other news outlets were still accepting the Bush Administration's diktat that intelligence "information" -- that is, news of disastrous intelligence failures -- was something the Times' readers "ought not to know."
So I'm tempted to say that, Yes, The New York Times has committed treason -- not by reporting on what Bush's spies are doing, but on failing to report on what Bush's spies did not do: a deadly failure to follow the money before September 11 because the House of Bush chose to protect the House of Saud.
|
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 827
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 1:44 pm: |
|
The BBC is one of the most extreme left wing broadcasting institutions in the world, and hence a bad source for any objective reporting or commentary.
Additionally the BBC recently decided to ignore suggestions for balanced reporting on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (BBC is pro-pali) from a report from an independent organization THEY hired to evaluate their reporting on the conflict!
It would be as if Howard Dean had his own radio and tv network. |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 133
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
Fat-
"The BBC is one of the most extreme left wing broadcasting institutions in the world, and hence a bad source for any objective reporting or commentary."
Your post is provincial. They do report the Israeli-Palestinian conflict differently and in a way that has had the reputation among reasonable people to favor the Palestinians, so I don't want to argue that point, whether it's true or not, but using that as a basis for the above statement is idiotic.
What your statement or the BBC has to do with Howard Dean is exactly zero.
I'm amazed how the right wing so desperately feels the need to smear somebody when attempting to make a point.
You should read Greg Palast. He's credentialed and deals in fact.
|
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 960
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 2:18 pm: |
|
FvF--
The fact that you think Howard Dean is a left-winger says all that needs to be said about your political comprehension. You know, you're allowed to just disagree with him honestly without lying and smearing him. Dean is a partisan Democrat, yes. But an extreme left-winger? Hardly.
And as far as the NYT's "leak" goes:
Quote:SWIFT, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is the international banking cooperative that quietly allowed the Treasury Department and the CIA to examine hundreds of thousands of private banking records from around the world.
But the existence of SWIFT itself has not exactly been a secret. Certainly not to anyone who had an Internet connection.
SWIFT has a Web site, at swift.com.
It's a very informative Web site. For instance, this page describes how "SWIFT has a history of cooperating in good faith with authorities such as central banks, treasury departments, law enforcement agencies and appropriate international organisations, such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), in their efforts to combat abuse of the financial system for illegal activities."
(And yes, FATF has its own Web site, too.)
An e-mail from White House Briefing reader Tim O'Keefe tipped me off to just how nutty it is to suggest that SWIFT keeps a low profile. Among other things, he explained, "SWIFT also happens to put on the largest financial services trade show in the world every year," he wrote. "Swift also puts out a lovely magazine ."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/06/28/BL2006062801268.htm l |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5199
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 2:22 pm: |
|
But he's not even making a point, he's just slinging mud. A counterpoint would have been interesting: "The BBC is biased, what really happened was xyz."
Apparently there is no counterpoint; as we've suspected, it's government of the Saudis, by the Saudis and for the Saudis. |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 76
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 3:03 pm: |
|
Many countries, particularly in Europe, report the Israeli-Palestinian conflict differently than the USA, not just the BBC. The BBC is famed for it's investigative reporting and in-depth news coverage. Their documentaries and historical drama is outstanding (at least compared to what's on offer here) and sports coverage is excellent. They are partly funded by the government, whether that be right or left wing. Unlike here, however, the right wing does not try to cut funding them as they do with the PBS here. Their website is unbelievable and extremely educational compared to a 'news' website here. You should check it out and if you have children of any age I am sure they would find the kids stuff informative also. |
fmertz
Citizen
Username: Fmertz
Post Number: 134
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 - 11:34 am: |
|
Had instead the Times printed un-authorized pictures of Brad Pitt and Anjolie's baby lawyers would be liming up to sue them. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3499
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 - 11:36 am: |
|
And if rats had wings, they'd be birds. Talk about a non-sequitor. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 962
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 - 12:18 pm: |
|
I'm still waiting for an apology from the right wing on this one. What did the Times print that was not available from the SWIFT website or trade show? |
mjh
Supporter
Username: Mjh
Post Number: 645
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 - 1:39 pm: |
|
I'm waiting for the subject to go away. Seems to me we've allowed Bush to successfully change the subject from abject failure in Iraq to demonizing the NYT......always successful in getting the far right foaming at the mouth.
The responses to the article remind me of Pavlov's dog..........Bush and his buddy Karl pull out the usual hate-mongering non-issues one by one to distract from the real issues at hand, and the far right responds immediately by slathering spittle demonizing the NYT. First it's flag burning, then the liberal media, next stem cell research, gay marriage, etc. etc. Slather, slather, drip, drip.
Too bad they can't yet train their followers to simply respond to a bell so that we don't have to hear this blather. Are we really to believe it's unpatriotic to have a free press?
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 2088
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 - 1:40 pm: |
|
Only in America, it seems, would we assume that terrorists wouldn't conceive of a scenario where we would try to track their flow of money, freeze their funds where possible, and monitor their cell and landline calls.
A number of the terrorists have engineering degrees from German and British universities, and were organized enough to coordinate the hi-jacking of four US airline aircraft. Wouldn't it occur to us that they know more than the average person about money movement and tracking funds?
Only in America today would we try to hang the free press (what's left of it) for reporting what anyone would know who has been following stories on terrorists and anti-terrorism. Peter King, Dick Cheney, and others who have hung the NYT out to dry but let the WSJ off without even a bitchslap should be ashamed of the farce they're playing out.
Shame on SLK and his NY Slime. SLK, stick to listening to Mark Levin. Don't try to imitate him. It's not impressive in the original or in the imitation.
|
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6699
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, July 7, 2006 - 10:59 am: |
|
SLK you have not answered a direct question, that most people reading this thread, I assume, would like to see answered....you said
Quote:BTW, many people on the right condemmed Coulter's remarks. And who said anything about killing Ward Churchill (the moron he is)? However true Coulter's remarks were she could of pampered her words to some degree
.
So, regarding the "says the 9/11 widows enjoy their husbands' deaths" what part of her comments regarding the widows is true? I looked but couldn't find a fact anywhere.
Simple question, requiring a simple answer. Straight up. Neat. |
pcs81632
Citizen
Username: Pcs81632
Post Number: 65
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, July 7, 2006 - 11:48 am: |
|
Twice a month, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) which is part of the Treasury Department, sends every financial institution in this country updates to the OFAC and SDN lists. The financial institutions are required to compare these lists against thier client databases and report any positive hits.
FinCEN has thier own website, and the search for this is information is public knowledge.
The NYT was correct in reporting the expansion of this prgram into the SWIFT network, since it's nothing more than what the US financial institutions are doing in their daily work environments. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page