Stephanie
Diamond Member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 70,230
- 10,864
- 2,040
It's time to hit these papers where it's going to really hurt them...We need to find out who their sponsors are, and boycott them, write them, phone them, tell them loud and clear what we think of the papers that they are sponsoring..
These papers are proving too be enemies of the United Sates and also to the people of the United States .. And if we get attacked again, guess who their going to blame, President Bush and the Republican party for not keeping us safe... Call me paranoid, or whatever... But look at their pattern....It's dangerous.......
Posted 6/23/2006
Media: Once again, major newspapers, led by The New York Times, have spilled secrets that will make Americans less safe and the war on terror harder to win. No doubt, Pulitzers are in order. We hope they're proud.
The decision by The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal to print details of the government's secret program to monitor terrorists' finances couldn't come at a worse time.
The same day that program was revealed, seven men were arrested in Florida, part of a plot to create a terrorist "Islamic Army" and blow up Chicago's 110-story Sears Tower. The group hoped to hook up with al-Qaeda, and even swore oaths to it.
Scary. If nothing else, this underscores the threat we're under and why those who aid and abet our enemies must be watched.
Which is exactly what the program to watch terrorists' bank accounts did. It looked at bank transfers in the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or SWIFT, system to track the financial activities of terrorists and their friends.
It is a key part of our effort to dismantle the global terrorist threat and to render al-Qaeda and its allies financially impotent. It worked so well, in fact, that both Republicans and Democrats asked newspapers not to print the story.
Just how good was it?
"The program," the L.A. Times said, "is considered a potent weapon in the war on terrorism because of its ability to clandestinely monitor financial transactions and map terrorist webs."
No doubt true. So why publish anything at all if it will ruin a legal program that works at rooting out terrorists?
Now, thanks to the actions of a few newspapers, maybe a future terrorist attack will be successful. After all, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups know to be more careful.
Sound familiar? It should. Last December, The New York Times printed details of the National Security Agency's data-mining operations using phone company records to keep tabs on al-Qaeda phone traffic to the U.S. The NSA program contributed to the breaking up of at least two terrorist plots. It made us safer.
Now the same Times reporters, Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, are back with the SWIFT story. They took a lot of flak for the NSA stories. We're just spitballing here, but maybe that explains why four major papers would have the same "scoop." In numbers, there is safety.
For the record, the White House practically begged them not to publish this, arguing it would imperil the highly successful counterterrorism program. (Remember: There have been no major terror attacks on the U.S. since 9-11). The New York Times rejected the plea, citing "public interest." The others followed.
We're left to wonder: Is this criminal behavior? The newspapers will claim they have the right under the First Amendment to publish government secrets if they see fit. But that's rubbish. Since World War II, Congress and a series of legal decisions have made it clear the media aren't exempt from the Espionage Act which forbids giving secrets to the enemy.
While the legality of printing secrets may be debatable, it's clear there's a crisis among media elites that have allowed hatred of the president and his party to taint their reporting. In the process, they've destroyed whatever claims to objectivity and fairness they might have once had. Far worse, they've given aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war and that is simply inexcusable.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&issue=20060623
These papers are proving too be enemies of the United Sates and also to the people of the United States .. And if we get attacked again, guess who their going to blame, President Bush and the Republican party for not keeping us safe... Call me paranoid, or whatever... But look at their pattern....It's dangerous.......
Posted 6/23/2006
Media: Once again, major newspapers, led by The New York Times, have spilled secrets that will make Americans less safe and the war on terror harder to win. No doubt, Pulitzers are in order. We hope they're proud.
The decision by The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal to print details of the government's secret program to monitor terrorists' finances couldn't come at a worse time.
The same day that program was revealed, seven men were arrested in Florida, part of a plot to create a terrorist "Islamic Army" and blow up Chicago's 110-story Sears Tower. The group hoped to hook up with al-Qaeda, and even swore oaths to it.
Scary. If nothing else, this underscores the threat we're under and why those who aid and abet our enemies must be watched.
Which is exactly what the program to watch terrorists' bank accounts did. It looked at bank transfers in the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or SWIFT, system to track the financial activities of terrorists and their friends.
It is a key part of our effort to dismantle the global terrorist threat and to render al-Qaeda and its allies financially impotent. It worked so well, in fact, that both Republicans and Democrats asked newspapers not to print the story.
Just how good was it?
"The program," the L.A. Times said, "is considered a potent weapon in the war on terrorism because of its ability to clandestinely monitor financial transactions and map terrorist webs."
No doubt true. So why publish anything at all if it will ruin a legal program that works at rooting out terrorists?
Now, thanks to the actions of a few newspapers, maybe a future terrorist attack will be successful. After all, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups know to be more careful.
Sound familiar? It should. Last December, The New York Times printed details of the National Security Agency's data-mining operations using phone company records to keep tabs on al-Qaeda phone traffic to the U.S. The NSA program contributed to the breaking up of at least two terrorist plots. It made us safer.
Now the same Times reporters, Eric Lichtblau and James Risen, are back with the SWIFT story. They took a lot of flak for the NSA stories. We're just spitballing here, but maybe that explains why four major papers would have the same "scoop." In numbers, there is safety.
For the record, the White House practically begged them not to publish this, arguing it would imperil the highly successful counterterrorism program. (Remember: There have been no major terror attacks on the U.S. since 9-11). The New York Times rejected the plea, citing "public interest." The others followed.
We're left to wonder: Is this criminal behavior? The newspapers will claim they have the right under the First Amendment to publish government secrets if they see fit. But that's rubbish. Since World War II, Congress and a series of legal decisions have made it clear the media aren't exempt from the Espionage Act which forbids giving secrets to the enemy.
While the legality of printing secrets may be debatable, it's clear there's a crisis among media elites that have allowed hatred of the president and his party to taint their reporting. In the process, they've destroyed whatever claims to objectivity and fairness they might have once had. Far worse, they've given aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war and that is simply inexcusable.
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&issue=20060623