President says New York Times is disgaceful

Aren't they? They say NYT did something bad because Bush Told Them NYT did something bad. They didn't, but since Bush said they did Bush Lovers believe it. They don't know why they do, or what it is that was bad, but Bush told them it was bad so they parrot that.

President says New York Times is disgaceful

Really? President Bush should look in the mirror. He is a disgrace. He has been a disgrace his whole adult life....not just as president!

it's just another sign that we have a wanna be dictator as a president. Freedom of speech? Not on my watch! yee haw!

I'm not sure the notion of "classified" has been stretched and twisted so much before.

If the identity of the oil industry leaders meeting with the Vice President is classified, but the name of a CIA operative working on nuclear proliferation is arbitrarily declassified, don't we have too much subjectivity at work here?

The SWIFT program is public knowledge. Their web site talks about surveillance of unlawful activity. The administraion has previously announced it would use monitoring of international and domestic financial transactions to catch terrorists. The only entity set up to do that monitoring is SWIFT.

It's a hair-split of the first order.

More importantly, making an issue of the "leak" distracts from the nature of the information revealed: that there is still more surveillance of US citzens' activities.

Let me break this "secret" right now: GPS tracking built into many cellphones can be -- and is being -- used to track movements of US citizens.

"Spy satellites" above the US are capturing activities of US citizens.

Face recognition technology in combination with fixed surveillance cameras are in operation in public places in major cities across the US.

Credit card and library card records are being checked for exposure to or consumption of suspicious materials/information.

ISP records and search records of Internet users are routinely scanned to monitor visits to web sites or transmission/receipt of content that is questionable.

None of these are selective surveillance: they are "fishing expeditions." They are without warrants. They are invasions of privacy. All are being used outside of the areas appropriate to national security and are being employed to find and prosecute criminals and "criminals."

Use of this type of information nets not only actual criminals -- but also potential criminals. People guilty of "thought crime" by virtue of their investigations or travels.

If you don't agree that all of this needs to be brought to the public forum and discussed and understood by every citizen, then your idea of America and mine are quite different.

AhemAHEM...

Excuse me, but is this the *same* New York Times which was so instrumental in forwarding the necessary propaganda the Bush 43 Admin needed to disinform the public in the run-up to 9/11?

Wonder what they did wrong?