President says New York Times is disgaceful

Wow people are getting politic-crazy over this!

If the issue is really whether or not the Times article was "disgraceful", politics shouldn't come into play at all. It doesn't matter who stated it. The issue should be the article itself ...

... which I have no problem with. As previously mentioned, the knowledge was public since 2001. You would have to be naive to think that anyone doing a large, international transaction would not be tracked SOMEHOW anyways. If a bank can keep track of someone buying $46 worth of liquor at Wal-Mart with my stolen debt card (yes it's true), I think they can keep track of large transactions.

I am continually amazed by people on this board who just cannot separate politics out from some of these American issues. Instead we are compelled to blame or defend our leaders.

EDIT: forgot a point

[edit on 30-6-2006 by Fiverz]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
It looks like using SWIFT to track possible terrorist funding and money movements has been in the public domain for a while:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is a non-issue, blown out of proportion to shape public opinion and deflect your attention.

Originally posted by Fiverz
Wow people are getting politic-crazy over this!

A sucker is born every minute, and they all end up here eventually.

Its like there is this whole section of the nation that is entirely hypnotized
and when the media or government says
"Dance like a chicken", they start sqauking and doing the farm yard shuffle.

ATS needs a brainwashed tracking list, to compliment the ignore list,
then we can keep an account of just how mindwashed these folks are every
time they go into a fit about the latest "manufactured for the weak minded" issue.

All mouths running amok before they have all the facts, and sure enough they
keep on blabbing complete BS even after all the facts are on the table.

All you big yapping mouths in the audience, ask yourself this:
what have you done about any of the issues you keep moaning about?
Published a newspaper, informed the public, researched the facts?
Tracked down those invisible terrorists with your spare time?
Made damn sure that the voting system is legit in this country?
Found those Weapons of Mass Destruction?

No you all sit on your butts bitching like a bunch of fat old ladies,
calling people names like third graders, whining for the end of free speech
and baying for the extinction of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
for your targets du jour.

Stop being played like a worn out fiddle, the song is getting old.

Originally posted by mr conspiracy

www.thestar.com

Once again the INTERNATIONAL press comes in to dispell the myth created here at home. When the story gets cloudy, look outside our media to get an unbiased view. The faux news body in this country have done an effective job of rendering our media useless and making exposing the truth in matters next to impossible.

The NYT reported on a program that the White House itself has boasted about, and the White House decided to make a political football out of it to get their supporters worked up in a froth of indignation, screaming drivel about "traitors" etc...

This is another Karl Rove tactical move to "energize" the administrations political base, just like the gay marriage amendment and the flag burning amendment votes. There's no actual concern about operational security here, just another phony crisis to get the talk radio and LGF drones gnashing their teeth over the dirty pinko traitors hiding under their beds. Meh... haven't we seen this tactic used often enough already to recognize it for what it is?

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

nytimes.com

The government would like us to publish only the official line, and some of our elected leaders tend to view anything else as harmful to the national interest. For example, some members of the Administration have argued over the past three years that when our reporters describe sectarian violence and insurgency in Iraq, we risk demoralizing the nation and giving comfort to the enemy. Editors start from the premise that citizens can be entrusted with unpleasant and complicated news, and that the more they know the better they will be able to make their views known to their elected officials. Our default position — our job — is to publish information if we are convinced it is fair and accurate, and our biggest failures have generally been when we failed to dig deep enough or to report fully enough.

I thought this quote really summed it up nicely.

I thought that quote a "nice" piece of propaganda. The media, ruled as it is by libertarian-liberal-know-it-alls quite natually thinks it is above the "people' and can, because that is what superior beings do, lead the sheep in any direction they choose, and if the truth gets a tad bit unrecognizable, oh well, as long as it is pointing the "idiot" populace along.

And what do they do when they get caught at it? Deny responsibility for any consequences of their leading.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by curiousity]

sorry double post


[edit on 30-6-2006 by Rick76]

Found this video of Keith Olbermann in it he talks about this and shows not only the website and magazine but also has clips of the president as far back as oct 2001 openly talking about swift.

Here is the link
www.crooksandliars.com...


Seems to me it couldnt have been to much of a secret if the president goes on TV and talks about it.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by Rick76]

From Lost_Mind

".... I am trying to fathom not why NYT ran the story per se, but why on earth would they run it knowing full well that it was an integral component to the security of this nation...."

It's nothing new; they've been doing it since their inception, as has the Washington Post.

[link] www.abovetopsecret.com...
[/link]

Originally posted by Rick76
Found this video of Keith Olbermann in it he talks about this and shows not only the website and magazine but also has clips of the president as far back as oct 2001 openly talking about swift.
Here is the link
www.crooksandliars.com...
Seems to me it couldnt have been to much of a secret if the president goes on TV and talks about it.
[edit on 30-6-2006 by Rick76]

That's How I Found Out About It!!!

Cool, so Zappa, Curio, what now? You still gonna say NYT committed treason by "revealing" a non-secret program? The President REVEALED IT FIRST! SO execute him for treason first if you want to execute NYT people for it. And the people who own SWIFT and their website and Magazine!

NYT REVEALED NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!! How many times do I have to say this to get it through your heads? THERE WAS NO SECRET PROGRAM, IT WAS PUBLIC!!!!!

Private intelligence profits have tripled since 2001.

REPLY: No-one works for free; do you?

In the past, oil and car companies have discouraged alternative fuels...."

REPLY: Discouraged?, maybe, but they can't stop free enterprise. Besides, none of the alternative fuels will drop the price of fuel (and, no, hydrogen won't work very well. One has only to look at the Periodic Tables to see that).

"..... and disbanded rail and trolley public transportation in order to perpetuate their profits."

REPLY: Rail and trooley transportation provided only limited travels, and ended for that reason.

Originally posted by Johnny Ohm
IT WASN'T SECRET

How hard is that to understand? It was never a secret, they have a public website and magazine and Bush has talked about it since September 24th 2001.

REPLY: WHAT DOES IT TAKE!!! The issue is not WHAT they were doing, but HOW that is so damaging, and it puts soldiers and civilians in many countries at risk.

What????? Zappa you aren't making any sense...

Unless you mean when Bush revealed SWIFT, the website of SWIFT revealed SWIFT, and the magazine revealed SWIFT it put soldiers in danger...

BUT IT DIDN'T! NYT revealed nothing, no treason, no crime committed, just Bush&Co trying to deflect attention from their crappy numbers and crappy actions and you fall for it.

My 2 brother's in law are both hard line Republicans.

They too seem to have drank in too much Neo-Con Cool-Aid from the reflecting pool downtown.

They also both depend on this administration's success for their livelihood,
one as a designer for the Navy and the other up to his neck in USAF military contracts.

I've stopped going to family gatherings completely because blood is most definitely
not thicker than their GS rating.

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

My 2 brother's in law are both hard line Republicans.

They too seem to have drank in too much Neo-Con Cool-Aid from the reflecting pool downtown.

They also both depend on this administration's success for their livelihood,
one as a designer for the Navy and the other up to his neck in USAF military contracts.

I've stopped going to family gatherings completely because blood is most definitely
not thicker than their GS rating.

If my Brother was a Republican and could not argue his case (reasonably) with me, I would not speak to him. I feel that there would be no reason to justify being a Republican anyway, unless you are desparately clinging on to your own denial. What good have the Republicans done to the USA? Democracy? Freedom? Don't make me, or the majority of the rest of the world laugh.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by Xeros]

The issue is not WHAT they were doing, but HOW that is so damaging, and it puts soldiers and civilians in many countries at risk.

Please explain how a New York Times article about a program that was already acknowledged puts anyone at risk...

You folks keep repeating this mantra about how the article "puts soldiers at risk" and is a "threat to national security", without actually giving any explanation for this claim. How does printing an article discussing an already public program create such a terrible threat to national security?

I kinda got under their skin about the effects of 9/11 being used as an excuse for the biggest
unrestricted military industrial spending spree in U.S. history.

They won't even associate with me because it might hurt their security clearance.

They both sit at their cushy desks while brave young men and women are in harms way
being used as pawns in an armed hostile corporate takeover of strategic resources.

Funny how these God fearin Christians don't mind sending other people's kids to their death.

Originally posted by xmotex
Please explain how a New York Times article about a program that was already acknowledged puts anyone at risk...

You folks keep repeating this mantra about how the article "puts soldiers at risk" and is a "threat to national security", without actually giving any explanation for this claim. How does printing an article discussing an already public program create such a terrible threat to national security?

Thanks xmotex, exactly what I wanted to say but you said it better.

Anyone wonder what the big deal is? I want to know what Bush has screwed up so badly that they need to use this to distract the media from it.

Originally posted by Lost_Mind
I think everyone is in a huff about it because the NYT went out of their way to shine such a bright light on it when it was absolutely unnecessary to do so.

Yes, the terrorists may be aware of the US watching transactions, in a general sense, but to go out of your way to remind all of those that hadn't been paying attn. or had become lazy/sloppy or less discreet in thier actions is unfathomable.

Even if is was illegal, why for Petes sake, would some one want to destroy the effectiveness of the tactic? Why would one want to compromise the security and integrity of the hard work of those collecting the info and putting the dots together to protect us? There is no rhyme or reason to doing this. This comes across as nothing more than agenda driven crap.

Couldn't a said it any better myself. So I quoted it so it'd get said again.

NYT busted open a dormant detail of the war on terror. Why? See that is what the real point is.

And someone else said "why did the "people', that great uninformed, poorly informed, or need to be informed mass, depending on your POV, need to know this?

'THEY' didn't and that is the complete fallacy with all the "keep us informed' nonsense
Now, if the government had decided to "secretly" check band our bank accounts, the NYT would have been silent as a Post. (pun intended) Because they are not about 'informing' the people of America, they are about hating on the government and its current leaders. And, just maybe, just maaaaybe, working for the terrorist groups 'cause they believe Allah is going to make America into one huge mosque?

Originally posted by curiousity
Couldn't a said it any better myself. So I quoted it so it'd get said again.
NYT busted open a dormant detail of the war on terror. Why? See that is what the real point is.
And someone else said "why did the "people', that great uninformed, poorly informed, or need to be informed mass, depending on your POV, need to know this?
'THEY' didn't and that is the complete fallacy with all the "keep us informed' nonsense
Now, if the government had decided to "secretly" check band our bank accounts, the NYT would have been silent as a Post. (pun intended) Because they are not about 'informing' the people of America, they are about hating on the government and its current leaders. And, just maybe, just maaaaybe, working for the terrorist groups 'cause they believe Allah is going to make America into one huge mosque?

So you agree with Bush, he is the Dictator of America and no one should say different?

Also, THEY DIDN'T REVEAL ANYTHING!!!!

You Bush Supporters again FAIL TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS ARTICLE HURT ANYONE/ANYTHING! There is a public website with a public magazine about a program that the President HIMSELF AS TALKED ABOUT PUBLICALLY!!!!

You Bush Lovers are grabbing for straws here because NYT did nothing wrong but Bush tells you they did so you must defend him.

Originally posted by Johnny Ohm

Originally posted by curiousity
Couldn't a said it any better myself. So I quoted it so it'd get said again.
NYT busted open a dormant detail of the war on terror. Why? See that is what the real point is.
And someone else said "why did the "people', that great uninformed, poorly informed, or need to be informed mass, depending on your POV, need to know this?
'THEY' didn't and that is the complete fallacy with all the "keep us informed' nonsense
Now, if the government had decided to "secretly" check band our bank accounts, the NYT would have been silent as a Post. (pun intended) Because they are not about 'informing' the people of America, they are about hating on the government and its current leaders. And, just maybe, just maaaaybe, working for the terrorist groups 'cause they believe Allah is going to make America into one huge mosque?

So you agree with Bush, he is the Dictator of America and no one should say different?

Also, THEY DIDN'T REVEAL ANYTHING!!!!

You Bush Supporters again FAIL TO EXPLAIN HOW THIS ARTICLE HURT ANYONE/ANYTHING! There is a public website with a public magazine about a program that the President HIMSELF AS TALKED ABOUT PUBLICALLY!!!!

You Bush Lovers are grabbing for straws here because NYT did nothing wrong but Bush tells you they did so you must defend him.

Oh that gets old in a hurry.... this constant..."you bush people are brainwashed" :@@