The War Over "War Secrets": Why The NY Times Is Not Treasonous (Op/Ed)

Righteously indignant, aptly labeled liberal elite--wow you think a heck of a lot of yourselves don't you. You've always said you were a real conspiracist and now at long last I believe you. If the latest furor over the financial eavsdropping of the Bush Administration is a masterfully conceived, brilliant distraction might I ask who is doing the conceiving? If, as you state this is designed to distract the general public from focusing on the real transgressions of the Bush Administration why is it that the "aptly named liberal elite" do not expose this tactic for what it is?

Could not your personal diatribe here be an equally adept attempt at deflecting the righteous anger of the general public away from the New York Times and back towards the Bush Administration? That tactic would certainly seem to fit in with your past biases in favor of the left of center reporting by the New York Times and with your well known biases against the Bush Administration.

Could it possibly be that the liberal elite is not quite as elite as they think themselves to be or that the inept, cowboy administration is not quite as inept and clumsy as you've consistently portrayed them to be? Now that would be a heck of an admission wouldn't it.

[edit on 28-6-2006 by Astronomer70]

Originally posted by thermopolis
There is no such "freedom of the press" in the first amendment. Just as there is no "seperation" clause.

A little more "reading" and less intepritation please........

Freedom of the press is established in the constitution, under amendment I of the bill of rights. As far as interpretation of the constitution goes, we're forced to leave that up to the supreme court. Btw how many judges have been replaced under this administration

Amendment I of the bill of rights according to cornell law scool

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Perhaps the section labeled "Publication of Legally Confidential Information" from this page off Cornell's site might help.

Publication of Legally Confidential information-(Scroll down towards bottom)

Publication of Legally Confidential Information.—While a State may have numerous and important valid interests in assuring the confidentiality of certain information, it may not maintain this confidentiality through the criminal prosecution of nonparticipant third parties, including the press, who disclose or publish the information

....

It does appear, however, that government would find it difficult to punish the publication of almost any information by a nonparticipant to the process in which the information was developed to the same degree as it would be foreclosed from obtaining prior restraint of such publication.181 There are also limits on the extent to which government may punish disclosures by participants in the criminal process, the Court having invalidated a restriction on a grand jury witness’s disclosure of his own testimony after the grand jury had been discharge.

From what i understand from this is that only the person who released the information can be held accountable, or at least the publication has a very good chance of remaining safe from major prosecution.

EDIT: Also to prove treason is extremely difficult, this case is no different than the plame case, and in my opinon isn't even as bad as that when you take into account the fact that the Bush administration has been touting how they have been targeting terrorist monetary interests.

[edit on 28-6-2006 by silentlonewolf]

"All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions - aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarhical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists... Like the India idol Vishnu, they have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one of the public opinions required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient looses all power of judgement and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party, they will in fact follow the flag we hanf out for them..." - Illuminati Protocol 12 -

There is NO Free Press.

Even in cases such as this, the situation was carefully planned. This is the Key element of Media Manipulation of the so-called "Free Press". Some think NY Times is "Liberal" and Treasonous and that it is an Enemy of the State for revealing certain "secrets". In my Humble Opinion none of that is True - but everything is just staged for the Public for further Divide and Control of them.

Think about it - if you have one guy in each and every corner, you can pull just one string, and everybody starts to dance to your tune. New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times are all Elite controlled - just like American Major TV networks. IF you start to follow up the chain of command you quickly find out that the Usual Suspects are yet again In Control; Council for Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergs, Rothschilds, Rockefellers.

So basicly they are yet again winning, while we are loosing and arguing who is right and who is not - and they are laughing at us and our dance to their tunes.

Yes... the game is on and we're being played.

However, the players forgot a few things...


Boston Globe

But a search of public records -- government documents posted on the Internet, congressional testimony, guidelines for bank examiners, and even an executive order President Bush signed in September 2001 -- describe how US authorities have openly sought new tools to track terrorist financing since 2001. That includes getting access to information about terrorist-linked wire transfers and other transactions, including those that travel through SWIFT.

"There have been public references to SWIFT before," said Roger Cressey, a senior White House counterterrorism official until 2003. "The White House is overreaching when they say [The New York Times committed] a crime against the war on terror. It has been in the public domain before."

Counterterrorism Blog

Suggestions that SWIFT and other similar transactions should be monitored by investigative agencies dealing with terrorism, money laundering and other criminal activity have been out there for some time. An MIT paper discussed the pros and cons of such practices back in 1995. Canada's Financial Intelligence Unit, FINTRAC,, for one, has acknowledged receiving information on Canadian origin SWIFT transactions since 2002. Of course, this info is provided by the banks themselves.

While monitoring SWIFT-handled transfers is a useful tool in identifying and tracking certain suspicious transactions, its importance should not be overstated. The information in SWIFT's hands is no better than the information which it is provided by the banks handling the transactions at both ends. And there is already an obligation on banks in the US and Europe to report all "suspicious transactions".

I think it's clear that this entire episode is an event designed to shape opinion and deflect attention.

Originally posted by thermopolis
The owner should be placed under arrest............

Jawohl Mein Führer!

And zoe vould like zies arrest carried out by yourself hmmmmmmmm?

Would zoe like zoe wear your favourite bootz for zis hmmmmmmmmmm?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I think it's clear that this entire episode is an event designed to shape opinion and deflect attention.

Crystal!

I did a search of my own before I saw this and got 3.25 Million Goolgle hits on "Tracking Terrorists Dollars". It's a known tactic and has been since 2001.

I'd like to ask those who claim NY Times is an 'aid to the enemy' what did the NY Times do that the president and others hadn't already done? Should we also charge the president as treasonous?

Good Job, SO.

Hmmmm....gosh. I mean I hate to start spewing rhetoric regarding the current administration. But, this sure is a possibility of what is going on. Thanks for the read! Good piece and something to ponder allright.

It's pretty obvious that this is a phony controversy designed to stir up the Republican base. There's nothing that seems to exite the extreme right like any mention of the NY Times. Witness all the "hang the traitors!!" hyperventilating here.

Of course, considering this program is no secret, and that the administration has actually boasted about US capabilities in this area, it's hard to take all the hysteria very seriously.

[edit on 6/28/06 by xmotex]

SkepticOverlord Awesome find!

Here is my little contribution about that:

PrisonPlanet

I knew there was something fishy about our corporate-owned media ratting out our corporate-owned government. It's simply a matter of which corporate interests hang in the balance. In the end, working Americans lose, no matter who they support in this financial surveillance fiasco.

According to the reports in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times, the financial tracking program was part of an aggressive post-Sept. 11 effort to gather intelligence, tapping into the world's largest financial communication network for information on bank transfers.

The network — run by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or SWIFT — carries up to 12.7 million messages a day. Those messages typically include names and account numbers of bank customers — private citizens and HUGE CORPORATIONS ALIKE — that are sending or receiving funds.

That's where the buck stops folks. The NYT doesn't care about us OR our privacy. They care about corporate freedom to engage in unfettered shady financial transactions without ANYONE - especially the corporate competition - getting a heads up through government surveillance.

And to that end, our corporate-owned media hopes to enlist the help of freedom loving Americans under the guise of protecting our constitutional rights, when really, they're concerned about their economic privileges.

We're in a no win situation. If we fight the surveillance, the corporations backed by the media stand to gain, and if we don't fight it, the corporations backed by the government prevail.

Working Americans are caught in the middle, like a hapless and hopeless nationwide ping-pong ball - one way or another, we go where they want us to go.

Corporations Rule the Media.

Corporations Rule the Goverment.

Corporations Rule the Country.

Corporations Rule the Nation.

Sad Days For "Democracy"...

[edit on 28/6/06 by Souljah]

I have to agree souljah. note once the corporate world decides against a party or canidate, the media ridiculing begins. Howard Dean's scream was nothing, abosultely nothing but look how big a deal it was made into effectively destroying his campaign. It waas decided on some level to nuter his candiacy. I would say based on the past year or so, the corporate world has decided that this president and its policies are toast (and I suspect the republican controlled congress as well) or these leaks would not be happening. Anyone who believes that we still have a free and fair (fair my ample ass, its never been fair) press is delusional. We are as much puppets of the media as any out there.

The only thing is that The Times ran an article post 9/11 calling for the Bush administration to step up to the plate and do this exact thing. So why would they risk making complete hypocrits of themselves? They know that it's going to come out that they called for these measures. Why would they risk looking like idiots?

Let's see:

Someone in the administration allegedly leaked Valerie Plame's identity, and indictments are returned and cries of impeachement are shouted.

The NY Times releases information about secret operations and methods that compromise the US' effectiveness in fighting terrorism, and any objection to the Times is called a diversion and a ruse to shape opinion.

Now I understand.

[edit on 28-6-2006 by jsobecky]

The god of the media should be Janus the two faced. the god of opennings and closings, beginnings and ends.

Originally posted by jsobecky

The NY Times releases information about secret operations and methods that compromise the US' effectiveness in fighting terrorism, and any objection to the Times is called a diversion and a ruse to shape opinion.

Becky, please..as if the whole world doesn't know they were doing this...including terrrorists.

Originally posted by Souljah

Corporations Rule the Goverment.

Corporations Rule the Country.

Corporations Rule the Nation.

[edit on 28/6/06 by Souljah]

That explains everything right there. The search for any deeper reasoning is pointless. I ususally tell people that if they want to understand Appalachia there a few crucial things they need to know. But it really applies to the whole country, and most people who think that we don't live "in that kind of place" have no knowledge of history. The Vanderbilts and Rockefellers legacies still rock on.

www.globalsecurity.org...

Originally posted by HardToGet

Originally posted by thermopolis
The owner should be placed under arrest............

Jawohl Mein Führer!

And zoe vould like zies arrest carried out by yourself hmmmmmmmm?

Would zoe like zoe wear your favourite bootz for zis hmmmmmmmmmm?

OK Sgt Shultz of is it Col Klink?

Modification to freedom of speech exist....err 'hate speech" for example.........yelling fire in a movie theater etc, etc,.........The only part of the 1st Amend that seems "sacred" is the "press" but upon actually reading, it only says Congress shall make no "LAW".

The times has violated several sections of the anti-espionage act.........

I do hope der "Bush" simply places guards at the door and turns the entire building into a prison..........

Absolute "freedom of the press" does not exist in the consitution. Nor does the seperation of church and state, nor does the Supreme Courts authority to pass judgment on the consitutionality of laws............

Oh yes, find the right to murder anywhere.........

Originally posted by thermopolis
Where in the first ammendment does the "press" have protection from "high treason"?

It simply says congress shall make no law...............there is no "exemption" for treason.

No person in the US is above the law, not even the "press". If a "citizen" were to have disclosed such a "secret" they would be in jail. How is a trash writter for a rag like the NYT's immune?

your right, no one is above the law. And when the law is becoming unjust and politicians are working for personal gain? the only treason I see are those wanting security over freedom

I am also a skeptical and I am going to agree with HB comments.

I wonder what this master plan can be and why the NY times would agree with something like that.

I also wonder if we should step back and check on who is the people with money behind the NY times.

What kind of people will be in tune with such a government master plan in motion.

I like this conspiracy about the role between Government and NY times, perhaps the link is there and just in front of our eyes.

I also find very un presidential for Mr. Bush to attack NY times so openly in a country that cherishes freedom of press.

Behind anything that goes on and move in this country an interest group or groups are involve . . . how may be the ones that are to benefit because it will be some benefit for some.

NY times is not the target here that is obvious but who may I ask are the ones targeted.

Will liberalism be the target? just a thought. just a rant from a conspiracy theorist.

[edit on 28-6-2006 by marg6043]

Originally posted by thermopolis
The times has violated several sections of the anti-espionage act.........

Can I ask in what way you feel the Times did so?

There is no difference in what the NYT's has done in telling of the banking data and printing that the US had broken Japans code in WWII. Japan knew the US was listening but didn't know we had the details.

The lie of the immune press is over. hang'em high............