The New York Times should be probed
This is ridiculous. The New York Times has shown another one of our cards to the enemy and no one at the paper seems to care. At what point does advancing their anti-Bush agenda become treason? They keep on revealing our means of catching terrorists. All of those responsible should be thrown in jail. We all know they want Bush out of office by any means possible... but no one would have thought they would aid the enemy of America that is trying to destroy us while trying to accomplish just that. Something needs to be done to stop the Benedict Arnold Times.
Comments
Posted by: Anon2
Posted on: June 27, 2006 10:37 AM
This act where people say liberals are betraying their country is old, tired, and thoroughly offensive.
Posted by: Chad
Posted on: June 27, 2006 10:57 AM
If you're offended, then maybe you should think about switching parties or telling the NY Times to stop being a traitor. The New York Times DID harm the country by publishing that story. There is no other way to look at it. They exposed a program that is used to fight the war on terror. They have been successful at using it... now it is a useless program. As far as I'm concerned... the NY Times is essentially a spy for the enemy. Those responsible should be thrown in jail. How is showing the enemy how we are fighting them anything but betraying our country?
Posted by: Anon2
Posted on: June 27, 2006 11:43 AM
How did they harm the country by publishing the facts about something that was already PUBLIC KNOWLEGDE?
From a report to the UN Security Council in 2002:
“The settlement of international transactions is usually handled through correspondent banking relationships or large-value message and payment systems, such as the SWIFT, Fedwire or CHIPS systems in the United States of America. Such international clearance centres are critical to processing international banking transactions and are rich with payment information. The United States has begun to apply new monitoring techniques to spot and verify suspicious transactions. The Group recommends the adoption of similar mechanisms by other countries.”
An MIT paper about the procedure from 1995:
http://swiss.csail.mit.edu/6.805/articles/money/ota-money-laundering/07ch6.pdf
So to recap, the NYT revealed nothing new. How then was this treason?
Posted by: Anon2
Posted on: June 27, 2006 11:46 AM
Also, I'd ask under what authority and with what credentials you feel you can immediately analyze the effect this article will have on our struggle against Islamic terrorists?
Posted by: Mark
Posted on: June 27, 2006 12:00 PM
The president agrees! He has more credentials than you do, that's for sure.
Posted by: Mike
Posted on: June 28, 2006 12:18 PM
Here's the bitter irony. A couple years ago, a New York Times editorial harshly criticized President Bush for not doing enough to combat terrorists. It said that defeating terrorists required not only having soldiers in the field but also implementing covert intelligence operations, including the control of terrorist funds.
Posted by:
Posted on: July 4, 2006 03:21 PM
Here is another source that outlined the process as early as 2002. It was released by the Federal Reserve Board.
Posted by: Chad
Posted on: July 4, 2006 04:38 PM
The white house asked for the report not to be published. Obviously it was considered a threat to national security.
Posted by:
Posted on: July 4, 2006 05:14 PM
Three sources of the same information have already been listed above, including a link to a Government site, so how did NY Times do anything wrong?