This is nothing less than TREASON by the NYT!!!

Something needs to be done.

the washington post did the same thing

Hey, they skipped the WMD find story altogether.

Who would actually get their news from the NYTimes.

Oh to have Abe Lincoln back in the Oval Office. He routinely rounded up traiterous bastards like this and put them were the sun doesn't shine.

Ann Coulter was right. Tim McVeigh took his truck bomb to the wrong building.

The NYTimes is nothing more then a hotbed of liberal anti american talking points. read at your own risk.

Good advice Steve.

The front page is where the al-NYT puts all of the important information for al Qaeda and their allies.

They wouldn't have even bothered to mention the Miami story, but they think that their taqiyya is more effective when they throw in a little truth.

However, those who consider themselves "enlightened" liberals feel that this news must get out. It would be interesting to see how they would feel if they were face to face with a "Jihadist" or if one of their family members were. Maybe this sounds mean but I feel that's what it would take to wake these clowns up. They can think of their first amendment rights while suffering the will of Allah.

First off the Miami story is fishy. Real fishy. Santorum and Rummy put their tin foil hats on too tight yesterday and all of a sudden there is a terror arrest. Golllly.

I suppose you are probably miffed that Santorum and his "we found the WMDs" claim is not front page?

Miami story reminds me of the Padilla story .... who fishy story, issued at a time the admin needs to change the subject. Remember Padilla ... the guy the US still hasn't charged. The guy they said was going to blow up malls and apartments and then admitted they had nothing on him as far those charges. This sounds like a similar boondoggle.

I checked ... you ranting rightwing lunatics are all wrong, AS USUAL. Get your news first hand and not from the drug addict Limpbaugh and that will happen less. The NYT, the WaPost, USA Today, WSJ ... all were sporting big front page stories on the Miami arrests.

Get a life people. Tune back into reality. You don't have to live inside Ken Mehlman's anus forever (although we all know he likes it).

Forbes covered it too. Kill Steve Forbes! Traitor.

Oh no. So did the Wall Street Journal. Kill all them too. Damn Judasesesess.

What is this country coming to. So did Bloomberg. Isn't Bloomberg a republican?

DFlatts

I was not wrong, but dead on in My posting You rabid frothing lunatic!

914

You should definitely stick to Fox News, especially Hannity. If you want more "real" news, certainly Limbaugh is the way to go. Washington Times is also good.

For those conservatives who held their noses and went to collegs (because you know, colleges are all librul and full of lies), the Weekly Standard offers propaganda in a polysyllabic oeuvre.

But definitely, the bestest place to get news from is all the other blogs. Because, you know, the best source of information always comes from people like yourself.

All those reporters in the NYT don't want anything more than to turn this country over to Osama bin Laden. Beacuse you know, all those liberal, lesbian feminists secretly want to be covered up in Burkas and be spanked by bearded thugs.

DFlatts, take your libruhl, uh, moonbat ass back to your ivory tower. A lot of good that PhD is going to get you. Have you ever seen a Harvard PhD working at the muffler shop?

See...liberals are not capable of honest work.

Since so many of you have stated you don't or won't read the NY Times, and you certainly aren't going to see both sides of the issues in any of these blog posts, here are the reasons TO PUBLISH information about the program:
(Quoting from the TIMES article:

The program, however, is a significant departure from typical practice in how the government acquires Americans' financial records. Treasury officials did not seek individual court-approved warrants or subpoenas to examine specific transactions, instead relying on broad administrative subpoenas for millions of records from the cooperative, known as Swift.
----------

That access to large amounts of sensitive data was highly unusual, several officials said, and stirred concerns inside the administration about legal and privacy issues.

While tight controls are in place, the official added, "The potential for abuse is enormous."
----------

Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified. Some of those officials expressed reservations about the program, saying that what they viewed as an urgent, temporary measure had become permanent nearly five years later without specific Congressional approval or formal authorization
--------

Among the program's safeguards, government officials said, is an outside auditing firm that verifies that the data searches are based on a link to terrorism intelligence. Swift and Treasury officials said they were aware of no abuses. But Mr. Levey, the Treasury official, said one person had been removed from the operation for conducting a search considered inappropriate.
---------

Several people familiar with the Swift program said they believed they were exploiting a "gray area" in the law and that a case could be made for restricting the government's access to the records on Fourth Amendment and statutory grounds. They also worried about the impact on Swift if the program were disclosed.

"There was always concern about this program," a former official said.
--------

I'll stop there, only half way through the article, and will try to get back and post more reasons later.

Still waiting for the reasons why they shouldn't have pubished this story, other than "because Bush and Cheny didn't want them to"....

Lint,

Forbes covered it too. Kill Steve Forbes! Traitor.

Oh no. So did the Wall Street Journal. Kill all them too. Damn Judasesesess.

What is this country coming to. So did Bloomberg. Isn't Bloomberg a republican?

Your post is a little fuzzy. Are you saying the NT didn't break the Finance Surveillance program story? If that's your point, then there must be some conspiracy between the NT, Forbes, and the Wall Street Journal in order for them to all reveal this classified program at the same time. If the NT did break the story, then your point is meaningless, as no harm is done by reprinting a story that's already been published in the NT.

The last few days have truly been a pleasure. In 2002 and 2004 the left thought that their message did not get out. Just a couple of months ago the MSM and many pundits were writing off the weak Republicans in 2006 [flashback 2002/2004]. Now through a series of votes in Congress and events that have occured all over the world and their reactions to these events, the Left is getting their message out. We shall see if the majority of Americans 'get' it in November.

The Lefty comments on the thread above about this 'phony arrest' and how all the idiots are on the Right side of the aisle, all marching to the same beat, agreeing 100% with everything said by the administration, talk radio, and the idiots in a few 'discredited' media outlets are just the ticket to your win in November. You've been more successful that you imagine with this strategy. I encourage you to keep it up.

[/sarcasm]

"Hey, they skipped the WMD find story altogether."

lol

It's reached the point of no return for some people.

Lee,

I'll stop there, only half way through the article, and will try to get back and post more reasons later.

The problem with the reasons the NT gives is that the press is self-appointed and unqualified to judge what is and what is not a vital interest to this nation. How many of the 20 current and former government officials and industry executives were for keeping the program classified? The NT editors don't say, only that some of them "expressed reservations about the program", not that it should be disclosed. We can't even readily get any of this information, so the NT editors could make any claims they want about their reasons. How much weight do you put in unverifiable claims?

Espionage is a serious crime as it can jeopardize people and even the nation. In the past, spies would use drop points to pass on classified information, but there was always the risk of being caught. That's no longer needed as a spy can simply give the information to the NT who can publish it with seeming impunity. The only drawback of this method is that the U.S. government knows what secrets have been compromised. What's to keep the NT from publishing the names of covert agents, or details of a black weapons program? I'm not willing to leave such decisions up to self-appointed partisans just because they work for a news paper.

I think it's time the NYTimes, LATimes and WaPo had their press credentials revoked for a year or two and were on the receiving end of some serious subpoenas.

They purport to be the high-tide mark of American Journalism, yet they act more and more like the British tabloids every day.

What insolent, self-absorbed morons.

How dare the NYT, LAT and WaPo act like the guardians of all that is virtuous and good.

That's the self-proclaimed job of the Fox News and the Weekly Standard.

Jeesus, these darn libruls.

And Lee, don't bother "getting back to us". Not many here care what you think. And take your little can of gasoline with you.

Mac Lorry said:

What's to keep the NT from publishing the names of covert agents, or details of a black weapons program? I'm not willing to leave such decisions up to self-appointed partisans just because they work for a news paper.

And what's to keep the White House from abusing this program? The light of day, thats what.

The White House can still operate this program, but American's have a right to know what their government is doing if their financial records are subject to program that is abusive or has a high potential for abuse.

Has this program been limited to the financial records of only suspected criminals, there wouldn't have been a story here. What's "news" is that the hugh Dick Cheney data vacumn cleaner is running amok again.

DFlatts:
D as in DUMB.

Lee lee:
You are still not signing with your new name-"pucker puss".

Could someone on the left please answer this question:

Why does the NYT etc. get to keep its government informers identity secret BUT the Government does not get to keep its own national security measures secret????

Lee,

And what's to keep the White House from abusing this program? The light of day, thats what.

It seems your point is that we can't trust the highest elected official in the U.S., but we can trust self-appointed partisans.

Has this program been limited to the financial records of only suspected criminals, there wouldn't have been a story here. What's "news" is that the hugh Dick Cheney data vacumn cleaner is running amok again.

First, there's no evidence that this program is running amok and second, if they were already suspected there would be no need for such a program. They are trying to find undercover terrorists to prevent a future attack on this nation. If it's ok for the IRS to inspect all our financial records to collect money, then a program to protect the people of this nation from attack is even more worthy.

Lint,

I see you're back, but without an answer to the question I directed to you. Did you miss it, or is it that you just don't want to engage in a reasoned debate?

No evidence at all that it even exists, Mac. I mean, why trust the NYT on the fact that this program is real?

I still trust the adm. when they first said they weren't doing warranless spying. And I trust them when they said they weren't data mining telecommunications traffic. And I believe them now.

What's the big deal right? I mean, they are simply protecting us, right? I mean, I'd be totally cool with having an NSA guy just hang out at the dinner table, cause, you know, I'm not really a terrorist or anything.

No, Mac. Your question was really rather idiotic. You posed two non-real alternatives, chose to pick one and then pretended to argue for it like it was a question. I saw no reason to get in the middle of the debate you were having with yourself.

Lint and/or Lee:

Again, please answer:

Why does the NYT etc. get to keep its government informers identity secret BUT the Government does not get to keep its own national security measures secret????

Lint,

Your reply sounds like the classic dodge used when someone finds themselves in a logical corner. I'll make it real easy for you this time and only ask one question.

Are you saying the NT didn't break the Finance Surveillance program story?

An intelligent liberal like you should be able to answer that question.

Jesus man. Go Google "1st amendment" and look it up. You can't possibly be this dense.

You can take it for anything you want. Call it a dodge if you like. The fact is that the story was published on the same day by 3 different newspapers under 3 different bylines.

You surely must have the minimal technical skills to go and look it up at the Los Angeles times and Wall street Journal's sites.

WSJ Online is not free. So, if you don't have access to it, pony up a buck and buy a hard copy.

And Mac, it's NYT -- New York Times.

NT was an operating system Microsoft put out in the mid 90's. That stood for New Technology.

Lint, if you'r going to keep coming back, why won't you answer my (Ted's) question?

Lint,

I still trust the adm. when they first said they weren't doing warranless spying. And I trust them when they said they weren't data mining telecommunications traffic. And I believe them now.

Is that what the administration actually said, that the we not doing warrant less spying, or did they say warrants weren't needed?

As for data mining telecommunications traffic, did they say they weren't doing it or that it didn't violate anyone's privacy? Has it even been confirmed yet?

Being you read the NT you should be able to tell us for sure.

Ted

It's called Google. You put in words and it spits back answers.

Try "1st Amendment" or "freedom of the press". You'll learn a lot.

I can see why you may not want to yuse Google though. Brin and Page are liberals. They drive hybrids. Google is in the Bay Area (full of liberals).

Lint,

It's warrantless or warrant less, not warranless.

MacLorry:

It seems your point is that we can't trust the highest elected official in the U.S., but we can trust self-appointed partisans.

What does George Bush have to do with preventing abuses of this program? Do you think he personally is supervising this program, and personally insuring that abuses don't occur? Of course not.

Now, tell me who is supervising this, and ask me if I trust that person.

First, there's no evidence that this program is running amok and second, if they were already suspected there would be no need for such a program. They are trying to find undercover terrorists t