VIDEO: Snow Lashes Out at Media, Suggests NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’
VIDEO: Snow Lashes Out at Media, Suggests NYT Has Undermined Americans’ ‘Right to Live’
President Bush today called the New York Times story revealing the administration’s monitoring of bank records “disgraceful,” and said the decision to publish details of the program “does great harm to the United States of America.”
Press Secretary Tony Snow followed up with another attack at today’s press briefing:
[T]he New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know in some cases might override somebody’s right to live, and whether in fact the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans.
Asked whether the White House attacks on the New York Times represented an effort “to create a chilling effect on media outlets,” Snow responded, “I don’t think so.”
Full transcript below:
SNOW: Well, I’ll tell you what happened is the New York Times clearly was in the lead on this one. It was ahead. And as it was getting ready to publish, other newspapers made inquiries and we asked questions.
But this is one where the New York Times clearly was leading and everybody waited until it posted its piece online to do their own publications.
QUESTION: We’re told the vice president’s going to make similar comments at his appearance today. With the president and the vice president in essence going after the New York Times today, are they trying to create a chilling effect on media outlets that might…
(CROSSTALK)
SNOW: I don’t think so. No, I don’t think so. It’s a very good question, though. If the New York Times decides that it is going to try to assume responsibility for determining which classified secrets remain classified and which don’t, it ought to accept some of the obligations of that responsibility. It ought to be able to take the heat as well.
So the administration certainly is going to lay out its concerns and what it may mean for the safety of the American people and the integrity of the process of developing intelligence that can permit us to track down terrorists and prevent them from killing again.
That’s what this is all about. It’s about what we can do in a time of war.
Traditionally in this country in a time of war members of the press have acknowledged that the commander in chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public. This is a highly unusual departure. It’s interesting; the Times talking about this program having been a departure from previous banking efforts. This is also a departure from the longstanding traditions here in the United States.
So it’s not designed to have a chilling effect. I think if the New York Times wants a spirited debate about it, it’s got it.
But certainly nobody is going to deny First Amendment rights. But the New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public’s right to know in some cases might override somebody’s right to live, and whether in fact the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Just goes to show. As long as this administration thinks it has the power to trample over the right to know what the hell our government is doing to screw us over, like many other freedoms, Freedom of the Press will suffer. Now, lets see how fast the Neocons come running to defend this piece of…err, stuff. ;)
June 26th, 2006 at 2:05 pmAs I stated yesterday, this leak, at a minimum, requires an investigation, because it undermines our country’s ability to defend itself during a time of WAR.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pm“No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 1804.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pmFNC is on red alert over this with all available resources trying to close the NYT for good. It’s funny that in all these discussions the WSJ is never brought up, only the LA Times and NYT, hmmm I wonder why that is……
June 26th, 2006 at 2:10 pmOnce we give the President all the power he says he needs to fight a war, what is there to stop a president from starting a war to get the power he wants?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:11 pm#3 Good post, Buford. Well-timed. Too bad the Republican Party doesn’t hold the Founding Fathers in the same esteem as we.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:12 pmfunny they bring this up. all the information they leaked in the plame case. They are hypocrits.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:14 pmSo, does outting a covert CIA operative “override somebody’s right to live”?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:14 pmHow orweillian of the administration.
We will dictate what we “think” is appropriate for the news prints to run!
In case any of the nimwits didn’t know, 3 papers ran this story one being a heavily conservative one.
I’d love to hear the troop withdrawl spin as well.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:15 pmIsn’t this “shoot the messenger” thing getting a bit old? Whenever they get caught breaking the law it’s always the messenger (ie, press, whistleblower, etc) at fault, not the lawbreakers. Why isn’t everyone wise to this by now?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:15 pmThis administration is violating the constirution and has been, reports have stated, before 9/11. I applaud NYT’s reporting efforts in outing these illegal acts.
SnowJob is nothing more than W’s talking parrot. A real parrot would have more credibility though.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:16 pmit does great harm, but apparently only when the leak is NOT coming from inside the White House…
June 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pmAre Democrats going to defend the press? Are they going to go that extra mile to rally support for our Constitution? Maybe while they’re at it press for a definition of success in this so-called “War on Terror”?
No.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:19 pmI really don’t understand the drama, given that this knowledge was PUBLIC SINCE 2002. Is anyone else aware of this? Is this credible?
If this is true, and it certainly seems to be, then the whole issue is in fact a non-issue, given that terrorists had access to this information for four years now.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:20 pmSo…this is undermining Americans’ “right to live”, but 2,500 American servicemen that have died fighting an unjust war is “just a number”.
Good to see that the White House is getting their money’s worth out of Tony Snow.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:21 pmSnow is an IDIOT!! Heckuva job, Snowflake!!
June 26th, 2006 at 2:21 pmQuick, someone tell Joe Wilsona nd Valerie Plame!…
Z.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:21 pmI hope if and when this ends that Center for American Progress and Thinkprogress and all the intelligent folks who blog here remember that the Democrats did the absolute minimal in defending our Constitution.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pmRepublicans are cowards.
They like to talk tough about the War on Terror, but the truth is that the vague threat of brown person with a gun or a bomb is enough for them to hand over all their hard-earned liberties to an adminstration who promises to keep them safe and warm.
The true Americans are those who bravely face the threat of terrorism while refusing to give away the freedoms our verterans and soldiers fought so hard to protect.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pmHere we go again.
I’d like the rightwingers to explain how George Bush’s many words to the public about our efforts at tracking terrorists have not endangered us. He certainly doesn’t have a problem talking to the public about it when he sees fit. But damn the press if they emit as much as a whisper.
Glenn Greenwald pointed out a few of these instances. Details here. I continue to post this info awaiting an honest response. Haven’t gotten one so far.
Highlights:
George Bush, telling terrorists about how we use “roving wiretaps” to eavesdrop on their calls -Columbus, Ohio – June 9, 2005.
George Bush, in 2004, telling terrorists that we are engaging in notice-less “sneak and peak” searches of their apartments – Hershey, Pennsylvania, April 19, 2004.
George Bush, alerting terrorists to changes in our techniques for eavesdropping on their cell phone calls – Baltimore, Maryland, July 20, 2005.
George Bush, alerting terrorists to the fact that we are eavesdropping on their telephone calls – Baltimore, Maryland, July 20, 2005.
George Bush, in 2004, telling terrorists that we monitor them by tracing their “money trails” – Hershey, Pennsylvania, April 19, 2004.
George Bush, telling terrorists how the Government monitors their computer communications and obtains their e-mails – Columbus, Ohio, June 9, 2005.
George Bush, detailing the threat priorities of the Homeland Security Department – Columbus, Ohio, July 20, 2005.
George Bush, detailing security measures taken against threats to American seaports – Columbus, Ohio, July 20, 2005.
Finally, Glenn provides this information:
…the Editors of National Review — before the Times ever breathed a word about the President’s eavesdropping “program” — damaging national security and helping Al Qaeda by telling terrorists that we monitor their phone calls, use roving wiretaps, examine their library records, use “sneak-and-peak” searches of their apartments, and read their e-mails.
He continues: Doesn’t President Bush and National Review realize that “discussing th(ese) program(s) is helping the enemy” because “the discussion about how we try to find them will enable them to adjust”?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:24 pm#13 Calm
June 26th, 2006 at 2:24 pmOne can hope! We need to keep the pressure on Bush supporters to justify why we went into Iraq and, more timely, what measureable objectives need to be met to define “victory” which will allow our soldiers to come home and the rest of us to “keep” the rights that are being suspended. NO SOLDIER LEFT BEHIND
Even more evidence that Snow was a hack journalist at best. Real jounalists seek the truth, they don’t suppress it.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:24 pmchildren, settle down, back to your seats …
We had an investigation into the Valerie Plame complaint, now lets have an investigation of the New York Times – I bet ole Pinch’s buttcheeks are clinching over this one.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:25 pmSNOW: and whether in fact the publications of these could place in jeopardy the safety of fellow Americans
June 26th, 2006 at 2:26 pmYeah, it sucks when somebody is spying on you, right, Tony?
I wonder what the liberal reaction would have been if say the NYT or similar paper had disclosed during WWII that we had broken the Japanese code or released the place and date of the planned D-Day invasion? See, I see no difference in what they are doing to destroy our nation during A TIME OF WAR. GET IT? WE ARE AT WAR. THEY ARE COMMITTING TREASON AND SHOULD BE TRIED FOR IT!
June 26th, 2006 at 2:26 pmI’d bet my last falafel that Pinchy Sulzberger roots for the enemy – not that he’s anti-American – it just makes a good story.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:26 pmIs the “think long and hard” doctrine in the Bill of Rights? Or *wtf*?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:26 pmThose who would trade a little liberty for a little security deserve neither.
Give me liberty or give me death.
The only thing we have to fear…is fear itself.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:27 pmI love the fact that they want to protect us.
But who, in the name of the LORD, will protect us from the “protectors.”
(Hint: I used to think it was the FISA court and the Congress… but not any more.)
June 26th, 2006 at 2:27 pm#2 – Uhhh Jason? Please cite for us the Declaration of War that was made by the House of Representatives & what date that declaration was made.
The House didn’t declare war. And if the House doesn’t declare war, you, nor anyone else can claim the technical status of WAR. I can’t believe we still have to explain this to you guys, EVERY TIME!!!! Maybe you’re just plain stupid? Have you considered posting over at Redstain? They’d love your limited cognative skills.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:28 pmReply to #18:
There is a well-known and oft-quoted quote out there (don’t know exactly who to attribute it to):
¨All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Now, I don’t know about the Democrats being ‘good men’, but one thing is indisputable: they have indeed done nothing to stem the tide of fascism that is currently eroding away our civil rights, and for that inaction, they are every bit as accountable as the Republicans.
I, for one, have lost all faith in not only our elected officials, but in our very system of government itself. All this can only end very badly for everyone concerned.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pmSo when the Bush administration loses control of its ability to control the media, when the media doesn’t want to do the bidding of the Bush administration (which it’s been doing a pretty good job of over the last five years anyway), the administration attacks it.
Nice to see those Bush Republican smear attacks working on the free press.
Nice to see the trolls and right wingers defending the attack on our civil rights.
Nice to see this country continue to slide toward a dictatorship.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pmPEOPLE. This is a NON-ISSUE. Again, the information that the Times revealed was made public in 2002. So you’re really just letting yourselves be manipulated by the right-wingers if you don’t bother to point this out. Don’t let that happen!
June 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pmThis after our drunken coward of a leader g.w.bush threw a tantrum today on the news channels.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pmI can now understand why he was always afraid of being called a wuss.
I wonder what the liberal reaction would have been if say the NYT or similar paper had disclosed during WWII that we had broken the Japanese code or released the place and date of the planned D-Day invasion? See, I see no difference in what they are doing to destroy our nation during A TIME OF WAR. GET IT? WE ARE AT WAR. THEY ARE COMMITTING TREASON AND SHOULD BE TRIED FOR IT!
Comment by Randy — June 26, 2006 @ 2:26 pm
hey Randy, I know for a fact I’ve heard that comparison somewhere before, oh wait…I know now….on Fox News this weekend! Come up with your own flawed comparisons next time smart guy.
BTW breaking the Japanese code didn’t violate the Constitution and therefore wouldn’t have been reported. That’s the difference.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:32 pmJason,
What war? A fictional war based on a fictional story that a group of fictional terrorists attacked us? The US government has spent a fortune spreading the myth that its “Al Queda” creation attacked us and the balloon has been deflating for some time. No amount of money is going to keep it afloat. The parade will be over soon. Good try, though, promoting the investigation of the leak.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:32 pm#2
Which declared war is this that you are talking about and how does it pertain to the power of the executive branch and allow it to bypass the laws and courts?
I’ll wait for your answer…..a long time.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:33 pmReply to #34:
What tantrum? Can you post a link?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:33 pmYeah, Tony, supress liberties, begin to burn books, make everybody a potential suspect of terrorism. We are at war, right? That is the country you deserve: Fearland.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pmHow’s that Fear working for you, Randy? Do you shit yourself every time you walk past a brown person?
Do you piss your pants when a car backfires?
Are you afraid of leaving your house in the morning? Of leaving your bed?
How is it to be so afraid all the time?
We have an enemy, the enemy is winning Randy. They are forcing us to change our way of life, which is what they want. They want us to be afraid, to do what we are doing. They are winning Randy.
The comparisons you cite are not apt analogies. This isn’t breaking the Japanese code or talking about when/where Operation Overlord would be launched, this is the President invading your personal life. Invading your home. Rifling through your private documents, your private phone calls, your transactions.
Your President is doing so much more to destroy our way of life than the terrorists ever could. He is concentrating unprecedented power in the executive branch, reducing the legislative branch to a rubber stamp. He is undermining the power of the courts. He is, in short, acting like a dictator. And that, Randy, undermines our way of life.
Fear is not what Americans do. We are not afraid. Stand up, and Be a Man Randy. Stop being Afraid.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pmRANDY – I’m pretty sure the Liberal, patriotic reaction to your hypothetical would have been the same as you are hearing today. If the leadership of this country is breaking laws and violating the Constitution in the name of war or national security, they should be exposed and held accountable.
We are nation of laws, not men. If Bush is breaking laws, the public has the right to know. The NYT and LAT are doing their patriotic duty.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:36 pmSo much drama. Show should be a playwright.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmRe #2:
Well, for one thing, Jason, we are not at war, you ninny. What we are “at” is a misguided congressionally authorized act of aggression based on lies and fabrications.
Every major news outlet in the country ought to be publishing every secret operation this neofascist bunch is doing. But like you, they are cowardly, and won’t.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmlil like the pot callin the kettle black?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmIf by some miracle, the dems do gain some seats this year and somehow retake the White House in ‘08 and after their victory party, there most likely will be an attack by Al Qaeda in ‘09, those who survive can just call the NYT and thank them for exposing how just Republicans are fighting the war on terror.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmRandy (#25):
We’re at war? Since when?
According to the US Constitution (that nasty document that always gets in the way) and the War Powers Act, only CONGRESS can declare war.
Hmmm… it was WWII, I believe, the last time that Congress declared war.
Therefore…. we are NOT at war.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmOne point that should be made crystal clear for everyone concerned:
Lots of right-wingers point towards Congress’ granting of emergency war powers to the President as justification for all these wholesale violations of civil rights. The problem with that justification is that the Constitution (and amendments therof) is, and remains, the highest law of the land, and no mere Congressional resolution can contravene it. If the resolution is in fact in conflict with the Constitution, it is by definition unconstitutional. Period.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmThat was pretty mild. Nothing groundbreaking there.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:39 pmWhile our friends randy and mighty aphrodite are so hot and bothered by what the NYT did, I wonder why they aren’t foaming at the mouth to get the person who gave the NYT the information? Or do they think that the NYT has a mole working in the Bush administration under “deep cover”? Actually, the more I think about it, I don’t really care what they think. They feel that a president who makes up his own laws and feels that he is not bound by Acts of Congress should be allowed to conduct an illegal war any way he sees fit.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:39 pmIf by some miracle, the dems do gain some seats this year and somehow retake the White House in ‘08 and after their victory party, there most likely will be an attack by Al Qaeda in ‘09, those who survive can just call the NYT and thank them for exposing how just Republicans are fighting the war on terror.
Comment by Randy — June 26, 2006 @ 2:38 pm
Ok and if that turns out to be false, will you go into exile on St. Elba?
The War on Terra is a metaphor, I hope your children are smarter than you.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pm>
Since when is shredding the constitution “defending” the country?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pmSome of you guys don’t get it… if we abandon the freedoms that define America, we have lost the “war”.
Hundreds of thousands of soldiers have died to protect America’s freedom in the last 230 years. Please don’t let their sacrific be in vain.
I know most of us aren’t overjoyed with the lack of Democrats in Congress being able to do anything with this administration, but….tripmaster monkey….why are you blaming democrats on par with republicans? Have you read the news at all? Democrats have been outvoted by the majority party on too many occasions. Who’s fault is that? It’s the fault of the morons who vote for republicans.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pmEveryone needs to back and read and/or listen to Bush’s speech to the Nation following 9/11. It was 9/21, I believe.
Bush says to the Nation, “I will do what is legal and right.”
June 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pmpesf..so if…the AG prosecutes any one for whatever with respect to “crimes”, are they crimes if in fact the war was maufactured?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pmI mean this is insane now…(feingold)…a white house under siege for a gigantic miscue..alice in wonder landesq where what is isnt?
Reporting the facts is just reporting the facts. Did the NY Times make up these facts? So no one in the government has any equal culpability to this act of undermining American’s safety? I think more revelations are coming and this is just the Administrations way to stop the bleeding and do a little character assassination to lessen the damage.Kill the messenger if you will.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pmRelax. We will all be much safer in an oppressive police state. Freedoms, not so much.
-GSD
June 26th, 2006 at 2:44 pmI am sure this fall they will tell us that our “right to live” is more important than our right to have votes counted in the 2006 midterm elections.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:44 pmI am still waiting for the GUN RECORDS monitoring story to come out….
Then we will see how far the RW cheerleading squad will go to defend this man and his admin…..
June 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pmBush and Bin Laden’s polling numbers track each other very closely — when one goes up, the other goes down, etc. Neither were doing very much or very well publically until the other came on the scene.
Bin Laden has been pushing Bush’s buttons successfully since 9/11, and now we are witnesssing the slow death of democracy in America. Bin Laden has scored a complete victory over America by manipulating Bush into reducing the Constitutional rights of the average Acitizen. Nationally we’re are becoming a shadow of ourselves and whether there’s another terrorist attack or not seems kind of beside the point.I can only hope that we snap out of it and return to our former inner greatness.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pmRANDY’s ignorance and fear are, sadly, typical of Bush supproters. As long as Bush is keeping them safe from scary brown people, no laws should get in his way. Blank check, all the way.
“If Bush wants to conduct house-to-house searches looking for terror clues, no problem – I got nothing to hide”, they’ll say.
Meanwhile, they’ll praise the bombing of the brown people in Iraq and Afghanistan who ‘want to kill us for our freedoms’.
Anyone else see the irony?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pmAs if the press finally revealing warantless searches of bank records is any more surprising that warrantless searches of voice and data communications. Do you really think that bin Laden and the rest of the religious nut cases who want to attack us have been recently using these electronic means to communicate and move money around? They stopped that long ago – the only people being spied on now are domestic dissenters and those that question the Bush admistration, i.e., the rest of the world.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:46 pmTraditionally in this country in a time of war members of the press have acknowledged that the commander in chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public.
Tony Snowjob
Thats and excellent point.
And when we’re at war, we’ll let you know Tony. In the meantime we opt for a free and open press.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:46 pmThis is nothing but a well orchestrated move by the administration to act outraged at the so called liberal media to gain the higher ground, when in all likelyhood it was purposefully leaked, probably by none other than Bushes brain KKK Rove.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:46 pmThe true strength and power of this nation does not lie in its laws, every nation has law, some good, some not so good.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:47 pmThe strength of this nation lies in its truth.
The real problem this administration has is, it has been wrong and inept so many times now and not forth coming, that I feel near every aspect of what it does is suspect and there fore truth shall set us free.
The NYT undermines the “right to live.” Another memorable quote from Mr. Snow.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:48 pmApparently the overdramatic response reflects the White House’s anger at having been caught again in trashing the constutution.
For 230 years, the constitution has seen the US through many sad and dangerous times, but BushCo has decided that they alone are arbiters of all that is America.
The “deciders” have decided that the constitution is a nuisance standing in their way of fascism. They declarer that free press (the fourth estate) acting in its role as watchdog over the government is traitorous – why? is it because the lies, deception and duplicity of this administration has been exposed on many occasions. BushCo would prefer to have an American Pravda.
Actually the press has been complicit with BushCo in the past: the spreading of false information before the Iraq invasion; in holding back information for one year on BushCo spying on Americans without a warrant because if they had published their news when they got it, it might have affected Bush’s “victory” in 2004.
The brazen attempt to control the free press, and the unchecked abuse of the constitution by BushCo is shocking.
No investigation needed. If you just click on the link Big Mike provided, you will see that the UN Al Qaeda and Taliban Monitoring Group has already made this information public in December of 2002.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:49 pmGeez with all this outrage, you would think the President sat and read “My Pet Goat” while the nation was being attacked…..oh wait…..doh.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:52 pmSoon to come: “The Right to Believe”! Of course, if you don’t “Believe Properly”, we have some piles of wood over here for you to step into and “meditate on the consequences of your erroneous beliefs”. Where’s a good Torquemada just when you really need one?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:52 pmChildren, settle down …
The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the Executive branch’s restrictions of civil liberties during a TIME OF WAR (pertaining to WWII), and will again, should each and everyone of these issues be brought before SCOTUS after we win the WAR ON TERROR. You know this will be the result as surely as I do.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pm#60
First, if you don’t like America, then leave! There are a few countries you could move to that love the way you think. Secondly, I am not a racist but it sounds like you are. Thirdly, tell me how have you been personally affected by the Bush administration. I hear many people claim their rights have been violated but when it comes right down to it, no one can supply specific examples. I wish liberals would stop trying to defeat Bush and spend more time trying to develop that agenda they are always talking about. No strike that. Continue to bash Bush, it helps the Republicans to continue to win elections.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:54 pmEarth to Republican morons: terrorists, criminals (including republican lobbyists), and rogue regimes (if they are minimally intelligentl), already know that their money is being tracked and they take steps to hide it. In fact, it has been tracked for decades and the tracking authority was enhanced in the so-called Patriot Act.
So get a grip and get a clue.
The question you should be asking is this: what is Bush hiding from the American public about his actions that he doesn’t want us to know? When that question is answered we’ll know the reasons for the unprecedented secrecy employed by this administration.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:54 pmI think it’s time we start using surveillance and every other means to monitor and spy on public officials 24/7. – and they’re family.
See how they like it.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:55 pmRandy: “First, if you don’t like America, then leave!” – - Wow, time warp to the ’60s, man.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pmHaven’t we been hearing since 9/11 that Treasury was monitoring bank transactions to attempt to catch terrorist activity? I don’t see what the big deal about the Times article is anyway, are there any terrorists out there who don’t think we’re trying to detect them? You’d have to be pretty stupid, like, say, the suspected terrorists in Miami, to not be aware that a large transfer of funds is going to catch someone’s attention.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:57 pm#67
Yes, and Mr. Gore would have continued to bore us with his slide show on GW.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:57 pmImpeach Bush yourself! This is much more than just a petition.
There’s a little known and rarely used clause of the in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.
That’s where we come in. In addition to the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.
You can initiate the impeachment process yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information in the blanks (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in.
http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html
More information on the precedent for submitting an impeachment
memorial, and the House Rules on this procedure, can also be found at
the above address.
If you have any doubts that Bush has committed crimes warranting
impeachment, read this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/evidence/
If you’re concerned that impeachment might not be the best strategy
at this point, read the bottom of this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org
“I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we’re really talking about peace.”
Bush, June 18, 2002
“War is Peace.”
June 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmBig Brother in George Orwell’s 1984
I am sure that comprehensive and complete spying on our financial transactions and bank accounts has to be very effective at stopping Muslim extremists.
After all, its not like they are gonna put their money in PIGGY BANKS!
June 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmSecrecy is the start of tyranny – Heinlein
June 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmHow much longer are we going to allow King George and all these Tory Loyalists to spit on the Constitution and the rights of all patriotic Americans?
June 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pmPoor scared Randy. You should maybe go back to bed little one, we will wake you when it is safe.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:59 pmGeorge W. Bush
Hershey Lodge and Convention Center
Hershey, Pennsylvania
WhiteHouse.gov
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040419-4.html
Looks like Bush is the guy who let the cat outta the bag on this one. Let’s start the investigation.
KILL THE MESSENGER NOW!
June 26th, 2006 at 3:00 pmReply to #60:
First, if you don’t like America, then leave!
You seem confused. It’s not that we don’t like America…it’s that we don’t like what Dubya & Company is doing to America. BIG difference.
I hear many people claim their rights have been violated but when it comes right down to it, no one can supply specific examples.
If you can’t find specific examples, Randy, it’s because you’re not looking. I don’t know whether that’s from laziness or design, but it amounts to the same either way. Open your eyes…about ten minutes of Googling will supply you with hundreds of examples…that is, if you’re intellectually honest enough to accept the facts available to everyone.
Continue to bash Bush, it helps the Republicans to continue to win elections.
If you sincerely think anyone has ‘won’ an election since 2000, you’re even more deluded than you appear.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:01 pmdamn, now randy thinks that those of us who don’t support unbridaled totalitarianism should up and leave the country… Ouch!
yo, nazi randy…..how bout you move to a country that allows its leaders to do whatever it wants, keeps it’s opponents in jail, requires you to abide by a specific religion….yea, you know….I’m asking you to go live in Saudi Arabia. You’d love it there…Just get used to saying Allah Akabar.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:02 pm#69 Jason
June 26th, 2006 at 3:04 pm“Win” the war on terror – what does that mean? Does anyone believe that terror will ever end as long as humans have the capacity for hurting others for their own desires? Then, when will the excecutive branch grant us back the civil liberties that are supposed to be ours inherently, inalienably? Further, its time to stop the analogy with WWII. I wasn’t alive then and if I was I still might very well have the same objections to the suspension of civil liberties. We didn’t declare war against “aerial bombing” after Pearl Harbor but against the Japanese who perpetrated it and we didn’t declare war formally against anyone in this mess. Our enemies in WWII engaged in “regime change” of their own, taking over other countries. We were right to protect Kawait against Saddam. We were wrong to take over a soverign country.
This whole “controversey” is undoubtedly designed by the Administration itself – all designed to give GW loyalists a way to attack dissent.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:05 pmThis whole issue is just another example of this administration feeding red meat to it wingnut base (e.g. see Jason Hendlers comment above). Attack the left for lack of patriotism in a time of WAR. How is it that the yellowest, weakest, crybaby element of our population thinks they are in charge of protecting us? If it isn’t the terrorists then it is homosexuals or who knows what… they’re scared of their shadows. Is there anything that these crybabies aren’t afraid of?
June 26th, 2006 at 3:06 pmWhen one person’s rights are violated, everybody’s rights are violated. This country is illegally detaining people without bringing them to court to face any charges. This is not simply a violation of their civil rights, but yours, too. By letting the government get away with this, you give them the right to do the same thing to you. Just because you think you’ve done nothing wrong, it doesn’t mean you have nothing to worry about. What if you look somebody who did something heinous? Do you think the government should be allowed to lock you up without ever giving you a day in court? Your president thinks he has that right.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:06 pm#87
You are forgetting one thing. These people are not American citizens. There are enemy combatants. Why would we ever give these detainees a trial is beyond me. Our enemy does not follow the Geneva convention. If Bush were locking up all Arabic Americans like Roosevelt did to the Japanese Americans during WWII, I would say you have an argument, but he’s not. Again, I say, you have the freedom in this country to leave if you don’t like it.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:13 pmRandy “If you dont like America, then leave”.
Never saw that one coming from a loyal, bed-wetting republican’t.
Really, I think you Randy, and the rest of the bedwetters motto should be “We don’t like America, so we’re going to change it by destroying the 2 branches of governence that we dont dominate – the judiciary and the media”
Reall, bro, YOU are the one who should leave. They got a nice country I’ve heard of where dissenters are jailed, military duty is not voluntary, the government has ultimate, one-party power and diplomacy is never truly an option. They call it North Korea. Go there. Now.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:13 pm#84 PLC
“We didn’t declare war against “aerial bombing†after Pearl Harbor but against the Japanese who perpetrated it and we didn’t declare war formally against anyone in this mess.”
Right on! No offense, but it is nice to hear good sense from a self-declared Christian who is not an apologist for the Orwellian Right.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:13 pmThis is just one more example of the hypocritical behavior of the Bush regime and it’s lapdogs in Congress. Like Nixon, it;s not about the impeachable offenses commited by Bush and his thugs, it’s about the press and their evil deeds in exposing them. One day soon Bush’s deep throat will emerge, disgusted and disgraced by these criminals and the whole mess will unravel before their eyes. If it happens before the election, the republicans embrace it in survival mode, if after, their all done for. The 2008 election will make the 1970’s look like a minor revolt.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:14 pmC’mom Randy and Jason. Answer posts 20, 65, and 82.
Still waiting.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:14 pmDid any of these guys study Civics, I mean in this country. Did they all sleep through “The US Constitution” lectures and fail the tests in high school, then get daddy to have them pass the course? I mean, there’s always room for oddball interpretations of any written document but come on, this is ridiculous.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:15 pmRandy,
Time to wise up bud. If anbody needs to leave this country, it’s those scared liitle guys with piss running down their legs ready to give up their civil liberties because of fear. If spying on citizens is ok in your little mind, why not random checkpoints, house searches and cavity searches. Or to paraphrase Tony “Is a person’s right to have his cavity unsearched worth someone else’s right to live?”
It’s a nonsensical scare tactic. Fear works best for those weaklings who don’t have control of their lives and are willing to let Daddy keep them safe.
Bush has made the world a much more dangerous place for all of us, especially our children. Think for yourself please.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:15 pm#70 Randy
June 26th, 2006 at 3:16 pmRights of life, liberty, and happiness denied to anyone (not just Americans, if you really read what our founding fathers wrote) is an assault on the rights of all Americans. Those who cannot support the rights of all others are not supportive of the American values (and maybe they should move to another country). I am tired of being accused of being anti-American because I disagree with an action of elected officials. A parent who loves his or her child will chastise and try to correct that child if he or she does something against the parent’s values. America is my child. Our leaders work for us, not the other way around.
No, Mr. Snow, it is your boss who seeks to undermine Americans’ ability to live. Open your eyes, republican moron.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:19 pmso…following this administration’s logic…cannot report on taxes, because that reveals secrets for the war on poverty, cannot talk about the multi-million dollar drug busts because that deflates the war on drugs…these guys are a joke, who will stand up to them and call them out, why did no reporter ask if snow if the americans right to live is just a number, or that if the administration starts fighting with the press it is just hugging (insert deregatory name here)…i hope, that america steers itself back on course the founding fathers plotted…right now its so far right, its just going in circles
June 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pmso…following this administration’s logic…cannot report on taxes, because that reveals secrets for the war on poverty, cannot talk about the multi-million dollar drug busts because that deflates the war on drugs…these guys are a joke, who will stand up to them and call them out, why did no reporter ask if snow if the americans right to live is just a number, or that if the administration starts fighting with the press it is just hugging (insert deregatory name here)…i hope, that america steers itself back on course the founding fathers plotted…right now its so far right, its just going in circles
June 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pmsorry for the double post (i thought that is impossible???)
June 26th, 2006 at 3:22 pm#95
Try telling that to the families of the 3000 Americans who perished on 9/11. IMHO, liberals are gutless and would never stand up this enemy. I’m glad that George Bush is our President and its obvious that the majority of Americans do as well given the results from the ‘04 election. See, this will be the defining issue of our time and until the democratic party wrestles its way free from the likes of Dean and the liberal left, they will never occupy the White House, which is ok by me.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:22 pmRandy,
The president declared these people “enemy combatants” (or his designee did) and that alone was enough to deny them a right to challenge that determination in court (according to the president). Whether or not they are enemy combatants or soldiers in a uniformed army, our signature on the Geneva Conventions means that we will give everyone picked up on a battlefield their day in court. (No amount of right-wing spin is going to change that fact.) They have a right to challenge that designation whether or not you think they should have that right. It would appear, Randy, that it is YOU who doesn’t like living in America.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:22 pmWell Randy you certainly landed in enemy territory here at ThinkProgress , mabey you should try ThinkRegress.org , you’ll get along good there .
June 26th, 2006 at 3:23 pmThe War on Terror is as much of a war as the War on Drugs. That is to say, it’s no War at all. Just a money/power grab.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pmThese people are not American citizens. There are enemy combatants.
Well, now….isn’t that convenient? They aren’t American citizens, nor are they prisoners of war (the ‘war on terror’ notwithstanding). Designating them ‘enemy combatants’ makes them non-persons, stripping them of all rights and allowing our government to do whatever it pleases with them.
Why would we ever give these detainees a trial is beyond me.
As I’m sure it would be. Hint: we’re supposed to be be better than this.
Our enemy does not follow the Geneva convention.
That’s no excuse, and you know it.
If Bush were locking up all Arabic Americans like Roosevelt did to the Japanese Americans during WWII, I would say you have an argument, but he’s not.
Why should he bother locking them up? It’s far cheaper to institute blanket surveillance, and this way, he can keep tabs on everyone, rather than just Arabic Americans.
Again, I say, you have the freedom in this country to leave if you don’t like it.
And again, I say that I will not be driven from my country by a tin-plated aspiring dictator with delusions of grandeur. I’ll stay and fight, thanks.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pmSo RAndy,
We are in Iraq because of the 9/11?
Real simple….You are a f**ing idiot.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pmOh RANDY… poor little terrified RANDY.
It’s actually those who oppose Bush who love America. We’re willing to risk the threat of terrorism before we’ll sacrifice our freedoms and liberites for the sake of security. You are not able to say the same.
Remember the cold war? When the threat of total nuclear annihilation was very real? We didn’t allow unwarranted eavesdropping and other Constitutional atrocities then, so why should we allow such things now then the threat of terror is vague, at best.
It’s also laughable that you want us to give specific examples of how Bush has violated our civil liberties, but you are also supportive of keeping these programs secret to the extent that those exposing them should be prosecuted for treason.
It’s actually YOU, the ones who like the idea a fascist dictator micromanaging most aspects of your lives in return for a promise of security that need to leave America for some other place. We real Americans are just fine fighting for the ideals that make this country great, and we don’t want you cowards here running her into the cround.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pm#90 Winston Smith
June 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pmAbsolutely no offense taken, in fact I’m honored. I chose the PLC monikor very purposefully. I am sick and tired of the neocons hijacking and distorting my faith, claiming the Bible as only theirs to interpret, and justifying their political “rendering” by reference to religion. I am sick and tired of being labeled “unpatriotic” because I vehemently disagree with this pathetic administration. About three or four years ago, I stopped being my church congregation’s “token”, quiet liberal and began forcefully voicing my progressive views – even in Bible Study classes. What really surprised me (although I guess it should not have) was how many other liberal/progressive members of the congregation there are and how they became willing to speak up then, too. I fear for religious freedom (and I include atheism as a “religion” broadly) if progressive Christians don’t speak up to balance the argument.
The NYT’s actions lately have been seditious an minimum, perhaps even treasonous. The creeps should be held up to the American people as objects of scorn, loathing and disdain.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:28 pmHey, Randy I’m a liberal and have 15 years in the military. So I guess your statement that “liberals are gutless and would never stand up to this enemy” is simple hatemongering. One thing I have learned in the military is you don’t go after the wrong target, or you aren’t fighting the enemy.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:28 pmExecutive overreach is a fact, and the NYT is merely reporting the fact. Executive overreach is part of the emerging fascist state in the US. Every once in a while, the NYT can imply that this trend is taking place. The bank records story illustrates this trend nicely. Wayne Madsen has been reporting for months that the numerous data thefts are part of a US government-managed effort to support the Total Information Awareness project once coordinated by one of our favorite felons, John Poindexter. Although operating under a different name, the project goal is to do exactly what the title implies, and all of us are subject to rampant invasions of privacy as a result.
Welcome to Bush’s America, folks. Welcome to Fascist America.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:29 pm#102
Thanks for pointing that out. Look, I don’t care if I liked or not, that is not important. What is more important is to be on the right side of this isssue and history will prove Bush correct here just as they did Reagan on the downfall of the Soviet Union and an end to the Cold War.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:30 pm#108 And should the people who gave the NYT (and LAT) that classified info also “be held up to the American people as objects of scorn, loathing and disdain”?
June 26th, 2006 at 3:31 pmNever mind that this information has been available since 2002. The NYT revealed nothing new.
Move along, folks. Just another rightwing distraction.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:32 pm.
listen… if you dont let the government secretly spy on you, YOU WILL F*CKING DIE. NOW GO AWAY, CONSUME AND BE SCARED.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:35 pmThey Are Called Hawalas…
Hawala. Look it up. Remember how important hawalas were in the aftermath of 9/11? Just another one of those tough, tedious, very difficult efforts in the war on terror largely forgotten by this Administration, except when it suits their short-term part…
June 26th, 2006 at 3:37 pmThis attack on the Media is yet another maneuver against democracy.
I strongly believe that far right wingers that are controlling this nation believe democracy is dangerous, and cannot be trusted. They believe the great American experiment of a government controlled by the people is dead; a failed experiment. It was merely a theory that to them is proven to not work correctly; when the people of a nation make demands of its leaders, right wingers feel like they’re being oppressed by an ignorant population; right wingers believe their judgement is all that is important, and their ability to govern, which they apparently inherited from their rich parents, should not be questioned.
This is why they claim to not pay attention to the polls; their conservative base sees this as resolute; the blind trust of the conservative public longs for the hierarchy of conservative government to make decisions for them without consulting the people.
This is also why the conservatives have no care for the constitution and can break it so easily; the constitution is a document of the people, and the people do not matter in conservative government, only the judgement of the conservative heirarchy.
Why else would they not pay attention to polls if it wasn’t because they don’t believe the public’s opinions mattered? To them, the only way the public matters is how it is manipulated through public relations stunts. The reaction to the policy of conservative government is irrelevent to the conservatives. Public opinion is something that is managed.
But to get back to my point, when the media reports on the illegal actions of this administration, it is offensive to conservatives, once again, because our opinion (and the founding fathers’ opinions) certainly don’t matter to these people. The democratic body shouldn’t know the truth because we’re sopposed to be believing the myths the conservative public relations organisations give to us, and when these reports by the media are published, the facade falls a little bit more, and those who are looking and thinking critically see how conservative government has hoodwinked the public and the constitution, and has eroded our experiment in democracy a little bit more.
-Dave M.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:39 pm#116 Good post, Dave M.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:43 pm#115:
Agreed. If the administration was actually serious about tracking the financial activity of terrorists, we’d be hearing more about this…but the simple fact is that this latest violation of our privacy, just like the warrantless wiretapping and collection of phone records, is not directed at the terrorists at all, but is targeting the American citizenry.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:44 pmWhy does Randy hate America so???
June 26th, 2006 at 3:45 pmGet a JOB randy. You’ve been bloviating here all morning. Most of us work for a living. I’m tired of supporting deadbeats like you!
June 26th, 2006 at 3:45 pmTHE UNDERLYING REASONS FOR WAR HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SIMPLE-SOMEBODY WANTS WHAT YOU HAVE OR DOESN’T LIKE WHAT YOU DO.UNLESS BOTH THESE REASONS ARE ELIMINATED (HIGHLY UNLIKELY, CONSIDERING HUMANS THRU HISTORY) THEN WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE TERRORISTS AND WARS.IF THESE WARS ARE INEVITABLE THAN WE SHOULD JUST GIVE UP ALL OUR RIGHTS NOW AND STOP BEING AFRAID, BECAUSE WE KNOW OUR PRESENT ADMINISTRATION CAN BE TRUSTED TO PROTECT US.I MEAN, WE’VE HAD 5 YEARS TO SEE HOW PROTECTED WE ARE AND HOW CAPABLE THIS ADMINISTRATION IS.RIGHT!
June 26th, 2006 at 3:45 pmRight to know versus right to live. Does that same arguement stand for the operatives who were working in Iran with Valerie Plame? I just want to find out how far the hypocricy goes.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:46 pm“What is more important is to be on the right side of this isssue and history will prove Bush correct here just as they did Reagan on the downfall of the Soviet Union and an end to the Cold War.”
ROFLMFAO! Yeah, the Soviet Union collapsed because of Reagan…. It had nothing to do with the fact that they were bankrupt and corrupt (sort of like the current state of our government).
Reagan was a p.o.s. just like Bush jr. He ignored AIDS, started a war on drugs that has only strengthened the drug dealers and suppliers of this country while weakening everyones civil liberties (must be a Republican thing, taking away civil liberties, that is), gave Contra terrorists weapons secretly, sold WMD’s to Sadaam (and many others) and slept through half of his 8 years in office. But I guess none of that is as horrifying as a blowjob, or as rolling up your sleeves and being passionate.
So yeah, youre right Randy, History will show us that Bush was just as much, or probably more of a shitty president than Ronald “I don’t know, mommy” Reagan.
Welcome to the reality based community, bubble-boy.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:48 pmWhen did congress declare war?
Can we be at war when the Commander in Chief says so?
If so, all the Commander in Chief need do is declare a War, suspend constitutional and statutory protections of civil rights and assume unlimited powers.
This is what Bush has done.
James, you support a Tyrant. You deserve to live under tyranny.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:48 pm#4 9 – “While our friends randy and mighty aphrodite are so hot and bothered by what the NYT did, I wonder why they aren’t foaming at the mouth to get the person who gave the NYT the information?” comment by Wayne A Schneider
******Dear Wayne – Hot and bothered?? Hardly. They might start printing the NYT rag on orange newsprint so we can correctly identify it as a “PUMPKIN PAPER”. The treachery of the NYT is exceeded ONLY by the traitor who would pass along such info for the assurance of publication. Of course, after a fair and balanced trial, they should receive the most harsh punishment the law allows.
“They feel that a president who makes up his own laws and feels that he is not bound by Acts of Congress should be allowed to conduct an illegal war any way he sees fit.”
June 26th, 2006 at 3:55 pm- more pyschic interpretations from Wayne
******Where did you go to law school Wayne??
Its not a war if we’re the only army on the battlefield.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:56 pm******Where did you go to law school Wayne??
Comment by mighty aphrodite — June 26, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
A far far better place than you I am sure!!!
June 26th, 2006 at 3:58 pmRandy, Dubya pulled strings to get out of Vietnam. How could Liberals be gutless cowards? I mean come on, check out this website http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
Could you tell me how Iraq and 9/11 are connected? Oh wait, you can’t
June 26th, 2006 at 3:58 pmHow about my right to my consitutional rights? It seems like the terrorists are winning when we abandon our civil rights for temporary safety. The war on terror is a farce.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:59 pm#87
Can you trust the Executive Branch not to abuse the power you argue they should be granted? I sure don’t. I see no reason to believe that they wouldn’t also try to dig up dirt on political opponents with these powers granted to them.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:59 pm“for the assurance of publication”?
Uh, that would be the UN. In fact, the .pdf is still up on their website.
Not very classified, is it?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:01 pm.
#88 -
So, you would have no problem if a foreign government detained you as an enemy combatant and held you without trial for the rest of your natural life.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:03 pmthis is all propaganda, 9/11 was an inside job
June 26th, 2006 at 4:05 pmWhy not just have one media outlet and that of course would be Fox news, and since Bush is the decider and only he knows in his heart what is right because God appointed him and history will prove him right why not just do away with elections. We should just turn all of our liberties over to Bush and if we do I just have two question Does that eliminate the possibilities of us ever being hit by a terrorist again? If we surrender all of our civil liberties to Bush will we be safe?
While we have been fighting this so called war on terror how many people have died in the war on drugs, the war on poverty and just everyday American violence?
There is no guarantee on safety, but Bush will guarantee fear.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:06 pmI just love reading the various neocons above like Jason M. Hendler, etc., who are stupid enough to try to persuade others that the NYT is treasonous. What unmitigated BS. The treason is all at Penn. Ave. And to imagine that ‘terra’ ists… other than those created by the government – don’t figure all this is going on is simply stupid. Oh, yeh, lets investigate the NYT…. there is a world for these idiots who desire to investigate… they are called fascists.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:08 pmDoes “Right to Live” also include the 2600 soldiers who died for a lie?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:08 pmComment by Randy — June 26, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
It takes far more courage to seek a path of peace than a path of war. In seeking peace, you put your own life on the line. In seeking war, you send other people’s children.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:09 pm#127- Jules – did you have to call friends for your “clever” retort – or did you come up with that ALL BY YOURSELF??? You and other Progs demonstrate DAILY a lack of understanding re: Constitutional rights, Constitutional responsibilities, Checks and Balances, Executive Power….The decaying corpse of 60’s leftist “thought” is a little bit like Weekend at Bernie’s – - it should remain buried as the stench is putrid. We’ll send flowers……
June 26th, 2006 at 4:12 pm[...] REALLY??? [...]
June 26th, 2006 at 4:13 pmOh, and for neocons (or simply stupidos) like Randy. There is no point in arguing with folks like you. You are impervious to logic and reason. You care nothing for empirical data. That makes you a nonentity as far as I am concerned. And not worth any more time.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:14 pmWhen asked about possible deliberate attempts at creating a chilling effect on the media,Snow’s answer was clearly punctuated improperly.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:17 pmInstead of,”I don’t think so.”,it no doubt should have read,”I don’t think.So?”
i love the “time of war” bit. love it, because with terrorism, there is no end to the “time of war”. there is ALWAYS going to be some group with some beef that wants to hurt americans or westerners or trekkies or whatever. i’m willing to risk it, if it’s a choice between privacy or the blind leap of faith that THIS TIME the government’s is doing anyting useful to me with it’s time.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:18 pmoh, and isn’t it amusing that all of a sudden, republicans like the idea of being reliant on government. big, big government. so, so big.
Et tu, MA?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:19 pmThe Bush Regime is breaking the law, but they call New York Times criminals? Wow Dubya Dunce Decider really is creepy!
June 26th, 2006 at 4:19 pmMighty,
“The treachery of the NYT is exceeded ONLY by the traitor who would pass along such info for the assurance of publication. Of course, after a fair and balanced trial, they should receive the most harsh punishment the law allows.”
If the trial is “fair and balanced”, how do you know that there will be a conviction? Or have you already decided the outcome? And who says that trials have to be “balanced”? You’ve been listening to Fox News Channel too much. And I didn’t attend law school to learn what I wrote. I paid attention to civics lessons. Are you telling me that you support the Unitary Executive Theory?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:22 pmAnd another thing- stop it with this “time of war” nonsense. Until the military draft gets re-instituted you chickenhawk treason-exclaimers won’t have to put your asses where your mouths are so STFU abuot “time of war.”
June 26th, 2006 at 4:30 pmRandy and Jason are typical representation of republicans or conservative these days? No matter how much reasoning, facts, common sense, etc are put forth. They defend republicans only because they feel they are republicans without understanding actual cause and effect?
Calling liberals as a whole gutless. And when pointed out time and time again, individuals who personifies courage are always liberals means nothing to them. Liberals understands history and current state may lead to destruction of America(not just in liberty and way of life but country as a whole). Yet, republicans aren’t willing to even consider listening.
I don’t see us getting better anytime soon. Even if we do somehow take back government and media to more open form with accountability. These republican fear and hatred will linger. How can we fix this? How can we eliminate hatred and fear against labels put upon one group to another group? I know we can’t eliminate fear and hate themselves but we must eliminate self-imposed fear and hate against labels.
I hope this makes sense a little.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:30 pmIt’s quite frustrating these days.
Ah, yes, Mighty Aphrodite, defense lawyer, has given the standard for justice: a “fair and balanced trial” you know, the same standard for Fox News.
By the way, Mighty, you never did respond in an earlier thread to explain how the prisoners at Guantanamo are not entitled to Constitutional protections:
Comment by pjh — June 22, 2006 “
June 26th, 2006 at 4:33 pm
Hello, Wayne…Just want to correct you on a point you made in posting #101. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that it was Congress who gave the president the authority to detain the unlawful combatants.
‘We conclude that detention of individuals falling into the limited category we are considering, for the duration of the particular conflict in which they were captured, is so fundamental and accepted an incident to war as to be an exercise of the “necessary and appropriate force” Congress has authorized the President to use.’
June 26th, 2006 at 4:35 pmAs long as decisions are to be made about my right to know or to live I would prefer that the NY Times give me the info so I can make my own decisions rather than have them made for me in secret by Big Brother.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:36 pmSo, you would have no problem if a foreign government detained you as an enemy combatant and held you without trial for the rest of your natural life.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — June 26, 2006 @ 4:03 pm
Excellent question.
I wonder how Randy felt about the holding of the American hostages in Iran for 444 days? In their minds they had every right to do this. Or is Randy going to say, “Oh, that’s different?
How about the detaining of the crew of the U.S. spy plane in China for 11 days, after it had collided with a Chinese fighter plane and was forced to land? Will Randy say, “Oh, we shouldn’t have been spying on them. Bad, BAD United States!” Will Randy say the Chinese authorities didn’t have the right to hold our crew?
And need I remind Randy that his dear leader, President Bush, the so-called “compassionate conservative” refused to go and greet the 11 crew members and welcome them home upon their return to the U.S. His reason? He didn’t want to interrupt the festivities.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:43 pmI for one appauld the NYT. Thank God there are a few papers left in the country that will thumb their nose at the President and inform the public. Keep up the good work, I encourage other publishers and editors to join in. The public despirately needs the truth as the truth will set us free of the oppression of King George and the neocom cabal.
Randy, I can’t help but comment on your ignorance through the many posts. You really need to read and educate yourself before your post here. By the way, King Ronald did not overthrow communism in the Soviet Union, the economy and famine did that for us. Reagan just took the credit.
PS. Reagan was an asshat as well not unlike Bush the younger. May you and the republican party burn in hell.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:43 pmNapu, namaste.
I hope this makes sense a little.
It’s quite frustrating these days.
Comment by napu — June 26, 2006 @ 4:30 pm
Look to the children. If you put infants from the four corners of the earth together in one room, there is no fear, no anger, no hate.
As more and more of us dedicate to living our life in love and harmony and peace there will be a change, balance will be restored.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:44 pm#137
So, in what country were you planning on signing that peace agreement? On what terms are you going to offer our surrender? You have no f*cking clue as to what is going on.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:44 pmExley,
I’d like to read the whole decision (and not just one paragraph) to see if it applies to what I said. Are you sure the “limited” part didn’t refer to just that one case? And if, after I do that, I find that I am wrong, then I will amend my remarks. I ask unanimous consent to have five business days to revise and extend my remarks. :-)
June 26th, 2006 at 4:47 pm#154 – then kindly enlighten us as to what is going on, for I am but a mere Shaman.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:48 pmCome on, Randy. I know you are reading this. What are you afraid of?
When are you going to read and respond to post numbers 20, 65, and 82?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:50 pmWRONG
Only 62,040,610 people voted for George W. Bush in the 2004 election. There are 298,444,215 people living in the United States. So, only 1/5 of the population voted for George W. Bush. That is not a majority of Americans. It was only 3 million more than Kerry got and it wasn’t even half of the total votes, which was 122,293,332.
Those darn facts get in the way don’t they.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:50 pm#152
June 26th, 2006 at 4:51 pmIf Reagan didn’t cause the breakup of the Soviet Union, how did it last as long as it did? Check your facts, the Soviets saw Reagan’s military build up as a threat to keep up, which economically they couldn’t. Don’t even try to rewrite history for the rest of us and give credit where credit is due. Here is a fact for you, why did Clinton sell nuclear technology to North Korea? Because he thought he could trust them and look at the mess that is causing us today. Had he stood up to them and brought in other nations as Bush is doing today, we wouldn’t even have that threat to contend with.
[...] Please find the entire story here. [...]
June 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pm#149, Exley,
Your entire post missed the point. No one argues with the right of the authority of a country to detain prisoners. However, in the very case you mention, the Supreme Court did say the prisoners had due process rights to a hearing.
Detention isn’t the issue: indefinite detention without a hearing is.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pmRepublicans always had the same answer to the question that your parents asked when you were a child, That if your friends jumped off a cliff would you jump too? and their answer was always YES
June 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pmLook to the children. If you put infants from the four corners of the earth together in one room, there is no fear, no anger, no hate.
As more and more of us dedicate to living our life in love and harmony and peace there will be a change, balance will be restored.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — June 26, 2006 @ 4:44 pm
Nicely put. Children are not born knowing who to hate. They are taught to hate. Somebody has to teach them that. And that somebody is usually an ignorant, bigoted parent (or whoever raised them).
June 26th, 2006 at 4:52 pm#158
I stand corrected. Bush was elected by a majority of eligible voters who decided to make the effort and vote.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:55 pmRandy, if you hate the liberal principles on which our country and constitution were founded, and you are in favor of the Governement silencing/censoring and prosecuting the press, and you think dissent should be punished, they why dont you go move in with the mullahs of Saudi Arabia? You’ll fit in quite well there, and your boy Bush could probably put in a good word for you too, since him and the royal saud family are so tight.
And we’re not at war, regardless of what the bubble-residing bed-wetting republicans claim. Congress never declared war, and according to the constitution, thats the only way we are officially “at war”.
America was founded on dissent, improved via dissent (Civil War) and the ONLY thing that will save her from the criminals currently in charge is DISSENT.
Criminal-enablers like Randy just don’t get it. They’re too busy soiling their panties every time a new terror alert is issued.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:57 pmWayne, Here is a link to the full opinion:
http://supreme.justia.com/us/542/507/case.html
It is my undertsanding that what the court was referring to in using the “limited” language were the unique circumstances of Congress passing the authorization to use force against Al Qaeda following 9/11:
The AUMF authorizes the President to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against “nations, organizations, or persons” associated with the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 115 Stat. 224. There can be no doubt that individuals who fought against the United States in Afghanistan as part of the Taliban, an organization known to have supported the al Qaeda terrorist network responsible for those attacks, are individuals Congress sought to target in passing the AUMF. We conclude that detention of individuals falling into the limited category we are considering, for the duration of the particular conflict in which they were captured, is so fundamental and accepted an incident to war as to be an exercise of the “necessary and appropriate force” Congress has authorized the President to use.
June 26th, 2006 at 4:58 pm#165
I am not in favor of silencing the press. They are free to print anything they want provided it doesn’t endanger national security. You are all so filled with hatred for Bush that you cannot see the difference. I don’t want our government controlling what we can and cannot read but our press has to realize that they have stepped over the boundary here in their pursuit of the Bush Administration and they will have to be held responsible.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:02 pmI wish it would threaten REPUBLICANS’ right to live. It would be a great day in America if they all dropped dead tomorrow.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:03 pm#166 Exley,
Thanks for the link. I will look at it when time permits. I have heard reports that there were people picked up during the fighting in Afghanistan that claimed they were not part of al Qaeda. If they were not al Qaeda, then were not the persons the AUMF said could be rounded up. The problem here is that people were denied the right to challenge the assertion that they were even enemy combatants in the first place.
I wasn’t sure until I saw what Briseadh posted above. I thought that the upshot of that ruling was that indefinite detentions were unconstitutional. But I will look over the ruling and see if I agree with your kindly-offered correction.
Peace.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:06 pmRandy, to say that Reagan caused the breakup of the Soviet Union is to give far too much credit to Reagan and not enough to those who came before or to the Soviet reformers. I see you threw in a dig at your favorite person, Bill Clinton. Hell, that’s what you wingnuts do best, right? Turn Reagan into a god and Clinton into a monster.
I see you have gotten off topic again. Bad boy.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:08 pm#167 Randy,
Once again, why are you saying only the press should be punished? Someone from within the Bush administration leaked that information. So why aren’t you calling for that person’s arrest, too?
June 26th, 2006 at 5:08 pmBriseadh na Faire,
Actually, your description of the Court’s holding in Hamdi is not quite accurate. A plurality of the the court found that American citizens held as unlawful combatants have a due process right to be given a meaningful opportunity “to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decisionmaker.”
It was the Rasul case (also decided in 2004) which found United States courts have jurisdiction to consider legal appeals filed on behalf of foreign citizens held by the United States military in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. Specificially, the Court found that the degree of control exercised by the United States over the Guantanamo Bay base was sufficient to trigger the application of habeas corpus rights.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:09 pmRandy has a right to his opinions, as does Mighty Aphrodite.
What really has bothered me since 2000 is that they kept pushing everyone else’s views to the margins.
The Good Lord knows how mad it made me to be consistently told that I am un-American, that I hate America and that I support the terrorists because I think differently than the White House.
When they do that to everyone who disagrees (moderates, liberals and conservatives alike), they must expect retribution. There is a lot of pent-up anger that has been stewing for the past 6 years and will likely explode.
The neo-cons can either accept this and get out of the way… or they can begin Civil War II: The Red vs. the Blue.
I prefer peace… and especially negotiation… but there is no limit to their desire for more power. If only they had not pushed everyone out who wasn’t a stooge. That’s what bothers me the most.
And to be perfectly honest (that is, truly Fair and Balanced), I must note here that Clinton tried to do the same thing… but the Republicans in Congress stopped him before he could amass much power.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:09 pmI am not in favor of silencing the press. They are free to print anything they want provided it doesn’t endanger national security. You are all so filled with hatred for Bush that you cannot see the difference. I don’t want our government controlling what we can and cannot read but our press has to realize that they have stepped over the boundary here in their pursuit of the Bush Administration and they will have to be held responsible.
Comment by Randy — June 26, 2006 @ 5:02 pm
How is printing something a few days ago that was revealed in 2004 by President Bush himself endangering national security? Are you going to hold Bush responsible for his words in post #82? How about the 6 separate incidents I point out in post #20 in which he revealed further information about our efforts at tracking down terrorists?
Have you contacted the FBI as I requested in post #65 to report CNN and Frank Thorsberg? Damn, Randy, I don’t know how I could make it any easier for you. I even provided a link to the FBI’s Web site that would let you look up the field office in your state.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:17 pmMommy, Mommy, the NYT is talking badly about our great, brave, intellectual president!
June 26th, 2006 at 5:18 pmComment by Randy
“Here is a fact for you, why did Clinton sell nuclear technology to North Korea?” – Betwetting Randy
Well, first off, thats a question, not a fact. But I digress.
Here’s where you are really showing off your complete grasp of reality, my friend.
The UN, including the US, agreed to sell reactor tech to Pyongyang in return for a freeze on their weapons program, which they agreed to. This is the exact same deal the Chimperor-in-Chief has offerred Iran. Its called diplomacy, and its called making deals to avoid war. “Clinton” did not sell them the tech directly, in fact it wasn’t even a US country. And those reactors haven’t even been completed yet, they were due to be completed in 2008, but prob wont since we stopped helping them build it after they went back on the agreement. So what you’re saying is a complete non-sequitor here. Its a moot point.
BUT HERES THE KICKER:
The reactor tech was sold to N Korea by a Swiss Co called ABB. Take a wild guess who was on the Board of Directors for that company from 1990-2001.
I’ll give you a hint. Its the same guy who shook Sadaam’s hand when he went there on behalf of Ronald “Wheres my Mommy” Reagan to sell Iraq WMD technology.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:20 pm#143 – Braid Faire – I earned my JD from the University of San Diego, y tu????
#145 – “If the trial is “fair and balancedâ€, how do you know that there will be a conviction?” – question by Wayne A Schneider….
June 26th, 2006 at 5:20 pm******I don’t – - but you can’t blame a girl for dreaming….(I only threw in the “fair and balanced” to tease you…)
Re: Unitary Executive Theory – As any well-trained lawyer can tell you, I can argue both sides of the Unitary Executive Theory. But what good does it do to argue with people who determine that a “war is illegal” or we should give my enemies (perhaps they are your enemies, too) the heads up on how we’re tracking them?? Shall we propose tying one hand behind America’s back in additio to a blind-fold???)
Wayne, You are welcome for the link. As for the issue of indefinite detention of unlawful combatants, the Court merely said that “could” be an issue under certain circumstances, but that such circumstances were not present in the Hamdi case because combat operations were continuing in Afghanistan:
“[W]e understand Congress’ grant of authority for the use of “necessary and appropriate force†to include the authority to detain for the duration of the relevant conflict, and our understanding is based on longstanding law-of-war principles. The United States may detain, for the duration of these hostilities, individuals legitimately determined to be Taliban combatants who “engaged in an armed conflict against the United States.†If the record establishes that United States troops are still involved in active combat in Afghanistan, those detentions are part of the exercise of “necessary and appropriate force,†and therefore are authorized by the AUMF.”
June 26th, 2006 at 5:22 pmmighty,
The Unitary Executive Theory is wrong! The president does NOT have the Constitutional authority to decide what the law is and what the Constitution means. And any argument you attempt to make in support of it would have to be flawed (since it is incorrect to begin with.) If the Unitary Executive Theory were correct, then the Legislative and Judicial Branches of our government would be superfluous since the president could do whatever he wanted to do.
And the war in Iraq is illegal. I would hope you could understand that by now.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:27 pmIf the record establishes that United States troops are still involved in active combat in Afghanistan, those detentions are part of the exercise of “necessary and appropriate force,†and therefore are authorized by the AUMF.â€
Comment by Exley
Now, do you understand why a significant part of the world hates US? It is really shocking, right?
SNOW: Define “chilling effect” and “media”, please.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:30 pm#178, Ah, but Mr. Exley, you pointed out the most important (and often-ignored) part: individuals legitimately determined to be Taliban combatants who “engaged in an armed conflict against the United States.â€
How do we know that they were “legitimately determined” to be part of the fighting force? We can’t, unless they are brought before some kind of court or tribunal to have that determination made. This is the part that is not being done (or wasn’t being done) in a timely fashion. I’m not going to take this president’s word on anything. You shouldn’t, either, regardless of who is in the White House.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:32 pmSO why don’t we as “The People” remove their right to secrecy on our behalf by removing them from office before they pull another “False Flag” terrorist act and suspend the 2008 elections!
That is the only way that I can see that this will stop.
Thanks!
Tracy V.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:35 pmJuan C.
“Now, do you understand why a significant part of the world hates US? It is really shocking, right?
Comment by Juan C — June 26, 2006 @ 5:30 pm”
I am not certain what you post means…The Court said that an enemy combatant (whether a lawful or unlawful combatant) is captured on the battlefield, the capturing nation has a right to detain that combatant for as long as the combat activities continue.
That is a not a uniquely American position. That is a position that is supported by the Geneva Conventions and international law. Combatants, including POWs, may be held until the end of the conflict.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:37 pmIts time that the rest of the msm stand with the NYTs.
Its time that they show their solidarity, even if they
start by reprinting the same story.
Use the freedom of the press or lose it.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:38 pmWayne, The Rasul decision has already addressed that issue. There, the Court held that the habeas statute extends to aliens detained by the United States military overseas, outside the sovereign borders of the United States and beyond the territorial jurisdictions of all its courts…T
June 26th, 2006 at 5:41 pmCould it be that you, RANDY, will be the last bush sucker standing.
Will you be the chump of all chumps.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:47 pmExley. I dont understand, then, If it is in the Geneva Convention why other countries do not engage in illegal wars, force feed and torture trialess prisoners?
June 26th, 2006 at 5:47 pm“Dubya pulled strings to get out of Vietnam. How could Liberals be gutless cowards? I mean come on, check out this website http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html”
Comment by Will — June 26, 2006 @ 3:58 pm
I think it’s interesting that in the hard lefts’ fervor to go after Bush that they will take polar opposite positions to some supposed core beliefs. Do you even realize that you are taking a very strong position that, “all of those who tried to get out of Vietnam were “gutless cowardsâ€?
It isn’t just Will either-I’ve heard this claim made by countless liberals.
June 26th, 2006 at 5:52 pmActually, Wayne, the war is NOT illegal as Iraq was in violation of the 1991 Cease Fire Agreement signed by the government of Saddam Hussein. In the agreement, Saddam agreed to comply with the terms under “penalty of resumption of force”. Try again….(Just because You and your prog friends say so – does NOT make it true.) Have you read both sides of the legal arguments re: the Unitary Executive Theory? How about Article II of the Constitution???
June 26th, 2006 at 5:53 pmI think where the problem comes form Pointman, is not so much taking an opposite opionion, but rather, that bush has sold himself as a wartime president. His staff has gone for the warhawk machismo, and yet almost none of them have served in the military, unlike say John Kerry, or Al Gore. Granted Clinton skipped out, but he also didn’t invade and occupy another country.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:03 pm#168 – “I wish it would threaten REPUBLICANS’ right to live. It would be a great day in America if they all dropped dead tomorrow.” – Comment by Tom3
***** CONGRATULATIONS, Tom3!!! You have just WON the Josef Stalin look-alike contest!!!! Again, my heartfelt congrats…..
June 26th, 2006 at 6:05 pmIt is a bitter irony with a great danger wrapped inside of it…Only George W. Bush (who has been utterly contemptuous of the US Constitution since the day he first swore an oath to protect it) could make the New York Times (which has shamelessly failed in its responsibility to the nation on Iraq, 9/11 and so much more over the last decade) look like a champion of freedom of the press….
June 26th, 2006 at 6:11 pmRichard Power
http://words-of-power.blogspot.com
One down 62,040,609 more to go.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:11 pmI think we can all guess what this is really all about. Since the U.N. itself has been monitoring these activities, looking for suspicious transactions since 2002, even though BushCo seems ignorant of that fact (and SO many others) that cannot be their problem, regarding the NYT. No, what I think we have here is the inevitable revelation that BushCo has been “monitoring” the financial activities of average Americans. Just like the warrentless wiretapping, first they claimed it was strictly limited to those with suspected ties to terrorists, not average Americans. Following several tortured revisions of their real activities, denying any wrongdoing on their part the entire time, the truth finally came out. Not only were they spying on Americans, (a no-no) but they were amassing a massive database at the same time. And the building of this database continues, unabated, despite our objections. And so we wait…
June 26th, 2006 at 6:32 pmTonite the roll of Randy was played by Karl Rove.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:43 pm#192 – Krazny – Our troops were in Haiti and Bosnia visiting exotic holiday destinations….Little things, like attacks on us, President Clinton chose to refer to the police, FBI and US Attorney. NOW that should horrify ANY terrorist!
June 26th, 2006 at 6:48 pmRight to LIVE??? What drugs are these people on??
June 26th, 2006 at 6:55 pmThese guys did a real good job following the money trail of the supposed bombers of the Towers. Didn’t they go directly back to the Saudis? What about all the put options that were on the stck exchange on 9/11? A lot of investors made money on the day the towers came down. How did they KNOW? This country better wake up and figure out who the real terrorists are.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:58 pmDon’t forget Dubai.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:03 pmGene – If you go over to the Palestinian conspiracy website you can read how 4000 Jews were told not to go to work on 9/11. I guess the Jews who were in the towers that awful day (and didn’t get out with the rest of those other poor souls) didn’t get the message….OR maybe they didn’t know the secret handshake??
June 26th, 2006 at 7:05 pmGene – If you go over to the Palestinian conspiracy website you can read how 4000 Jews were told not to go to work on 9/11. I guess the Jews who were in the towers that awful day (and didn’t get out with the rest of those other poor souls) didn’t get the message….OR… maybe they didn’t know the secret handshake??
June 26th, 2006 at 7:05 pmSorry for the double post – except to Gene and other conspiracy theorists – they benefit from a bit of reiteration.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:07 pmI’m torn whether to feel bad for the NYTimes employees who are being threatened with jail for reporting the truth. First, they were in bed with Bushco, and admitted it (Judith Miller, etc…). NOW…should we feel sorry for them??? “First they came for ______, and I said nothing, ……….then they came for me (NYTimes). Maybe you’re getting what you deserve??? For not reporting truthful news about Bushco 5 years ago?????????
June 26th, 2006 at 7:11 pmWhy are prominent members of the Executive , Gonzales especially, Republicans AND Democrats alike, along with all sorts of talking-head news media, allowed to continually ‘remind’ us that special (read: illegal) measures sometimes need be taken by the Executive during a “time of War”?
Why does nobody remind these people that a war was NEVER declared? The ‘Authorization’ for use of force is NOT the same thing. In fact, that is the very REASON the Exec didn’t ask for a full declaration of War, because it is a very different, and much more serious matter, and Congress most likely wouldn’t have granted it.
The DOJ’s justification for Bush’s new ‘Imperial’ powers are said to be his ‘inherent wartime’ powers. In fact, we are in no such legally delcared war. Why is this never brought up, especially in the media, when this has been the carte blanche excuse for everything?
A ‘War on Drugs’ did not give the Regan’s a ‘wartime’ power to wiretap.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:12 pm191, glad to have your expert legal advice on the matter.
I guess we might as well give up. Article II of the Constitution grants the Commander in Chief the power to declare war and usurp the constitution.
At least, Aphrodite, you won’t have to bother submitting motions to suppress evidence on 4th Amendment grounds.
I wonder, how would you plead if evidence against one of your clients was obtained by waterboarding someone until s/he implicated your client?
How would you feel if you were wrongfully accused of being an enemy combatant? terrorist?
What legal arguments could you raise, when all the evidence obtained against you was the result of covert intelligence gathering operations by the United States Government?
How does a defense attorney represent the accused in a Dictatorship?
Perhaps you should study criminal proceedure under Nazi Germany or Communist Russia for an insight as to what you well be dealing with in a few years.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:16 pm“As I stated yesterday, this leak, at a minimum, requires an investigation, because it undermines our country’s ability to defend itself during a time of WAR.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — June 26, 2006 @ 2:09 pm”
So Jason, let’s get this straight! You want an investigation into the media’s right to freedom of speech, but not an investigation into the documented lies that this administration used to get us into this sham “WAR”? Aren’t you putting the Panzer before the Fuher?
June 26th, 2006 at 7:16 pm“As I stated yesterday, this leak, at a minimum, requires an investigation, because it undermines our country’s ability to defend itself during a time of WAR.”
When are you people going to get a clue? We are NOT at War. Only Congress has the authority to declare war – and as of today, they haven’t. Everything that the Imbecile and his cabal have doen has been in direct violation of the Constitution. It is in violation of International Law. It is in violation of what we consider basic human rights.
Either you are a paid shill or you really need to stop using mind-altering substances. Get a clue. The only real war on terror would be a revolution removing every single tyrannt – from government officials to the scum-sucking directors, employees and shareholders of organizations that financially benefit from spending more than the entire world combined on “defense” while keeping people in a state of fear. 9-11 was not perpetrated by 19 Arab hijackers. Even FBI Director Robert Mueller admitetd this to the press on two occasions. If you really believe the official conspiracy theory propogated by Washington D.C. (and it is a conspiracy theory, since no one has been offered any hard evidence to support the Adminitsration’s claims – and stolen passports retrieved from a fireball that allegedly collapsed the buildings don’t constitute evidence), then you are either brain dead or a paid shill.
Read the Constitution – something the Imbecile called “A goddamned piece of paper.” There is nothing in the Constitution that grants the government to take such actions. The Constitution limits what government can do. Those who undermine teh Constitution are guilty of treason. In time of war, that means the whole Bush cabal could be executed for their crimes. Maybe you should think twice about referring to the US as “at war.” If you are a paid shill making your living from taxpayer dollars, you , too, could be guilty of treason. Just remember what the penalties are before your next post.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:21 pm” You want an investigation into the media’s right to freedom of speech”
Sorry, I meant Freedom of the Press
June 26th, 2006 at 7:21 pmMighty Aphrodite conspiracy is usually based on facts, something Bush and people of your ilk don’t respect. If you really care about this country, try to see who benefitted most when those Towers came down{including the owner}. It gave Bush free licence to throw the Constition out the window. It made gobs of money for the military industrial complex. Everlastng war makes money for a select few. You are probably a minion of these slime. Wake up America.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:28 pm“Gene – If you go over to the Palestinian conspiracy website you can read how 4000 Jews were told not to go to work on 9/11. I guess the Jews who were in the towers that awful day (and didn’t get out with the rest of those other poor souls) didn’t get the message….OR… maybe they didn’t know the secret handshake??
Comment by mighty aphrodite — June 26, 2006 @ 7:05 pm
So if you believe that “theory”, then why don’t you believe the “theory” that the Mossad along with other agencies forwarned Bushco about the imminent attack? If the prick prez wasn’t directly instrumental in the attack. he was atleast informed and elected not to take action to save innocent lives. Whether you agree with them or not, atleast the Israelis take care of their citizens! This Fascist government obviously doesn’t give a shit about this country! Wake up “mighty aphrodite” you’re “mighty stupid!!”
June 26th, 2006 at 7:34 pmComment by Jane — June 26, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
Maybe not just treason, but international war crimes. I had the privilege of observing a portion of the trial of one of the generals accused of genocide in the International Tribunal for War Crimes in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia.
The supporters of a Dictator go down with their boss. Could it be some of the posters here are headed for a war-crimes tribunal of their own? Most definitely (speaking as a Shaman, in answer to the question)
June 26th, 2006 at 7:36 pmlets get one thing straight 1st !!! if youve examined the evidence obout 911 and what REALLY happened… then you WILL know that the muslims had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. they wre used and setup by cia and our govt so as to look like they did it just as they did in the fedral bldg in ok. any HONEST person who REALLY wants to know the truth can so by going to ” question911″ to get the videos that show the PROOF of who REALLY was behind 911, and go to “infowars.com” and research all you want!!! if you dont…. then you can continue to be brainwashed by our controlled media and expect to be in a police state in a very short time cause as anyone well knows , history, that ppl like hitler and others have used terrorism to get the ppl to fear for there safty and give up there guns and all there freedoms for so called safty. go ahead and make light of what i am trying to get you to do, but when it happens… it will be too late to do anything about it.
if anything…….. just look at one of the 2 vids. “911 in plane site” or ” loose change 2e”
June 26th, 2006 at 7:36 pmyou WILL see the truth……………… you WILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Does anyone else find the concept that our nation has been set up to be at war eternally a little unsettling. ‘War’ does not excuse all behavior. In fact it is times of crisis that put our standards to test that define our morality. Being at War does not mean throwing sense and accountability out the window. Being at War actually means being held to a higher standard, something we seem to have forgotten. The more I read the news, the more I’m convinced that we’ve traded brains for bombs, liberty for chains.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:43 pm216…….pat kell
That’s the kind of truth that mainstream media will never expose! Thay are controlled by and pander to these fascists!! The propaganda mill discredits and slanders anyone who questions this regime. While the stupid lemmings glut themselves on mainstream lies, we are being spied upon, we lose our freedom, and we get closer and closer to revisiting Germany of 1933. Wake up before it’s too late!! Your president and his henchman are domestic and war criminals, willing to do anything and everything to accomplish their devious goals!! Just visit the PNAC website, it’s all there!!
June 26th, 2006 at 7:50 pmKudoes for Trevor he’s figured it out.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:51 pmThe NY Times is not the source of the story. The Wall Street Journal and the LA Times both broke the story at the same time as the NYT. Seems The WH singled the latter out for political reasons.
June 26th, 2006 at 8:07 pmWHAT UNDERMINES THE RIGHT TO LIVE IS THE REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS. THEY CHOOSE NOT TO RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN RAISED SINCE 1997 DESPITE THE FACT CONGRESS GAVE THEMSELVES ANOTHER RAISE THIS YEAR! AND THIS REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS CHOOSES NOT TO SET A DATE WHEN AMERICAN SOLDIERS CAN COME HOME THUS CONTRIBUTING TO THE DEATHS OF MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND INNOCENT IRAQI PEOPLE. YES LET’S TALK ABOUT THE RIGHT TO LIVE BEGINNING WITH THIS BUSH ADMINISTRATION FULL OF HYPOCRITES!
June 26th, 2006 at 8:49 pmgive us liberty or give us death.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:14 pm“As I stated yesterday, this leak, at a minimum, requires an investigation, because it undermines our country’s ability to defend itself during a time of WAR.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — June 26, 2006 @ 2:09 pmâ€
Herr Hendler. Ya! Vie need to investiagte das. Maybe some slappy face to de enemies of der state. Ya, anyone who das nich support der Bushco. Fire up der ovens.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:14 pmNO ONE believes anything this President says………about anything…….ever. This President is the one that is taking away “People’s Rights To Live” all over the World. I have never heard anyone so full of shit in my life. God Help Us All!
June 26th, 2006 at 9:17 pmi agree with Mr Snow about the NY Times undermined Americans’ “right to live” but for a different reason. namely, sitting on the fucking story during the 2004 presidential election. The NY Times is the wolf in sheeps clothing – think Judy Miller and the run up to the fraudulent mess in Iraq. Yes, the NYTimes sat on this story so the 2004 election would be close enough for electorial fraud to push Bush over the top. That is undermining Americans’ “right to live” freely.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:19 pmTypical adminstration game, blame the media. However, they should praise the Mainstream media.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:20 pmThe MSM helped them cover-up the illegal wars.
The media sits idly by as the administration forces Amazon to stop stocking books like “America Deceived” by E.A. Blayre III
The media barely mentions the NSA wiretapping anymore.
The MSM watches as protestors are caged away from events.
This anger at the media is a farce. They’re trying to convinvce you that the media is doing it’s job.
Not going to work.
Support indy media.
Last link (before Google Books caves in):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0
Actually, Wayne, the war is NOT illegal as Iraq was in violation of the 1991 Cease Fire Agreement signed by the government of Saddam Hussein. In the agreement, Saddam agreed to comply with the terms under “penalty of resumption of forceâ€. Try again….(Just because You and your prog friends say so – does NOT make it true.) Have you read both sides of the legal arguments re: the Unitary Executive Theory? How about Article II of the Constitution???
Comment by mighty aphrodite — June 26, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
Gee, my fat sweaty bald loser friend-Bushco has allowed us to keep part of the Constitution. That really is great news. I think i will have a large order of “Freedom fries” to celibrate. On top of that. Things have even got better and better in Iraq according to Fauxnews so I think I will make a biggie size.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:23 pmWar! War! War! 9-11! Traitors! Leakers! War! Gay Marriages! Flag Burnings! War! 9-11! 9-11!
June 26th, 2006 at 9:26 pmSomebody give these people a Valium.
Tony McSnowjob the White House lying spokesman formerly liar at FAUX.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:30 pmI would really like to understand the position of the anti Bush crowd with respect to the publication of classified information by the NYT by asking those interested to simply and as rationally as possible to respond to the following questions: 1. Do you believe a government employee, elected official etc., should be immune from criminal prosecution if he/she discloses classified information to the press during a time of war? 2. Should a news organization be immune from criminal prosecution if it publishes classified information during a time of war when it knows that the information has come from an employee, elected official, etc., of the government whom it knows has violated the law by said disclosure. 3. if your answer to no. 2 is yes, would your opinion be the same if the reporter on the story broke into federal offices and obtained the information? If your answer to number 3 is no, how do you reconcile your answers in 2. and 3. Please see if you can provide an analysis that my facilitate an understanding by someone who really wants to know. Please keep references to Haliburton, Cheney, and bush lied-kids to a minimum in your answer.
June 26th, 2006 at 9:40 pmMike, You need to live in a dictatorship. Free people would not even ask the questions you posit. Bushco has declared war for ever. Want to shut down the press?, or just have Pravda (or should I say Fauxnews)?
June 26th, 2006 at 10:04 pmHow can the NYT be guilty, when we are not at war. King George declared the Mission Accomplished quite some time ago. So the Iraq war was over at that time, what we have now is an occupation. Protecting the Oil reserves. As Democrats we need to start framing the Iraq situation this way and let the Republican say its a war.
Wes
June 26th, 2006 at 10:33 pmwhere it may be lawful for the NYT to publish classified information
June 26th, 2006 at 10:42 pmComment by Mike
Oh, you are worried about law in a country where there are prisoners being tortured, force fed and without a trial. You are worried about law in a country that finance terrorists as long as they destabilize for US interests (and then turn against you, really smart), you are worried about law in a country where constitution has been modified (or set aside) in order to get a stupid Patriot Act so you all feel more secure whereas they search your private life. Finally, you are worried about law in a country that has killed over 100,000 civilians while securing oil deposits for big companies that are profiteering with the blood of your citizens. Law…what the hell does that mean to you?
#230
Mike,
As I see it your questions have no bearing in the case of the so-called classified info that the NYT reported on.
Guess what Angry Bush said today on a video clip I saw on Fox News? He said (and this is not a direct quote) that if you want to track the terrorists you have to follow the money.
This is the same thing he said in 2004 at the Hershey Lodge and Convention Center in Hershey, Pennsylvania. See post #82 for a link to his words as posted on the White House web site; I’ve posted his words again for you and highlighted two important parts:
Now, Mike, I want you to tell me why we aren’t charging Bush with treason for divulging our terrorist tracking methods to the world.
Next, Mike, it would seem that none of the rightwing idiots on here today wanted to answer any of my other questions, despite several pleas that I made throughout the day. Would you like to take a whack at it?
Please see post #20 and again tell me why Bush babbling to the public about ways we track terrorists does not put us in danger and help out the terrorists.
I next want you to read post #65 and do me a favor; since Randy apparently didn’t call the FBI and report CNN for listing ways we track terrorists, I want you to do that for me tomorrow. Will you? I’ve even posted a link to help you find the FBI’s field office in your state.
Finally, Mike, answer this for me: why is it that anyone who read that CNN article in 2001 found out that we performed wiretaps in tracking the terrorists, but when the NYT revealed warrantless wiretaps late last year, rightwingers including Bush were screaming that national security was at risk and they were ready to throw the reporters in prison?
June 26th, 2006 at 11:06 pmJuan C. I should have known better than to expose myself to your razor sharp logic and analysis. The law is a set of statutes(including the Federal and state constitutions), decisional law, and administrative holdings which govern relationships, conduct, transactions and human behavior.The law is not black and white as some of you might think but often grey, subject to interpetation and analysis. Our human experience demonstates that over the couse of time our relationships with other countries may change as will our policies. The relationship betwwen the U.S and Japan circa 1945 is not the same as it is in 2006. This is true with many other countries and regions in the world. What might appear to you as contradictory and hence inconsistent positions have to be viewed in the context of the time and relationship. The constant reference to the constitution to support proffered positions in a number of posts, including yours, is naive as you(and others like you) fail to analyze constitutional issues in the context of the signficant body of decisional law which is relevant to many of the issues which you cite as constituional violations by this administration. So Juan, think about what I’ve written, take two asprin and go to bed. You will awaken a wiser and more refined thinker in the morning. Good night and good luck
June 26th, 2006 at 11:08 pmJune 26th, 2006 at 11:08 pm
Couldn’t use that bank technology to investigate all the funny 9/11 trades, though, nope. That would be unamerican.
June 26th, 2006 at 11:15 pmHey Mike. 1st of all , I supported the war. I totally bought Colin Powell’s presentation, reveled in the really cool ‘McWar’, and mocked Martin Sheen , and Susan Sarandon when they did their tape-over-the-mouth thing. I smiled when Bush had his jaunt across the deck of that carrier(hey , let him swagger a little!) Problem :we were all lied to. People tend to get pissed when lied to, especially when their sons’ and daughters’ blood begins to be spilled as a result. This might inform you, then as to the genesis of OUR hatred for Bush, now( do I really need to explain that?) To your point about revelations by the press I say this: I’m REALLY glad the NYT published The PentagonPapers. I’m really glad WaPo published all those Woodward/Bernstein articles. Those ,and other muckraking helped change our history for the good. This country’s (YOURS) depends on the ability of the press to sniff out and reveal govnt corruption and mismanagement. Bush is a DANGER to our country. Your question about a reporter breaking and entering is both a strawman argument ( and therefore not deserving of a response)and highly ironic , since it is the Repug controlled organs of govnt which are daily breaking and entering your life. Who’s watching the watchers? Sorry for my run-on sentences. Peace
June 26th, 2006 at 11:15 pmthank you wc for the opportunity to respond. Before 911, it was purportedly known that Bin Ladin wanted to attack the US. However, most rational security experts agree that there was not much the US could do to prevent an attack based upon such general information. However, I ask to WC, if we knew that on 911, airplanes were going to be used as they flew out of some of our major cities to attack us, do you think the US could have taken security measures that would have stopped the attack? I have used this rather elementary example to explain the difference between the president’s general statements and the times report of the program in question. I would also like to make sure that you understand that I am not singling out the times. My problem is more with the individual who leaked the information. My friend WC, here is the point. I do not believe the government employees or elected officials should have the unilateral discretion to leak classified information whether it be a Republican or Democratic administration. Why is this point so hard for you all to see. I don’t get it. You have got to let go of your Bush bone to let some common sense logic in once in awhile. If you would like me to evicerate any more strawman arguments you wish to postulate, please send them
June 26th, 2006 at 11:23 pmjimbobuddy Jim: Here is where you lose me. Bush Lied. This reasonates with the fringe left but not with independent thinkers who may otherwise have a problem with Bush. This is an argument that I have never understood. You can legitimately argue alot of things about the war, but that this government and many others knew that Iraq did not WMDs in the face of the intelligence at the time is not one of them. I assume by your response on the leak that you would leave it to the discretion of government officials and/or elected officials to leak classified information if they thought it appropriate to do so. Is this really what you want as a policy. I think you need to come back from the dark side and I am hear to lend a hand
June 26th, 2006 at 11:35 pmdear wes clark: I now see why you were not nominated as the democratic presidential candiate. If you ever run for president, I will not vote for you based upon this post
June 26th, 2006 at 11:43 pmMike . Thanks for the response. It’s difficult to know where to start w/ you – assuming that you’re genuinely open to the conclusion that you might be wrong. Most people resist that conclusion ,whatever their political stripes may be. 1st off: if you READ the article you will discover that NYT had multiple sources, ‘gov’nt ,and industry officials’. Furthermore – unlessyou challenge the fact that over 2,000 orgs., and THOUSANDS of people were privy to the existence of this program – how can you be charged with revealing something that’s already in the public domain? Also 1999 MIT report, and UN r4eport, both cited earlier .( Itype SLOW ,and think even slower ,so I’ll send this .
June 26th, 2006 at 11:57 pmThe comment by Patriotic Liberal Christian (PLC) truly highlighted all the Bush administration is all about and what Americans have to fear the most: absolute rule, also known as AUTOCRACY. Excellent question PLC. What is it going to take for brainwashed groupies of Team Bush to wake up and put an end to this country’s suicide?
June 27th, 2006 at 12:07 amThis administration ALREADY leaks classified info – remember McClellen’s famous response concerning the NIE leak? He said it was declassified THAT day. Turns out Bush had ‘authorized ‘ the leak 10 days earlier. So,…if the pres does it , that means it’s legal…? And by the way, they represented the selected portions of that NIE as the major findings, which in fact , they weren’t – leading to the opposite conclusion of the major findings. I believe that’s called lying.
June 27th, 2006 at 12:10 am#241
Mike,
Nice little dance around my questions. Try again.
June 27th, 2006 at 12:16 amHey, Tony. Newsflash: We’re not at war. There is no war. Read the Constitution, bonehead. It’s called an invasion.
June 27th, 2006 at 12:42 amBushCo had no complaints when Judith Miller ‘transcribed’ the faulty intellegence she was fed by them, and fanned the hysteria to greater heights, ‘catapulting the propaganda’, GWB style. And I’m sure they appreciated the way the NYT sat on that NSA story, until AFTER the 2004 elections were over. As long as you do what they want, it’s all good, but cross them, and you are done. Same M.O. evey time. They only bitch when they are busted, Then they go all out to justify what they have done, starting with “The Guilt Trip”. SSDD.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:01 amI find it interesting that often the righties love to throw out the Clinton Card when they have no valid argument, and more recently, how they use the “Bush Haters” as a way to dismiss any valid argument that somone presents.
It is an excellent Rovian strategy to use the word “bush haters.” But the logic is flawed. Assuming that one is a bush hater, does that make a person’s argument(s) less valid? Assuming that one is a bush hater, does that make that person a radical “fringe” leftie (another rovian term)?
Assigning a “bush hater” moniker is often incorrect. Most independent thinkers, progressive christians, and others don’t carry hate in their hearts for other human beings. What they can despise and reject are the ACTIONS and PHILOSOPHIES by those who harm others or bring harm to our country. I for one, despise what this administration has done to our great democracy by bastardizing our civil liberties, starting an illegal and immorally based pre-emptive “war” which is now an illegal occupation, using fear to control the masses, lying to our representatives and the American people about the reasons for needing to attack Iraq, breaking its promise to find those that brought outside terrorism to our shores (9/11) and starting a conflict with a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11 and was not an imminent threat. I’m angry at those right-wingers and uneducated republicans whose blind loyalty to their own party is reminiscent of the nazi party – their love of party is greater than their love of country. And what I am most angry about is that we have sent our soldiers “into harm’s way” and killed innocent children, brothers, sisters, women and men for the greed of those who either want to propagate their own financial gain and/or their political agendas. There was NEVER any intention of leaving Iraq. The invasion into Iraq was deemed necessary to establish a geopolitical foothold in the middle east in which to built 14 huge permanent military bases and the largest American embassy in the world, not to mention control of the second largest oil cache and the precious resource, water.
I despise those that take Faux News or Rush Limbaugh as gospel. I detest those who refuse to let go of their denial and rationalizations used to justify their own insecurities and fears.
I want my country back. I want integrity and honor restored to the White House and our branches of government. If we don’t learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it. America, the new Roman Empire will fall if we don’t wake up and demand the truth from our leadership and if we fail to hold them accountable.
As a mother of a soldier recently returned from “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” as a former army wife, and daughter of two air force parents, on the 4th of July I will be mourning the deaths of our soldiers and innocents and mourning the slow death of our democracy. All those who wish to believe that it is patriotic to ignore the Geneva Convention, hold “enemy combatants” indefinitely, condone torture, invade a country that is no imminent threat to the US, invade our personal privacy, and increase the wealth of the filthly rich while raping the middle class and poor, then go ahead and have your BBQ’s and fireworks and pat yourself on the back for being a “patriot.”
True patriots know that our Constitution is a sacred document to be cherished, honored and protected and not shredded for the sake of false security.
Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:11 am~Benjamin Franklin
Wc no dance WC just powerful logic which leads to an inexorable conclusion with which you disagree or more distubingly are unwilling to accept. No need to try again as I have scoreboard.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:19 amjimbuddy what are the references in your post? Are they websites. If you have info for me to consider, I would like to review. As for the first part of your post, please. Anyone who disclosed this info had security clearance. I still have not had an answer to my question whether a person with such clearance and therefore classified information should have the discretion to disclose info.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:25 amThis is what happens when stupidity is empowered.
All organizations, including this administration, follow the chaos theory. It is made up of separate individuals, and they don’t all act the roll perfectly, but the continuity of the overall theme is remarkable.
The lowest plebe can’t separate himself too far from the head of the beast.
June 27th, 2006 at 1:34 ami believe anyone who has doubts about the NYT publication of classified information should read this. Outgoing Treasury Secretary John Snow has written to Bill Keller at the New York Times about terror finance surveillance, and the decision of the Times to inform terrorists about that surveillance. Here is what Snow wrote:
Dear Mr. Keller:
The New York Times’ decision to disclose the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a robust and classified effort to map terrorist networks through the use of financial data, was irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide. In choosing to expose this program, despite repeated pleas from high-level officials on both sides of the aisle, including myself, the Times undermined a highly successful counter-terrorism program and alerted terrorists to the methods and sources used to track their money trails.
Your charge that our efforts to convince The New York Times not to publish were “half-hearted” is incorrect and offensive. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Over the past two months, Treasury has engaged in a vigorous dialogue with the Times – from the reporters writing the story to the D.C. Bureau Chief and all the way up to you. It should also be noted that the co-chairmen of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Governor Tom Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton, met in person or placed calls to the very highest levels of the Times urging the paper not to publish the story. Members of Congress, senior U.S. Government officials and well-respected legal authorities from both sides of the aisle also asked the paper not to publish or supported the legality and validity of the program.
Indeed, I invited you to my office for the explicit purpose of talking you out of publishing this story. And there was nothing “half-hearted” about that effort. I told you about the true value of the program in defeating terrorism and sought to impress upon you the harm that would occur from its disclosure. I stressed that the program is grounded on solid legal footing, had many built-in safeguards, and has been extremely valuable in the war against terror.
Additionally, Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey met with the reporters and your senior editors to answer countless questions, laying out the legal framework and diligently outlining the multiple safeguards and protections that are in place.
You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that “terror financiers know” our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.
Lastly, justifying this disclosure by citing the “public interest” in knowing information about this program means the paper has given itself free license to expose any covert activity that it happens to learn of – even those that are legally grounded, responsibly administered, independently overseen, and highly effective. Indeed, you have done so here.
What you’ve seemed to overlook is that it is also a matter of public interest that we use all means available – lawfully and responsibly – to help protect the American people from the deadly threats of terrorists. I am deeply disappointed in the New York Times.
Sincerely,
[signed]
John W. Snow, Secretary
June 27th, 2006 at 2:19 amU.S. Department of the Treasury
War does not give the president carte blanche to trample our rights. Read the Constitution, you assholes who scream “treason” simply because we patriotic Americans on the left believe in the rights our Constitution grants us.
If we don’t defend the Constitution, then what are we fighting for? If you don’t like our Constitution or dissent, then maybe you would feel more at home living in Iraq or the Sudan.
And what is this “WE’RE AT WAR!” crap? Didn’t Dubya say “mission accomplished” in Iraq?
Is the War on Terror a perpetual, unending war? If so, then does that mean the Constitution goes down the toilet?
If Bush was serious about wanting to spy on terrorists and not law abiding US citizens then he must agree to oversight. He is not a king and we are not lemmings (well, most of us aren’t). Those of you who are calling “treason” can kiss my ass. I’m not going anywhere and I will fight for the Constitution even while you are raping it.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:21 amI hate how this administration justifies everything by saying “this is a time of war”. Do they think we don’t get the fact that they STARTED this war? On spurious grounds, for the profit of themselves and their cohorts (either that or simpy at the urging of a well meaning but totally misguided and impractical chief executive)
Plato had an interesting comment on this when he examined democracy and what he saw as its flaws. Personally, I think it’s the best thing we’ve got going, but he did point out that in a society where you can be whatever you want and do whatever you want, it is entirely possible that one could “make war in peacetime, if you don’t like peace…”
This administration does not like peace, despite what they say. Every power move they make requires maintaining this state of war in the public eye, otherwise their whole house of cards comes down. If the terrorists were stopped, if we didnt have an immediate national threat, real or otherwise, they would never be able to present these grievous abuses of civil liberty as anything other than just that.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:23 amNothing new with Snows comment- every administration has at one time or another attacked the press for something they felt hurt their policies.
If the Government feels the Times violated the law- they should file charges – if they don’t then the Times should file a formal complaint for abuse of the constitution before the courts.
I like Tony Snow… says it like it is… I also like the Times they call them as they see it.
Both of them are right- both are exercising that right.
But – unless someone files a charge in court this is just more political HOT AIR….
Where I work as Journalist we have to worry about getting shot for what we report on.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:24 amPut it context- this is all just political banter- grow up.
“I wonder what the liberal reaction would have been if say the NYT or similar paper had disclosed during WWII that we had broken the Japanese code or released the place and date of the planned D-Day invasion? See, I see no difference in what they are doing to destroy our nation during A TIME OF WAR. GET IT? WE ARE AT WAR. THEY ARE COMMITTING TREASON AND SHOULD BE TRIED FOR IT!
Comment by Randy — June 26, 2006 @ 2:26 pm”
You are an idiot for making such a comparison, and have the IQ of a bat if you can’t figure out the difference. It’s called OVERSIGHT. Congress oversaw FDR’s actions. Not only that, but FDR got a full declaration of war from Congress as outlined in the Constitution. You would know this if you would read the Constitution instead of Ann Coulter’s copy-and-paste plagiarisms. You would also know that dissent isn’t treason and the president doesn’t have the power that Bush is asserting. Go back to your Klan meeting and leave intelligent people alone. We have to clean up the mess you rightwing jerks have got us in.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:28 amComment by robert — June 26, 2006
Under a Dictatorship, you get death.
We are under a dictatorship.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:34 amAfter scrolling the comments, I realized Randy and Jason are here as trolls because they won’t engage in real debate. Typical fascists.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:36 amAs long as Bush says it, then it is true. Is that it, guys?
Clinton had Monica blowing him. Bush has Randy and Jason. Knees sore, guys?
I see an exploitation of induced fear for the purpose of consolidating and increasing a fascist-like power.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:42 amIf you really want to know, then you must accept the fact that your questions, as asked, cannot be answered. The outcome in each case is fact-driven. Just read through the decisions in the Pentagon Papers case and you’ll understand that there is no clear-cut answer. I believe there were about 10 different opinions from 9 Justices in that case.
Three days ago, I asked the Pro-Bush posters on this site to answer fact-specific scenarios. I have yet to receive a reply. How would you analyze these two hypothetical scenarios? In each case, you may assume that the newspaper received the information from someone who violated the law in disclosing the information and that the disclosure was properly verified before publication.
1) what if there was a secret executive order requiring all televisions/cell phones/electronic communications devices manufactured or sold in the U.S. to include a hidden camera and microphone which would provide a continuous feed to the NSA?
Revealing such a program would definitely hinder the Government’s intelligence gathering efforts. Should a newspaper be prosecuted for publishing information about this program?
2) What if there was a secret executive order requiring middle-of-the-night abductions of anyone of Middle Eastern descent. Each man, woman and child so rounded up would be tortured until they revealed their connections to terrorist cells and named their co-conspirators, then gassed and buried in unmarked mass graves?
Revealing the existence of such a program would hinder the Government’s intelligence gathering efforts in the War on Terror. Should a newspaper be prosecuted for publishing information about this program?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — June 25, 2006
June 27th, 2006 at 2:49 amOne last observation for the night.
The use of the phrase, “right to live.”
A not so subtle call to arms for the evangelical christians to mobilize against the free press.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:51 amThe White House is made up of business men, this is undeniable. Can you imagine how valuable it is having the ability to listen to business competitors conversations under the guise of terrorist survaliannce, and now add the advantage these business men have by having access to banking transactions of competitors, with this type of access to info a friggin clown could become a billionaire. Oh, wait a minute, that explains alot.
June 27th, 2006 at 3:17 amfrom #170
“Randy, to say that Reagan caused the breakup of the Soviet Union is to give far too much credit to Reagan and not enough to those who came before or to the Soviet reformers….”
Thank you for writing that. I’ve lived in “New Europe” (the Czech Republic) for 8 years and I’ve spoken to exactly ONE Czech who credited President Reagan with the end of communist regimes in Europe. And he didn’t actually witness the revolutions because he was living in Australia from the 1970’s to the early 90’s.
June 27th, 2006 at 4:27 amBigger American military spending DIDN’T cause the Soviet leadership to say “Curses! The Pentagon’s budget is forcing us to stop discouraging freedom of expression, association, press and the practice of religion.” The Soviets didn’t say “We can’t win in Afghanistan, therefore we have no choice but to create a freely elected legislature!” Glasnost started in Moscow, the breakup of the USSR started in the republics. Revolutions start from within.
Genius Bush Invents Bushopoly
And we all thought Georgie-boy was a dimwit. Turns out we were all wrong. Well, not all of us, there were plenty in the business of Weapons Manufacturing, the Oil & Gas industry, and a hefty slice of Wall Street players who spotted his gleaming intellect years ago. But even they could not have foreseen such limitless potential from the boy-king’s genius idea of re-inventing a monopoly. The little king has managed to turn an archaic monopoly into something more than a monopoly, in fact, something new and way more than a monopoly. For him and his business affiliates, he has used the War on Terror to gain unaccountable access to the phone conversations and, now, banking records of anyone he so desires, which likely includes any and all competitors. Imagine what you could do with this type of access to financial information and competitors’ business strategies, and without having to worry about making a legal account of it. Imagine knowing ahead of time where people will be moving their money, or what a particular business group is planning to do over the next quarter, year, or decade. It’s truly a new take on the old monopoly. And for pulling this scam off, I believe the new styled monopoly should be named: Bushopoly.
June 27th, 2006 at 5:02 amJust because BushCo either chooses to ignore, or chooses to forget, and prefers their own ‘version’ of reality, that in no way negates the FACT that the international financial transactions, that might relate to terrorist related activities, have been under surveillance by several organizations since 9/11. As we know all too well by now, just because BushCo says it is so, does not mean that it is. In fact, the exact opposite is more likely to be true. I still think this is just a ‘distraction’, to hide that they are really snooping through our banking info, same as the wiretapping, using the WOT as their blanket excuse for everything.
June 27th, 2006 at 7:09 amGiven the administration’s past handling of information about veterans, I think we need more information about what data the government is collecting, not less.
June 27th, 2006 at 7:55 am“somebody’s right to live.”
Hey Tony, like the 50,000 or so Iraqis (Bush’s estimate) that we killed? What about their right to live? Didn’t they deserve to have a country free from US occupation? Doesn’t a country that never attacked us, that we STILL TODAY insinuate attacked us on September 11 2001–don’t they have a right to live?
Hypocritical bastards…all of them.
June 27th, 2006 at 8:22 amIt’s really interesting, the comparisons which have been made here to other events, especially to other “wartime” events, such as the breaking of codes during World War II.
The difference, as far as I can see consists mainly of two points:
1) Using the phrase “during a time of war”. This is a neverending “war against terror” that is so poorly defined that it could conceivable be stretched out indefinitely. The administration has taken to calling it “The Long War”, and for good reason. The only reason I can see for fighting an undefined adversary in these circumstances is the unbound expansion of executive power. If we are at war, it is against our own people ; intelligence against terrorists would be best gathered from outside this country, where their operations are based … I don’t think those are the interests we are truly following.
2) The difference between codebreaking in World War II (and other such comparisons) and publicizing wiretapping and other forms of domestic monitoring. The former would be a secret, such as the locations of German U-Boats in the North Atlantic or the more abstract notion that we could understand coded conversations. The latter is mentioning a method of investigation, which does not inherently compromise National Security. I think that the only way it could be said to compromise National Security would be to admit that it is outside of the jurisdiction of the Executive, in which case it would not be part of common knowledge. Either way, it’s a losing proposition. (either it compromises National Security because it’s not within jurisdiction or law, or it doesn’t compromise National Security and it’s a moot point)
It doesn’t really matter that the examination of domestic phone and bank records doesn’t really further the cause of tracking terrorism; the only people who have been caught with anything resulting from this most likely would never have become actual terrorists (see the other news stories on this site for more information about this). We can’t really point to anything that this has done other than allow us to spy on ourselves under the guise of a “time of war”. Perhaps a time of war, but not a war against terror… people are still terrified, just now we’re terrified of our own government.
(As an aside, name-calling and such practices don’t really help to further the debate taking place on this forum. I’m not a real fan of the current administration, but I can only blame them for that, since I haven’t seen any laws or policies come out of them which have seemed to better the American people… their focus has been more on a series of foreign countries and boogiemen.)
June 27th, 2006 at 9:47 amWc no dance WC just powerful logic which leads to an inexorable conclusion with which you disagree or more distubingly are unwilling to accept. No need to try again as I have scoreboard.
Comment by mike — June 27, 2006 @ 1:19 am
Yes, Mike, it was a dance. Maybe a tango…not sure. You didn’t even begin to address the gist of my questions, which is this: why is it perfectly acceptable for Bush to talk about our efforts to track terrorists yet when the press reports on it, calls of treason and imprisonment resonate throughout rightwing land.
Mike, had you bothered to link to the site I provided, you would have read President Bush’s own words in 2004 telling the world, including any terrorists who could understand the English language, how we tracked their activities.
Instead, as if on cue you went on yet another 9/11 tangent, a typical rightwing tactic. Did you even bother to read any of the detailed info on Glenn Greenwald’s site, to which I linked? Obviously not. Let me offer a bit more info. For your viewing pleasure, in Bush’s own words and my own translation thrown in:
Message to terrorists (for the ignorant among us): We are wiretapping your cell phones.
Message to terrorists: We can perform surprise searches of your property.
Message to terrorists: Internet providers are cooperating with us so that we can have access to, and can read, your e-mail.
There you go…just 3 examples of United States President George W. Bush telling the world, including any terrorists or would-be terrorists who could understand English, how we are tracking them.
And now, for the icing on the cake, President George Bush telling terrorists that we monitor their financial activities, something that the rightwingers are ready to throw reporters into prison for:
I look forward to reading another non-answer today, Mike. Hope to see you soon and hope you are having a good morning.
June 27th, 2006 at 10:15 am[...] The White House has launched an assault on the New York Times for publishing a story about the administration’s secret program to monitor bank records. Yesterday, President Bush said the paper’s conduct was “disgraceful” and White House Press Secretary Tony Snow implied they were undermining Americans’ “right to live.” [...]
June 27th, 2006 at 11:05 amNext thing we know, it will be called treason when we as individuals exercise our free speech (talking amongst one another, with coworkers, blogging) as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Wake up righties…you might be thriving now, but it won’t be long before all of us will be subjected to a complete Orwellian police state. You may be loyal to Bush, but I guarantee you, he doesn’t give a damn about you or your freedoms. If you think he does, you’re a fool.
June 27th, 2006 at 11:14 amAs usual, the same appalling hyper emotive exaggeration. Right to life as well!! Nice … not. Why can’t these people simply discuss the genuine merits of their actions, without all the hot buttons and hysteria?
June 27th, 2006 at 1:01 pmWhat a bunch of half-informed liberal idiots. You’re blind and you’ve grabbed the elephant’s tail, thinking you arknow how to describe the whole animal. What do most of you spend your time doing? Watching TV or smoking dope? Obviously not reading history, learning about other countries, or developing any character. You’ve been raised in Disneyland, in comparison to the rest of the world, and apparently you have no sense of balance–you can only whine about what isn’t still perfect, and in doing so you lose sight of what is more important. Civilization can unravel in an instant, but you obviously think being civilized is man’s natural state if you just don’t antagonize others–try walking alone at night through a really bad part of town and thinking happy thoughts and not doing anything bad and see how many nights that’ll work for. The reality is just the opposite-hate, greed, and violence fill the vacuum when civilized people fail to take appropriate, balanced action against destabilizing forces. You’re part of a team (this country and western civilization) struggling to avoid returning to the dark ages, and the rest of us are having to drag your useless, whining asses along so your children will enjoy the same freedoms and security you currently enjoy.
June 27th, 2006 at 3:26 pmlike the white house has any credibility.
June 27th, 2006 at 5:54 pmDear Bob Earle (Comment #275)
June 28th, 2006 at 1:46 pmDamn! You are either one fascist brainwashed ditto-idiot or an agent of American Fascism and the CIA propaganda/psych-ops. You must be aware of the concentration camps (excuse me “Civilian Detention Centers”) in the USA made for idiot liberals and conservatives (heck everyone). Also recognize that John D. Rockefeller and the New World Order Crowd including CFR, Bilderbergers, and Trilateral Commision, and many henchman are actually pushing for a 95% population reduction (war, famine, desease or . . . concentration camps?) Research REX 84 and Project Garden Plot etc.) so I understand your message about “dragging our useless whining asses” but you are entirely stupid that anyone will have freedom or security-we’ll be lucky if we’re alive by the end of this decade. This is a war on America and the constitution and of course the American people. This war on terrorism is STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM by the US of A. Wake up or got to hell. Your arrogant Ad Hominem attacks are ignorant of the truth so I gave you a taste of your own medicine along with a heaping amount of truth to free your little lemon-sized fascist mind free but you probably like to see things like your brainwash masters like you to see things so you’ll fantasize life is simple and our goverment loves us and will tuck us into bed at night and sing us a lullaby.
Mejia, I’m just curious–which mental institution are you writing from? Better yet, please tell us your life story and what you consider your biggest accomplishments–it would be interesting to understand how you arrived at where you are. Please include also parental relationships and if you have ever been married. Or just free-associate (similar to your post). I’d truly like to undertand more about the world you imagine you live in. It sounds much more complicated and dangerous than the one the rest of us are writing from.
June 28th, 2006 at 2:29 pmHey bob earle!
Check this out, especially the part I placed emphasis on. Our efforts at tracking terrorists’ finances was public knowledge in the weeks after 9/11. It was released by the White House.
So when are you going to charge Bush with treason for helping the terrorists?
Fool.
Fact Sheet on Terrorist Financing Executive Order
September 24, 2001
The Order expands the Treasury Department’s power to target the support structure of terrorist organizations, freeze the U.S. assets and block the U.S. transactions of terrorists and those that support them, and increases our ability to block U.S. assets of, and deny access to U.S. markets to, foreign banks who refuse to cooperate with U.S. authorities to identify and freeze terrorist assets abroad.
Other Actions in War on Terrorist Financing
This Executive Order is part of a broader strategy that we have developed for suppressing terrorist financing:
- A Foreign Terrorist Asset Tracking Center (FTAT) is up and running. The FTAT is a multi-agency task force that will identify the network of terrorist funding and freeze assets before new acts of terrorism take place.
- The President, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State and others are working with our allies around the world to tackle the financial underpinnings of terrorism. We are working through the G-8 and the United Nations. Already, several of our allies, including Switzerland and Britain, have frozen accounts of suspected terrorists.
Read more here.
June 28th, 2006 at 3:53 pmplease someone, put mike in the belly of a c130 and air-drop him into any place in iraq after a “nip-tuck’ job which makes him look like an iraqi…then he can find out if his current delusions about dubya;s greatness are true…come to think of it, mike is probably dubya messing with everyone here trying to sound intelligent but just cant quite make it
June 28th, 2006 at 10:17 pmCongratulations WC, you found the elephant’s tail and have told us it’s like a rope. Unfortunately, the fact that our government had carefully controlled, but full access to the SWIFT money transfer system was NOT public knowledge. Not that I ever referred to the money-tracking subject in my previous posts–it’s a minor issue and even if I was thoroughly versed in the details (neither are you, by the way–that’s obvious), I wouldn’t waste my time defending it to the likes of you.
It’s the childish paranoia, half-truths, misinformation, and hate pervading the comments in this section were what got my attention. You’re all pretty much ignorant, uncritical thinkers, and have a myopic world view, and if you’re too dumb to at least SUSPECT how much you don’t know, you’ll probably never self-examine enough to improve with time. Apparently the world isn’t to your liking and you feel cheated that it isn’t. So you throw tantrums, lash out at authority figures, dream up grand conspiracies, and justify your pitiful existence with the nobility of your “cause.” You insult and denegrate those that don’t even know you exist, believing this makes you feel big and important and smarter than they are. You’re yappy little dogs barking at the big dog outside the window who you know can’t get to you, even if he wanted to. You use the anonymity of the internet to say things you wouldn’t have the balls to say face to face, in an isolated place with those who disagree with you. If you behaved like this in your real life, you’d frequently get your ass kicked, and deservedly so. If you did, you’d learn something.
You’re living in a dream world, a world of pure good (you) and pure evil (them) which is no more than your own unconscious mess being projected on the outer world. Conspiracy theories and “Bush is the devil incarnate” attitudes are really getting boring. He’s not infallible and neither are you. But he’s not a complete fruitcake as most of you are.
Support your candidate for elections and vote for them, but if they don’t win all the time, don’t insult us and tell us we’re all fools and that you’re the geniuses who know how to make it all better. If your candidate for team captain doesn’t always win, support the team anyway or if you can’t, make constructive criticism or shut up. Only childish egomaniacs don’t understand how boring they are when they collect a few facts on an issue and try to ram their theories down our throats (rudely).
If you’re the people who know better and can do better, make a ten year plan to run for President and see how you fare in the public eye. Come up with a better strategy to determine the fate of billions of people on this planet, send it to the NYT editorial page, and see how much respect you get. Do something useful instead of trading theories based on half-truths, whining, and insulting the administration on the internet. Or go see a competent therapist who can help you separate fantasy from reality.
June 28th, 2006 at 11:14 pmI know i have said this in other bloggs , but i will say it again here. WC , the statement you quoted pertained to transactions originating between U.S. based money suppliers and terrorists. The story in the NYT is that we were also tracking the money trails between non-us entaties and the terrorists. Do you see the difference yet??? The US gov did not tell anyone that they could or would do that. I realy wish poeple would realy think for themselves , with that graymatter you call a brain, instead of just regergatating thoughts from others.
June 29th, 2006 at 1:36 amWar? I didn’t realize we were at war. Last time I checked Congress never officially declared such a thing. Of course, not that a annoying detail like constitutional legitimacy would deter presidential rhetoric.
June 29th, 2006 at 8:49 am“I’m glad that George Bush is our President and its obvious that the majority of Americans do as well given the results from the ‘04 election.” -Randy
You might want to thank Diebold Inc. for that one as much as the American people.
I’ll also add that, despite that, I make sure I go out and vote in every election. And when I vote, I avoid BOTH Democrats and Republican candidates like the plague. If more poeple had done likewise in ‘04, maybe we wouldn’t have these problems.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:17 am“I’m glad that George Bush is our President and its obvious that the majority of Americans do as well given the results from the ‘04 election.” -Randy
You might want to thank Diebold Inc. for that one as much as the American people.
I’ll also add that, despite that, I make sure I go out and vote in every election. And when I vote, I avoid BOTH Democrats and Republican candidates like the plague. If more poeple had done likewise in ‘04, maybe we wouldn’t have these problems.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:17 amThe only thing we have to fear is the administration itself.
July 15th, 2006 at 12:27 am[...] White House Press Secretary Tony Snow attack the media at today �s press briefing: “[T]he New York Times and other news organizations ought to think long and hard about whether a public�s right to know in some cases might override somebody�s right to live.”read more | digg story Digg this [...]
August 26th, 2006 at 6:36 am[...] criticized the press, going so far as to say he sympathized with the White House’s swift-boating of The New York Times for publishing a 2006 story about the Bush administration’s spying [...]
April 14th, 2008 at 11:35 am