Byron York writes in National Review that Tom Kean, co-chair of the 9/11 Commission, fears that the terrorist finance tracking program, which was very effective and completely legal, is over:
Thomas Kean, the co-chairman of the September 11 Commission, was briefed several weeks ago about the Treasury Department’s terrorist-finance program, and after the session, Kean says, “I came away with the idea that this was a good program, one that was legal, one that was not violating anybody’s civil liberties…and something the U.S. government should be doing to make us safer.”
Kean tells National Review Online that the New York Times’s decision to expose the terrorist finance effort — Kean called Times executive editor Bill Keller in an attempt to persuade him not to publish — has done terrible damage to the program. “I think it’s over,” Kean says. “Terrorists read the newspapers. Once the program became known, then obviously the terrorists were not going to use these methods any more.”
There are a variety of ways to transport or transfer money; electronic transfers are just one means of doing it. Now the terrorists will find other ways to make their financial transactions, which will make it more difficult for us to track them.
The exposure of the terrorist-finance program was particularly troubling to Kean because the 9/11 Commission had given high marks to the administration’s efforts in the area of terrorist financing…the only area in which the administration scored an “A” — actually an “A-” — was in its efforts on terrorist financing. “The U.S. has won the support of key countries in tackling terrorism finance,” the commissioners wrote, “though there is still much to do in the Gulf States and in South Asia. The government has made significant strides in using terrorism finance as an intelligence tool.”
Now, a major part of that effort appears to have been compromised. “That’s the way it is in this war,” says Kean. “There are a number of programs we are using to try to disrupt terrorist activities, and you never know which one is going to be successful. We knew that this one already had been.”
Not anymore, thanks to the New York Times and other media outlets.
Let’s not forget that shortly after 9/11 the editors of the New York Times demanded that the Bush Administration follow the terrorists’ financial records as one method of fighting terror:
The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America’s law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies….If America is going to wage a new kind of war against terrorism, it must act on all fronts, including the financial one.
Isn’t interesting that the New York Times killed the very program it demanded President Bush create. And how will the Times react if the US were to be hit by terrorists again? How else – by blaming the Bush Administration for failing to prevent the attack.
Plenty of people hate others that they never met. I don’t mind if certain people hate Bush. If many on the left didn’t, I would be worry. I will defend what he stands for if it is what I stand as well. If not, I will disagree with it as I’ve done in the past.
Reagan fought hard with the Dems to keep the budget beyond defense down. The GOP did well from 94 to 98 then seem to decide if the Dems who are in the minority get to have all these Pork project then we as majority should too. The last two years they have done better but have plenty of room to go. Not only have they cut some program growth but have actually cut some programs. When was the last time the Dems cut anything except for the military?
The problem with the GOP is they are still scared of the MSM and the beltway politics.
P.S.
As for hating people, I doesn’t bother me a whole lot if people hate others just be honest about it. Those who sling mud but then complain when it get sling back, perturbs me. I try not to let first impressions influence my lasting opinion. Clinton struck me as an opportunist from the get go and unfortunately his actions back it up. He did some good things as President but only after the poll change in that direction. He also did plenty of lame things as well. Over all he did not strike me as a good person.
Carter struck me as a good person but he was lousy as a President.
I can now say with little doubt in my mind that OTR you are full of shit and the fraud that was the first impression that I got of you.
“Hey folks, how does it feel to know that a man who advocates totalitarian rule by the Republicans”
Asshole , you graduated quick from possible fraud to outright liar.
“AND advocates the killing of the opposition in order to achieve that rule is out there within our ranks”
Here is what I said:
“I got no problem with listkeepers comments because democrats mostly being a bunch of pussies would love to see harm come to the Republican Leadership but are too cowardly to admit it, however there are certifiably insane democrats , lots of them that would scream it from the highest mountain”.
“We don’t need democrats period”.
Only a BDS suffering idiot would and do assume to know they know what thousands of individual Americans think , believe and feel. You have proven worthy of the perpetual fraud that is the democrat party.
THAT IS EXACTY WHAT WE DON’T NEED.CAREER POLITICAL FRAUDS AND LIARS.
Thanks for playing and showing for all what I have been saying now for a while. I can’t think of a clearer example of how democrats use words of others to give themselves justification to make false accusations , display phony and desparate outrage and when they have tire of making complete asses of themselves on national TV they can always fall back on what they are truly good at. PLAYING DUMB. Uhh uhhh well that’s what he really meant to say.
Democrats , lying frauds in the MINORITY. Todays Reality period.
OTR has reminded me why I hold self-professed “Christians” who make it a point to advertise their beliefs in such contempt… They’re often frauds who’ve never cracked open a bible. As I said before, my hatred is for those who’ve earned it…and the willful ignorance of OTR, Lee, and their ilk makes them no better than OBL in my book. Granted, I shouldn’t wish their families ill, but such bastards who willfully blind those who are tasked with the defense of our country in pursuit of their political agendas must suffer GREATLY when the inevitable outcome of their treasonous stupidity comes to be. You’re traitorous filth, nothing more.
I think I listkeepers comment about Lee’s Family members suffering death at the hands of terrorist’s so he would pull his head out of his ass and keep it out and accept reality and live in the Real World rather than wankering for a pathetic bunch lying frauds is a view that I have heard countless times.
Compare that to a bunch of opportunistic frauds knowing that many more thousands will die as a direct result of their despicable greed and thirst for power , scoring political points like winning a goldfish at a carnival and for no other reason than to smear those they cannot beat at the ballot box.
Democrats have already accomplished this grotesque and disgraceful act upon the human race and are at it again. They have brought the needless slaughter of nearly 3 million people and are all to eager to do it again. Only a democrat would complain and cry about a persons supposed wish as being worse than their party’s actual selfish and calculated decision that led to countless deaths. Ya! they really care.
Hear! Hear!
To All the ranting Wizbangers
This evening, Roger Cressey, a former Bush Admin. advisor on terrorism, said categorically on MSNBC that the revelation by the NYT of this financil operation did not in the slightest way reveal anything that the terrorists had not already known.
So get unbent & stop using this nonevent as the path to censorship of the media. Those of you who persist down this path are showing that they don’t give a damn whether the media is government controlled or simply intimidated enough that it doesn’t matter.
All that you are revealing about yourselves is that a free & unfettered media is anathma to you folks and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what that adds up to.
I can now say with little doubt in my mind
Don’t you mean doubful little mind?
OTR you are full of shit and the fraud that was the first impression that I got of you.
“Hey folks, how does it feel to know that a man who advocates totalitarian rule by the Republicans”
Asshole , you graduated quick from possible fraud to outright liar.
“AND advocates the killing of the opposition in order to achieve that rule is out there within our ranks”
Here is what I said:
“I got no problem with listkeepers comments because democrats mostly being a bunch of pussies would love to see harm come to the Republican Leadership but are too cowardly to admit it, however there are certifiably insane democrats , lots of them that would scream it from the highest mountain”.
“We don’t need democrats period”.
Let’s break it down for your angry noodle, just so you understand…. Now, think before you react.
As noted right above, you said “We don’t need no democrats period.” Now, what the blazes do you THINK that means Einstein? It means ONE PARTY RULE. Get a grip son. Your brain is oozing all over the Wizbang website.
And, you also wrote:
Listkeeper, you are WAY out of bounds here”
I respect your opinion Mo , But I got Listkeepers back on this one without hesitation.
So, what do you “got Listkeepers back on”?
This gem of a comment by Listkeeper where he wished that another terror attack would strike the United States so that some people might be taught a lesson and “suffer” to use his exaxt word.
And, you agreed with that didn’t you Rob? Yes, you did.
Thus, it is rather easy to see why you are a totalitarian stooge hungry for power you’ll never ever have. You don’t need no opposition party!
And, wooo hooo! Let’s have them terrorists bomb the hell out them people in New York, them libruls. They deserve it anyway and that’ll teach them a lesson!
I’m not the only conservative in this thread to note that your words are a bit… shall we say…
Strong.
OTR, you’re lying. I never said I wish another attack would happen. The stupidity and willful ignorance of those like yourself have guaranteed that outcome.
Lee,
Still waiting . . . 7.5 hours and you still haven’t answered the simple questions that were asked.
Kinda shows your hand, troll with no substance.
File/play crickets.wav
7.75 hours and counting? tick tick tick tick…
Mak “Ak” 44: Roger Cressey was Richard Clarke’s deputy under President Clinton, and then for a short period under Bush.
He had no responsibility or oversight, much less exposure, to this program.
So, your pals at Olbermann or Hardball cite him as a National Security expert. They get the kind of expert they’re looking for.
But this guy didn’t work the program, so how is he opining as to its usefulness. Is this like Old Timer giving his opinion that nothing happened under the program without any factual basis.
That’s not what our intel people and the President are telling us. Clark and Cressy have much to answer for.
Mitchell
You’re just blowing out your ass. A simplistic attack on Cressey (who by the way makes many appearances on more than MSNBC as an expert on terrortism) is totally unfounded. The SWIFT operation even had a website about the program.
Moreover, Bush, from shortly after 9/11, has said that the US will use every avenue possible to track financial transfers.
That the terrorists were being watched w/ their financial transactions should come as no surprise to anyone other than the fools here on Wizbang who want to use this incident as a pretext to censor the press.
Your rant, Mitchell, just reveals how little you give a sh_t for the 1st Amendment. Perhaps you prefer an American edition of Pravda.
OTR, you’re lying. I never said I wish another attack would happen.
Listkeeper, you’re right. You didn’t say you “wish another attack would happen.” You said, it’s your “sincerest hope”… specifically your exact words were:
My sincerest hope in life is that Lee loses loved ones in a terrorist incident that could have been prevented through this or any of the other programs his kind have rendered useless.
So, you are saying that it is your sincerest hope that another terror attack hit the USA, that is, if it proves your ideological point.
Either way you slice it, it is, in your own words: your “sincerest hope in this life that Lee loses loved ones in a terrorist incident…” the rest is just your evil hearted excuse to justify the deaths of people whom you obvious hate with a passion.
You have indeed made it clear that it is your “sincerest hope” that a “terrorist incident” would happen.
It is YOU who are the liar. Here, for all to see.
You understand that people can go back and READ what you have written above, yes?
Just checking.
mak44 @ June 28, 2006 10:21 PM
Link please . . .
Mak44: “All that you are revealing about yourselves is that a free & unfettered media is anathma to you folks and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what that adds up to.”
No, an irresponsible, partisan group of journalists that will do anything to take down a president even to divulging secret government intelligence operations during time of war is anathma to us.
Whether or not the disclosure by the NYT actually told our enemies anything they did not know is moot point relative to the culpability of the NYT. They broke the law and had you or I done the same thing, we’d be sitting in jail facing serious prosecution right now – and justifiably so.
One of the most powerful fundamentals of intelligence gathering is that you do not tell the enemy what you are doing and you do not tell them what you are not doing either. Any information that tells the enemy about what you are doing or verifies their pre-held suspicions should not be disclosed. Otherwise the integrity of the program and then entire system is compromised rendered at least less effective.
By printing the story, the NYT gave classified information to the enemy – no question. Whether the information was already known to, or useful to, the enemy has no bearing on the guilt of the NYT. Releasing such information was wrong morally, ethically, and legally.
If the highly paid, solidly lefist staff of the NYT and the leakers who supplied them with information are able to take the law into their own hands and without any due process, accountability, or oversight act as judge, jury, and executioner to classifed and necessarily secret operations then we as a nation are in deep trouble.
The NYT has no more right to divulge that information than you or I do – especially during time of war.
F15C
My understanding of the matter is that the NYT had numerous sources who revealed this classified information to them. If anyone is to be prosecuted, it is the leakers.
As to the “leftist” NYT, that was a real Lefty hit not long ago on the Clinton marriage story.
What people who think like you do is label any element of the media that doesn’t print news that squares w/ your preferred view of the world.
On the other hand, a news medialike Fox & the Washington Times are your preferred vehicles because their motto is: “All the news that’s fit to Fabricate.”
http://www.swift.com
real hard one to find.
There is some severe cognitive dissonance involved in believing 1) A free press is utterly vital to a free society, and 2) Nothing the press does actually has consequences in the real world.
Oh, and it was vitally important to run a story that was *completely irrelevant*.
Because that’s what mak44 and others are claiming… nothing in the story was actually *news* to anyone… right?
What a freaking waste of paper.
David B
Sorry, no link. But if you want to hear it, tape or TIVO Olberman’s Countdown on the West Coast edition or tomorrow’s morning repeat. It’s in the first segment, so you won’t have to watch long enough to get seriously ill.
Course, if you hasve a strong enough stomach for the truth, you might stay on for the piece about the swiftboating of Murtha re his purported statement in FL & the retraction printed today by thw Sun Sentinel as an antidote to Paul’s horsesh_t hitpiece thread on Murtha this past Sunday. Paul didn’t have the cajones other than to make an equivocatinbg retraction buried back on his Sunday poost where no one is likely to see it.
Apologies for the latter thread hijacking.
O.K. mak44 you seem to be a little challenged on understanding your own dribbling, so let me help you a little, and please read slowly so your whittle brain can keep up.
You said
Notice the keyword there simpleton, you said that the SWIFT website had information about the program.
Again, you moron, provide the link to the portion of the web site that describes the program.
Or, like Lee, are you showing your hand as a troll with no substance? You made the statement, back it up with fact.
Who’s the dipshit now Skippy?
Apologies to mak, I assumed you posted the comment about dipshit . . .
But no apologies to the other moron, learn to read you tool.
Thanks mak, I’ll take a pass on Olberman, it was bad enough when he was a slobbering sportscaster, now he just foams at the mouth to much for me.
I hate to say it Old Time Religion but at 96 maybe it aint Bush that aint right in the head!
David B
No problem, but if you want a source, you’ll have to hold your nose & watch Countdown.
I understand that a lot of people here despise Olberman, but this is a factual report & not his opinion or editorial comment.
Thanks for that brave admission. editor in chimp mak 24.
914
Why 914, you are too kind.
BTW Is your “Pass” valid thru the 4th?
44 is Your self absorbsion a terminal condition?
Wow, Lee and OTR have some old, non-existant caricature family members.
I just wish the NY Times had the same respect for nat’l secrets as they expect us to have for their reporters’ sources.
Start locking up journalists until they give up their sources. Risen in a jail cell would be a hoot.
-=Mike
Lock up the Aristocrats that look down on all of us mere Americans? Why thats prepostrous…They have our best interests at heart, and our collective need to know all balanced perfectly.
PUKE
Course, if you hasve a strong enough stomach for the truth, you might stay on for the piece about the swiftboating of Murtha re his purported statement in FL & the retraction printed today by thw Sun Sentinel
See, HERE is where somebody would include a link to back up their point.
Just a piece of advice.
This evening, Roger Cressey, a former Bush Admin. advisor on terrorism, said categorically on MSNBC that the revelation by the NYT of this financil operation did not in the slightest way reveal anything that the terrorists had not already known.
Of course, if he was a believable source, he’d have been on a channel people ACTUALLY watch. You go to MSNBC when Hee Haw happens to kick you off your usual slot.
You’re just blowing out your ass. A simplistic attack on Cressey (who by the way makes many appearances on more than MSNBC as an expert on terrortism)
A better debator, of course, would have put a link to back up his/her claim HERE as well.
Moreover, Bush, from shortly after 9/11, has said that the US will use every avenue possible to track financial transfers.
This is like saying a teacher who tells his class to study for a test and a teacher who hands his class a test are doing the same thing.
Your rant, Mitchell, just reveals how little you give a sh_t for the 1st Amendment. Perhaps you prefer an American edition of Pravda.
And you demonstrate a desire to let an elite crowd of unaccountable people make decisions for the country as a whole.
There is a reason why the left embraces the courts and not the legislature.
My understanding of the matter is that the NYT had numerous sources who revealed this classified information to them. If anyone is to be prosecuted, it is the leakers.
As a member of the public with a vested right to know — I want to know who these sources are.
Sorry, no link. But if you want to hear it, tape or TIVO Olberman’s Countdown on the West Coast edition or tomorrow’s morning repeat. It’s in the first segment, so you won’t have to watch long enough to get seriously ill.
So, all you have is Olbermann’s demented ramblings?
Sorry, if I didn’t take Keith seriously when discussing the blocking scheme of the 1994 Buffalo Bills squad, I don’t think I’ll take him seriously about something that he is even MORE clueless about.
I know, you think “Hey, he’s wearing GLASSES!” and all — but that doesn’t actually equate to any intellectual weight.
No problem, but if you want a source, you’ll have to hold your nose & watch Countdown.
So you have no source, then. Got it.
Would you take “Well, you’ll have to listen to Sean Hannity’s show for the source” seriously?
I understand that a lot of people here despise Olberman, but this is a factual report & not his opinion or editorial comment.
Gee, why would anybody possibly doubt you on this one? The Bush/TANG story on 60 Minutes was not an opinion or editorial comment either, right?
-=Mike
You know the part that really gets me? It’s the part where the Times and their sympathizers say “they already knew it was going on… what’s the big deal?”
The “big deal” would be the difference between knowing there are police on the interstate that will give out tickets for speeding. And knowing the exact locations they like to hide and the shift rotation schedules for all the patrol cars so you can now completely avoid all the speed traps.
The “big deal” would be the difference between knowing that nuclear weapons exist and work, and finding a tech manual with exact schematics, a list of the materials needed (and the tolerances they would have to be manufactured to), and electrical diagrams to actually build one.
Of course the disclosure hurt the program. Before, they knew it was going on. Now, they know exactly what to do and what NOT to do to fly under the radar and make it that much harder to find them and root them out. Maybe just that much harder that they now have enough time to actually pull off some of their plans.
Way to go Times Two.
Former Republican Rep. Joe Scarborough gets it right as he takes the wood to Peter King for calling for prosecuting the NY Times:
SCARBOROUGH (6/26/06): Do you not trust yourself with this information, do you not trust your peers? You are the head of the Homeland Security Committee, for God`s sake. I would hope that you– Listen, what if Hillary Clinton is president two years from now, three years from now, and she is conducting these type of programs? Aren’t you going to demand to have that type of knowledge ahead of time? […]
CARBOROUGH: Friends, here`s the bottom line. OK? Let`s bottom-line this one for you.
For me, it comes down to double standards. I always apply the test of what we Republicans would have done had this happened during the 1990s. During the Clinton administration, when I was sitting on the Judiciary Committee, I’ll tell you what would have happened–we would have raised hell. We would not have trusted Bill Clinton with this type of unlimited power. And we have not trusted–we never would have trusted Janet Reno as attorney general with this type of unlimited power.
This is a fight, not just between Republicans and Democrats, not just between the New York Times and George Bush, but it`s a fight between conservative Republicans who believe in limited government–those Jeffersonian Republicans–and establishment Republicans that want to give this administration whatever they ask for.
Nuff said.
Except nobody fought about Clinton’s widespread domestic spying program.
-=Mike
MikeSC
God help you, you pompous ass, if you think yopu offered any debating points above.
Simply dismissing a news piece on Countdown because you despise Olberman does not invalidate a truthful report, you dumb sh_t.
You couldn’t succeed in Forensics were your opponent a rock. Slinging sh_t is not a rebuttal.
However, you might change the “SC” in your user to “SS;” it would be far more apropos.
God help you, you pompous ass, if you think yopu offered any debating points above.
So, ya got nothing, eh?
Nothing at all, huh?
No evidence whatsoever?
Well, at least you were makkk enough to admit it.
Simply dismissing a news piece on Countdown because you despise Olberman does not invalidate a truthful report, you dumb sh_t.
Gee, Countdown has built up SUCH a level of trust that I take their word seriously without, you know, CORROBORATION OF ANY SORT WHATSOEVER.
Again, if I said “Listen to Hannity’s show for the source”, you’d be just a bit skeptical, too.
Provide a link. Just one. Heck, be industrious, go to Olbermann’s site, and find the link there.
…of course, I doubt he has one, either.
You couldn’t succeed in Forensics were your opponent a rock. Slinging sh_t is not a rebuttal.
Thank you for demonstrating this so effectively here. I mean, yeah, it’s your usual non-reply — but it’s universally demonstrative of your point here.
Shame you can’t back up your OTHER points with anything so concrete.
However, you might change the “SC” in your user to “SS;” it would be far more apropos.
Oooh, did makkk get upset?
Channel that anger into backing up a point of yours for once. What do you say, sport?
-=Mike
Mak
What is Yopu? a new flavor of yogurt?
Mak44, you then believe the NYT staff is centrist or maybe slightly even right of center politically? I’d like to understand what makes you think the NYT is not a group of lefties. Though nowhere near the DU, the NYT is significantly left of center. That is not hardly news.
The synchophantic support coming from you and some others indicating that the NYT story did no harm is baseless – you have no possible way of knowing that. If the program was known to terrorists one and all, and it was legal, and it was not harming Americans, then why put the story on the front page and make such a point about the program being secret?
You would have us believe the story was no big deal, yet the NYT saw fit to talk to the government departments involved, current and former politicians of both parties, and the two chairs of the 9/11 commission (who asked that the NYT not print the story). Even Jack Murtha asked them not to publish the story. So, regardless of what you think, the NYT, those government officials, and I think the story was a big deal.
This is an excerpt from a CIA report about leaks of classified information:
“While leaks of classified information are often intended to influence or inform US audiences, foreign intelligence services and terrorists are close and voracious readers of the US press. They are keenly alert to revelations of US classified information. For example, a former Russian military intelligence officer wrote: ‘I was amazed–and Moscow was very appreciative–at how many times I found very sensitive information in American newspapers. In my view, Americans tend to care more about scooping their competition than about national security, which made my job easier .’
“I call this the Lunev Axiom: Classified intelligence disclosed in the press is the effective equivalent of intelligence gathered through foreign espionage. Importantly, more than just Russian intelligence officers understand this. Key adversaries of the United States, such as China and al-Qaida, derive a significant amount of their information on the United States and US intelligence from the media, including the Internet. What we need to understand are the legal implications of this key principle.
The NYT’s exposure of the NSA and SWIFT programs did not help American citizens, our soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan, or our intelligence agents here and abroad one single iota. But the information did help somebody and I’m sure they are grateful to the NYT for their assistance just as the Soviets were.
I wish the NYT would work half as hard (or work at all acutally) to gather and release valuable classifed information about our enemies as they do releasing information to that enemy about our fellow Americans who are working to find and stop them.
914
Sorry Sybil- I misspelled “yoda.”
914
I forgot that these cold nites up thar in Minnesota probably slow down your reptillian nervous system.
F15C
Yea. they got such a bunch of Libs at the NYT; like the recently retired Wm. Saffire & the resident David Brooks, not to mention the former Judith Miller who carried the Bush Water for hyping his war of choice.
A real hotbed of Lefties, exclusively.
Yes and I guess I can blame Gore for not bringing His inconvienent truth up to My neck of the woods..its like 40 degrees out right now. brrrr
914
You might consider moving to Cincinnati, where reptiles thrive in the heat & humidity & can pound the keyboard even thru the nite. Plus, while we’re not the buckle on the bible belt, we certainly are the 1st notch.
And of course, it’s the home of probably your most admired woman, Jean Schmidt
Lee lee was laughing at someone for spelling something wrong. One thing is certain-you can’t spell lee lee wrong because it is so easy. Just in case someone has forgot how to spell it, this is the how it is spelled–ASSHOLE
“So this is kind of strange, then. Both Snow and Dick Cheney have explicitly said that the Times has put the nation’s security at risk – and presumably they think the paper continues to do so, since it won’t back off its right to publish such stories. Yet by all indications the administration is unlikely to take any real action against the paper, mainly because it could be politically disastrous for Bush. Either the administration is putting politics ahead of national security and won’t act aggressively against an institution it says is endangering American lives – because it would be bad for Bush. Or the administration’s claim that The Times endangered national security is just the latest in a long string of lies it has told to the American people. Which is it?”
No, it’s called having other things on your plate and trying to find out the agents leaking.
Though, I could use that logic and ask Dems why in the heck they’d want abortion to be “rare”, since it’s only a common surgical procedure and all.
-=Mike
Mak44: “Yea. they got such a bunch of Libs at the NYT;”
So you agree with me. The NYT staff is predominately leftist. Big of you to concede the point.
Have you no semi-witty rejoinders about the statments made in the CIA report about how some of our newspapers helped the USSR, and currently are read ‘voraciously’ by our current enemies? I’d really like you to counter what they said.
I think the quote in that article, “Classified intelligence disclosed in the press is the effective equivalent of intelligence gathered through foreign espionage.” sums up the current NYT/NSA/SWIFT matters quite nicely and accurately.
I don’t have enough information to know if the NYT is purposefully trying to help the enemy – I’d like to thing they are not, but the available evidence doesn’t support that conclusion. But whether on purpose or as a side effect of trying to ‘get Bush’, they are providing aid to the enemy.
jhow66
You posted; “Just in case someone has forgot how to spell it, ( Lee’s name ) this is the how it is spelled–ASSHOLE
How erudite; I am in awe. Your forensic skills are so razor sharp, I imagine poor Lee has bled lifeless on the floor.
Wouldn’t dare think of taking you on in an exchange of ideas.
BTW Weren’t you one of those bitching about posters on the “Troll thread?”
BULLSEYE.