The Rampant, Irresponsible Political Thread

[David Panzer]

There was no argument being made. It was solely a snide comment. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Karachi Vyce]

No, the traitors are those who leak real TOP SECRET information to the media for political gain. Oh, and the media for publishing it.

It would appear that ZHD and I are in accord with what we feel are rather treasonous actions by the NYT.

I have to agree with the reasoning provided by "Ace" over at his blog:

The left continues to undermine national security in the most despicable, cynical way. I'm quite sure the reasonable liberals at the NYT and WaPo know full well that programs like this are absolutely vital, and their secrecy is likewise vital. However, they have made the most anti-American and evil sort of decision: While tools like this are vital for saving American lives, they will not permit any Republican President to use them. Only Democratic Presidents are permitted to employ the full panoply of powers for protecting American lives.

It's blackmail, pure and simple. Either let a Democrat into the White House, or we will continue to sabotage American security and, in effect, kill Americans. We will keep secrets when a Democrat is in office, but not a Republican. So we offer the American people a choice: Let the politicians we favor run the country, or we will help Al Qaeda murder you.

At the very least, the NYT should have its White House press credentials revoked. I'd rather like to see congressional hearings, however, with our politicians taking the editors of the NYT and the WP and verbally ripping them new assholes for deliberately providing aid to our enemies just to embarrass the Bush administration.

[Jan]

What I don't understand is why anybody thinks it's news? It only stands to reason that following the money trail is an obvious way to go and there've been stories previously about various 'front' operations having funds frozen. So what's to be upset over when the newspapers point out what should be obvious to anybody?

Jan

[AaronB]

At the very least, the NYT should have its White House press credentials revoked. I'd rather like to see congressional hearings, however, with our politicians taking the editors of the NYT and the WP and verbally ripping them new assholes for deliberately providing aid to our enemies just to embarrass the Bush administration.

National Review Magazine is calling for exactly that. Their editorial just went up today.

[AaronB]

What I don't understand is why anybody thinks it's news? It only stands to reason that following the money trail is an obvious way to go and there've been stories previously about various 'front' operations having funds frozen. So what's to be upset over when the newspapers point out what should be obvious to anybody?

Jan

Without having read the article, I would presume that there are meathods that the government was using to make it more unique than just following the money. On a side note, John Snow (Secratary of Treasury) has written an (open?) letter to Bill Keller. I think that this passage answers the question Jan has:

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.

[Der Mike]

What I don't understand is why anybody thinks it's news? It only stands to reason that following the money trail is an obvious way to go and there've been stories previously about various 'front' operations having funds frozen. So what's to be upset over when the newspapers point out what should be obvious to anybody?

Jan

The better question is: If this is so obvious, why was it a front page story in the NY Times to begin with?
-=Mike

[Dr Maturin]

Bush and company got fed up with all of the leaking. It's not that this program is more important than wiretapping or secret prisons; it's that this "story" was the straw that broke the camel's back.

[David Panzer]

So instead of dealing with the leakers, the Bush Admin whines about the Times.

[Dr Maturin]

So instead of dealing with the leakers, the Bush Admin whines about the Times.

They COULD always do both...

[David Panzer]

But right now, they aren't. They're whinig like a 4 year old whose mother said "No, I'm not going to buy that toy"

[Dr Maturin]

But right now, they aren't.

You don't know that.

They're whinig like a 4 year old whose mother said "No, I'm not going to buy that toy"

No they're not. Whining usually constitutes annoying complaining about something trivial. They're rightfully complaining about something that's a major concern.

[David Panzer]

You're right. I don't know if they are. However, since Tony Snow and others in the Administration have said nothing about dealing with the leakers, it gives one the impression that they are doing nothing.

To me, their complaining sounds like whining.

[AaronB]

To me, their complaining sounds like whining.

Much like you're whining about what Bush is or isn't doing?

[Dr Maturin]

You're right. I don't know if they are. However, since Tony Snow and others in the Administration have said nothing about dealing with the leakers, it gives one the impression that they are doing nothing.

That's the thing...this shouldn't be in the open. It's a very serious, very secretive thing. They shouldn't play politics with it when there are so many other things that they can play politics with safely.

[David Panzer]

Much like you're whining about what Bush is or isn't doing?

Never knew a post on the internet makes a sound