| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
||||||
| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
|
||||||
| The Alley |
|
My Wish... |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
Using broad government subpoenas, the money-tracking program allows U.S. counterterrorism analysts to obtain financial information from a vast database maintained by a company based in Belgium. It routes about 11 million financial transactions daily among 7,800 banks and other financial institutions in 200 countries. Some Democrats in Congress have said the program raises concerns about intrusions on privacy and was another step in an aggressive Bush administration expansion of executive-branch powers. My wish is that these Democrats and the New York Times staff be in the next place that the terrorists bomb. President Bush said Monday it was "disgraceful" that the news media had disclosed a secret CIA-Treasury program to track millions of financial records in search of terrorist suspects. The White House accused The New York Times of breaking a long tradition of keeping wartime secrets. The Times has defended its effort, saying publication has served America's public interest. Neither the Times of the Democrats in question care about America's public interest. What they ARE interested in is obvious. Their actions are despicable.....again. |
||
| © Copyright 2006 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
No lies there. The NY times committed treason in my simple view and should be treated as such. Same with the governmental leakers. Firing squad or hanging should send the appropriate message about publishing wartime secrets used against a known enemy. And the NY Times did this even after the White House pleaded with them not to run the story. How do you think the FDR Democratic Administration would've dealt with major US newpapers publishing headlines and stories about the upcoming invasion of Normandy, complete with times, landing zones and military inventory? |
||
Mistletoe Angel 
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Unlike the NSA surveillance story, where I did believe there was no excuse for the FISA law to be walked around and to perform warrantless eavesdropping on Americans (for the record, I absolutely agree we need that NSA program and eavesdropping should be performed, just done in the legal manner), I do agree with you in that I see no problem with monitoring financial records in identifying and catching leads in apprehending terrorist suspects. However, I am also shaking my head here toward your "wish", Balladeer. I recognize that whenever any major story breaks at first that one gets very upset about, it can literally rattle anyone to the depths of their soul and thus I understand some of the most heated thoughts will come out at first and then cool down eventually. But I can't respect anyone's thought of wishing others dead or in harms way, as you somewhat seem to insinuate here in your wish. In these last five-and-a-half years that I've been here, I have always believed you as someone whose views I often disagree with, but also someone who is quite understanding and fair-minded, one who absolutely means well and really has a great heart. Really, I think most people who would read something like your initial comment in this post would indeed agree and understand your general point here in that the New York Times and these particular Democrats just don't take our national security seriously, but when they read that line, "My wish is that these Democrats and the New York Times staff be in the next place that the terrorists bomb." they'll think of it as something out of the pages of Ann Coulter's playbook or something and feel suddenly you've lost all credibility because of that single thought. All I can say, Balladeer, is be careful what you wish for.....because this may indeed come true, and far more innocent lives than these leakers and Democrats will be lost in such a tragedy, something none of us here ever want to see. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Yep, I don't disagree with your thoughts, MA, and of course my comment wasa meant more in sarcasm than actual wish, as i'm sure you know. I will state, however, if the actions of specific people at the Times caused a terrorist act to be perpetrated on the US, causing loss of life for innocents, I would want them there, also,and I don't apologize for feeling that way. Their actions are inexcusable and transferring the direction of the thread towards my words instead of theirs does not address the issue. I do agree with you in that I see no problem with monitoring financial records in identifying and catching leads in apprehending terrorist suspects. That's all you had to say with reference to this topic, Noah. Nothing about the actions of the Times, no condemnation or even acknowledgement of them....just an "I see no problem." |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Yes, and I did believe you had to have been sarcastic, or just thinking out loud, and you are far too understanding and mature to ever stoop to that sort of level really. I'm just asking you be careful more than anything when you address your thoughts on serious issues like this, for if someone heard words come out like this publicly, they're going to be interpreted just as they are, and the only conclusion most will come to is that that person really did wish those dead in a next terrorist attack and such, and moreover in wishing terrorists kill them here it's as though that person really wants another terrorist attack to happen on our homeland just to prove a point. It's a lesson I think everyone, including myself, must continue to be reminded of again and again. As for the actions of those who pushed and released the New York Times story, I can't say I know enough about this story at this time to have a genuine opinion of it, it's something I need to learn more about. If they released this story without any consent, communication or permission from White House personnel, then yes, I do think it's an act of compromising our national security and they should be punished. But it could lean the other way as well possibly, and until more details are available (please share any other information or chronology of events you may have here) I choose to approach this story with caution. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Again, Noah, you are keying in on me and avoiding the topic...can you respond to the issue, please? he only conclusion most will come to is that that person really did wish those dead in a next terrorist attack and such, and moreover in wishing terrorists kill them here it's as though that person really wants another terrorist attack to happen on our homeland just to prove a point. I cannot believe you said that, Noah, but it is an incredible statement that causes me to lose all respect for you, if you would stoop to such a tactic to say something like that. Finished. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
It's too bad that they can't or won't see that giving information to the terrorists directly works against the American people's interests. Their actions in this instance are disgraceful, more than disgraceful, dangerous to our safety. They need to exhibit a bit more responsibility in their reporting, especially in such dangerous times when our very lives depend on defeating these terrorists. It doesn't help when they are given a blueprint of our strategies. To sidetrack a bit...love the new picture, Michael! |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
I did provide my opinion of this.....I claim ignorance of the matter at this time as this has just been coming out within the past 24 hours, thus don't have any real opinion at this point. From what I do know, however, I do find what these storywriters did questionable to inappropriate. And I believe you mis-read my previous comment. I said that I was certain you were indeed being sarcastic and you really don't wish any irresponsible Democrats and newswriters dead. I was merely mentioning in my previous response that especially these days, everyone has to be careful what one says, for some people won't see the sarcasm, they won't see the joke, and if they heard any politician or celebrity say, "My wish is that these Democrats and newswriters are in the building that is the terrorists' next target!", most hearing or reading that will believe it's being meant what that person said, and would storm huge outrage and controversy. If you were in their shoes and I knew you just as well as I do here, I would know better, but others would think you really did wish physical harm upon these personalities, and I never want to see that gross misunderstanding happen for you or anyone here. We've learned what it's like to get "Dixie Chicked" and I certainly don't want to see you or anyone becoming the innocent victim of such an outcry for saying something you didn't mean. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
 Ooohhhhhh...and I love your new picture too, by the way, dearest Balladeer, yay! I'm just beginning to learn how to use a digital camera, so I hope soon I can finally upload a new picture here, after several years of the same picture! (giggles) Love, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I didn't like it either. But at the same time? I am glad that I know too. and hmmmm... I dread the day we hang journalists. But tch..there is that, this squeamish feeling I get, and I get it when I watch a little too much news coverage during wartime, but I also get it when I watch very creative acts of terrorism depicted in blockbuster movies and on the internet. And then? I'm torn...one is fantasy and entertainment, and this is journalism, and apparently, reality. If I trusted this administration (and hey? please note I did not say Republicans, 'cause yanno? I don't trust Demo's much these days either) BUT... if I trusted this administration, I could say truly I would prefer not to know. As things stand in MY relationship to the government, I ain't standing in the "trust" line. The Bush administration has already taken many liberties, and if we cry "treason", I propose let's cry it across the board. But then? "What the *bleep* do I know?" (with winks to jo jo) I'm gonna go try to find Serenity. She would know what to do! gleeeeeeeeeee?  *peace* |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Yay, let's turn on the Serenity Signal! Love, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
This issue just goes to show how far we've come in defending people's First Amendment rights... oh, wait... I forgot something... I might be remembering something that isn't a fact; however, isn't there something in that law of Freedom of *everything* that precludes bringing harm against the US Government, or another human being? And would this information not possibly give aid and comfort to the enemy. As we are in a "War on Terror", then giving information to the enemy about how we are winning so that they might possibly counter-act and avoid they damage being done to them... isn't that what is called giving aid and comfort to the enemy? Isn't it written somewhere that soing such is highly illegal and could cause you to be alive somewhere where people force you to make small rocks out of little rocks, and make little rocks into powder? That is, IF you are allowed to live at all? NO? You don't see it that way? Tell you what... we have a member of our family here on the Blue Pages that is currently in harms way. How about we ask him if he is happy with this, and if he thinks it is going to make the job of those who are doing the fighting any harder. OK, OK... I apologize for singling out any one specific person, That wasn't right... in that case, how about we ask the family of ANY of the men and women who have been killed by an IED or in a firefight with terrorists if they think it is a proper use of freedom of the press. Go ahead... I'll wait.... just let me know what they said. *humming tunelessly* Oh, wait... *I* am one of those. Silly me, I forgot that one of my foster kids was killed in a firefight with insurgents just a short year and a half ago. LEt's ask what *I* think about this... or do we even need to? "... the rest is silence" |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
No, I don't think we need to, Ringo, and I'm sorry for your loss. Thank you, Denise. Nice to see your words! |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
My condolences and sympathy hugs go out to your foster child too, dearest friend! Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I too, am very sorry for your loss. And as you once nodded in sympathy to me regarding an emotional issue and offered a hand of friendship, I do the same now.  and yes *peace* |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
I thank everyone here for their thoughts... it was not done to elicit those responses, rather to make a point to those who feel the public has a right to know everything that is being done to aid in the fight against terror. "... the rest is silence" |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Noah, I'm not sure if they approached the WH or vice versa, but there was a plea from the WH for THNT to sit on the story and not run it. New York Times did anyhow, most likely out of pique and failure to resist the urge to stick a thumb in the President's eye. They ran the story on the front page with a bold headline. Another paper copied their story and ran it as frontpage news. Given the New York Times' trackrecord of publishing 'scoops' dealing with national security and the war on terror, it's rather naive to think the terrorists don't read that newspaper just for more ammunition to stoke the fires of zealotry. And that is 'aiding and abetting', if not treasonable behavior, especially given that every single 'scoop' they've run on this Administration purported to directly impact Americans and impugn on their Rights has proven to be false. But that didn't stop the stories in the first place and were definately learned by terrorists from that source. If they really wanted to increase their readership, there's other ways than pandering to Islamic religious extremists and Allahcentric killers. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I do agree, bro, we have to take in the record of NYT, if we will compare it to the record of the Bush Administration regarding honesty. And I still maintain--I am torn. When I am torn, I do what I always do--I personalize. Now let's suppose for the sake of argument, that I personalize this administration. If that is so, "then I don't trust Daddy." That, is a terrible thing. and it is happening... beep beep beep tonight beep reporting on the home front National Guardsmen in New Orleans report incoming gunfire and now, I smile weakly, I have been told that to be a true proponet of New Orleans, I shouldn't advertise this stuff--because, we um, need you guys, to come here and spend yer money and act like nothing has happened... Well I say b.s. It's happening. Where is the muzzle tightened? and I propose a new question: "when do you NOT wanna know?" |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Judging by the way you describe the situation, I do believe it was wrong and disrespectful for them to rush to publish the story if the White House did ask them not to release it at this time. I absolutely believe the threat of terrorism is real and anyone who doesn't recognize that is naive to say the least, and we do need this NSA program and like efforts, for I absolutely agree there is a legal way to perform eavesdroppings and monitorings. In fact, I believe some of the most at-risk sites are not being taken seriously, especially nuclear power plants and our nation's ports, and if anything that should be a top priority in my mind. I must say that I do believe, like Karen, that our rights are weakening and eroding in some ways under this "long war" in which we are bogging ourselves down in. I don't trust the President in some of his decisions, especially in failing to either seek a warrant for post-911 wiretaps or cooperating with Congress to see to it the FISA law was democratically changed in understanding we're living in a more dangerous world and the current FISA law was out-dated. Instead, he walked around that law, and if we allow ourselves to continue letting our elected officials, who are sworn to defend the Constitution and the law, then we are just setting ourselves up for inevitable further erosions of our law and liberties, and that to me is also appeasing those who threaten our way of life, for they want to see us sacrifice what we hold dear. I don't trust the New York Times to a great extent in that I do believe, as you say Alicat, that their disclosure of these many details can inspire these terrorist networks to shift tactics and provide hints to eluding our security strongholds. I also don't trust our government to a great extent either, in that I do believe it really does mean well overall in trying to secure and protect this nation in a genuine manner, but often I just don't think they take the time to think their policies over and act irrationally and recklessly ever too much, and if we continue to get stuck in the quicksand of this "long war" in the Middle East, I believe we're only going to get stuck in a greater conflict that'll take generations to amend. For the record, I'm not a radical pacifist, I'm a "pragmatist pacifist". I believe war should ALWAYS be a last resort and all aggressive wars are immoral. However, I DO believe some coercion is justified, in going after the key figures directly responsible for civil harm, without resorting to widespread war where the innocent are in harms way. I believe facilities which obviously are strongholds of terrorism activity or weapons that can harm large populaces should be taken down and dismantled. I don't believe in total disarmament, but just some arms reductions in which the money can go back to providing for our children's education, health care, higher mimimum wages and other basic needs. I just believe there are always better ways to resolve conflicts and that the benefits of war are outweighed by the curses. I hope that others can understand that here, and you have every right to question my beliefs if you wish, but that's just the way I feel. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
What secret was exposed? With respect to the poster, I don't understand why this is suddenly the news or even why the NY Times made it the news -- it's old news. It has been going on for the past four years, see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13561813/site/newsweek/ . Anyone who has money in an overseas account is informed (if it is a legitimate bank, that is) that the bank is required to give an accounting of any wire transfers to the U.S. - there may be a dollar limit on that, I'm not sure. This is a fact that has been in effect for several years now. So why all the sudden fuss? Is it the disclosure of the processing center itself in Belgium? Or is it just another election argument contending that anytime the truth is told about a known fact, it is jeopardizing (fear factor) Americans? Are there some new provisions to the existing practice that we didn't hear about before. I heard about them, didn't you? I mean, after 911, how do you think they were able to find out about and freeze so many bank accounts suspected of fronting terror money under the auspices of being nonprofit organizations or otherwise? I tend to be on the side of the right to privacy (although I don't have anything to hide) just because I do not want to lose a right I was born with -- when especially we could be focusing on protecting our ports, borders, identity theft, airlines, college enrollment for foreign students....many other things which have not been up to par. Those enforcements would not deprive American citizens of rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. I mean, what next....our medical records are going to be nationally available....then what next? I believe many of our rights have already eroded and we have let it happen out of fear. But, hey, it is not okay to racially profile with airport screening, but it is okay to look into everyone's bank accounts....give me a break! Just for kickers, how do you feel about the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership? Now, this is scarey....we didn't even hear about it until after the fact, and in effect, it sort of creates a new kind of nation....not the U.S. anymore...maybe, the new North American Union (kinda like the European Union)? Where has the involvement of the other branches of government been with this one? Sorry, I'm getting carried away, but please take a look at this anyhow. I grew up with the notion this was OUR country, and yet, there was no congressional oversight in enacting this new "union." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/11/20041130-3.html *Note to Ser* Bleep...think everyone needs to see it...*wink* btw, it's on its way. [This message has been edited by iliana (06-27-2006 06:03 AM).] |
||
|
latearrival Member Ascendant
since 2003-03-21
Posts 5499Florida |
Well, I did see a recent cartoon showing the three as one big country. Maybe we can annex Mexico in and get rid of all the aliens! I dislike the use of that word to describe our Mexican neighbors. martyjo |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
The point is that even though it's been going on for the last four years, it's only been recently revealed. The date on your msnbc link is June 26, 2006, not June 26, 2002. 'Here's where the building is located, here's an arial shot, here's what it looks like. If you need anything else, Mr. Terrorist, just let us know how we can accommodate.' |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Alicat - I knew about it. I heard about provisions of the Patriot Act that provided for this to occur. (Not the name of the bank that is doing the gathering, but the Patriot Act that required it.) So it is not new news except for the statistics themselves and where it is being done. So do terrorists not have access to reading the Patriot Act -- bet your bottom dollar they've read it and probably laughed themselves silly. The reason why I say this is because they want to end democracy, at least that is what we are told -- the Patriot Act and other government actions done to protect us do sacrifice some of our democratic freedoms -- so the terrorists were probably thrilled with some of the provisions in it -- after all, wasn't it reported that much of the money they passed around was done manually and not using bank accounts? [This message has been edited by iliana (06-29-2006 05:26 AM).] |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
But, hey, it is not okay to racially profile with airport screening, but it is okay to look into everyone's bank accounts....give me a break! - Iliana I do agree, bro, we have to take in the record of NYT, if we will compare it to the record of the Bush Administration regarding honesty. If that is so, "then I don't trust Daddy." - Serenity You, ladies, are the people the NYT wrote the article for. That is their objective - comments like yours. Iliana, they do not look into everyone's bank account...that is YOUR exaggerative mind working again. You may want to be clearer of the facts before posting such material. This article does not claim any laws were broken and no one states there were. They simply want to throw something out there to get people to have thoughts like yours....news based on innuendo. Serenity, you have the complete right to feel distrustful or anything else about Bush you want but comparing the Bush administration to the newspaper leaking this story makes no sense at all. You are doing exactly what they want you to do.....make an illogical jump from one to the other and say"Ah, that damn Bush just can't be trusted." I confess I find it impossible to believe that anyone would sanction the newspaper's actions here....in this thread no one does but several just use it as a springboard to go after Bush, while completely ignoring the topic. Congratulations. Mind control is alive and well. Alicat, we are a far cry from "loose lips sink ships", aren't we? Perhaps Al-Qaida will make the Times their Man of the Year. It would be well-deserved. |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Mike, your words: "It routes about 11 million financial transactions daily among 7,800 banks and other financial institutions in 200 countries." Exaggerating? Secondly....like I said, this is old news. I did not bring up the topic; you did. The NY Times did and then Bush did, and then you did. Political! That's all. The terrorists have probably been avoiding banks ever since the Patriot Act was instituted....we know they deal in drugs and gems like tanzanite, diamonds, etc....mined in obscure African countries....and work on the barter systems....so why are the banks being checked? Ask yourself, why? if terrorists are savvy to this and I feel certain they have been because they immediatly started changing their financial dealings after the Act was passed according to many experts. And, we do agree on one thing, yes, mind control is working. If it isn't fear of the terrorists or illegal immigrants, then it is fear of the government, eminent domain, and losing our own rights. The fear factor is alive and well and sells lots of papers. It's a hayday for either major political party anyway you look at it. I see little difference in the parties these days....just different agenda....both use fear as a element to the campaigns. In all fairness, even though it has been known about the banks reporting information for several years, I had not heard where this was being done and I can understand why that is something that did not need to be divulged unless it was to draw our attention to how many accounts are being watched. When a reporter quotes numbers then they should give the source of their information or it may not be considered credible. That is really a big number and if that is how many suspected terrorists there are, wow, we really are in trouble, and I have a hard time believing it. [This message has been edited by iliana (06-27-2006 03:29 PM).] |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Jo's right. Neither of our political parties are divorced of scare tactics and fueling fear as a political weapon. The Democrats use fear politically in crying out that our civil liberties are being imploded, while the Republicans have been exploiting the tragedies of 9/11 and our fears of terrorism to make excuses toward this particular war, even if it means taking our national deficit to record numbers and chipping away at others food stamps, Medicaid, national parks, etc. to fund it. Mind control is omnipresent apparently. I certainly agree some concerns of civil liberty erosions are exaggerated and propagandized just like threats of terrorism are sometimes, but I believe when most Americans do believe we are heading in the wrong direction, and do believe the scope of executive power is being exceeded and taken too far, Americans have the right to be upset and question our liberties are under attack. * June 15, 2006 Department of Defense Letter (In Response To January 5, 2006 FOIA Request) * Now, I was searching the wire earlier today, and I came across this transcript of a letter from the Department of Defense as requested under a Freedom of Information Act response, and according to this transcript, the DOD appears to be admitting that they have monitored a much wider spectrum of student organizations than was earlier acknowledged. Their admissions included conducting surveillance of groups protesting the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy for gays and lesbians in the armed forces, as well as students protesting the war at State University of New York at Albany, William Paterson University in New Jersey, Southern Connecticut State University and the University of California at Berkeley (the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement), despite NONE of the reports in the documentation indicating any terrorist activity by the students who were monitored. Perhaps we should just admit that mind control is being thrown at seemingly every direction. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Noah, I wonder how many people that read that letter will question what those rules cited are? Almost sounds like the days of good old J. Edgar again, doesn't it? Maybe some people don't really know what happened there, but more and more it is looking like history repeating itself. Just a little more scarey this time because technology is so much more advanced. |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
Every time someone reveals the so-called hidden stuff, the administration cries foul...cluck cluck fowl play. It's not as if the terrorists didn't already know they were being tracked financially. GIMME a break! Even the village idiots know this is something we've ALWAYS done. I am NOT saying we shouldn't track the dollars, because I think we should. My-oh-my the poor little admins.... don't kill the MESSENGERS when you don't like the message...and? I doubt anything in print wasn't already well-known by those who are AWAKE and aiming at us every chance they get. I do NOT buy the argument that this is anything that puts our troops in more danger than they are already in by being where they are today. And I am terribly sorry for your loss, Ringo, and hope you hold onto those fondest memories of your lost loved one. There you have it, just what you'd expect from me...my not-so-humble-opinion.  I like your new photo though and I still enjoy and respect your willingness to speak out Mr Mike! |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
Maybe we'll go all the way back to the Ultimate Democrat, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and start relocating ethic/racial groups to concen...detention camps. I'm curious but lazy, Iliana. What were your responses to the Valerie Plame leak? I ask since you seem very nonchalant about these current leaks. |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
I said, "When a reporter quotes numbers then they should give the source of their information or it may not be considered credible." Alicat -- I used the wrong word: source. What I should have said is that "a good reporter substantiates his/her numeric complilations with references" -- meaning, giving the place or institution where people can verify the truth of the numbers. Please understand that I believe revealing a "Source" (when it is a person) without their permission violates their right of privacy and violates freedom of the press. [This message has been edited by iliana (06-27-2006 07:07 PM).] |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
*laughing* I have to be called on regarding MY logic? *smiling sweetly* I will restrain myself from quoting some of the many illogical statements from our Commander-in-chief. I don't want the thread to deteriorate to name calling, so I promised myself no Bush Bashing. And that's out of respect for you Mike-lovie. I know it upsets you so I won't go there.  'Cause I DO love you. and the following is off-topic folks, but a message to Jo. Not only did I receive the fine gift of that movie from you yesterday--I was WATCHING it on the Starz channel when it arrived! Whoa. How's THAT for synchronicity? *chuckle* Some things just defy logic, eh? Thank you my friend--you are a joy. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Iliana....ok, let's use your figures...7800 banks in 200 countries. Let's see...that's 39 banks per country. 39 banks? Las Vegas has 39 banks! and you wish to say that the government is monitoring OUR bank accounts and you don't call it exxagerating? I feel confident that your account has not been spied upon and I doubt seriously that mine has, either. You prefer to give the opinion that we are all under surveillance when it's just not true. Iliana and Kacey.....let me ask you something. If this were nothing but an old story that everybody knows, why did the Times meet with administration and discuss publishing it for hours (in which they ignored the administration's request not to)? Seems a little silly for an old story. Why even would they go with it, if it were nothing new and something everybody knew anyway? That's not news. So why....? The fact that they did makes your conclusions that it was a nothing piece a little far-fetched and illogical. I have, of course, come to expect that Bush will remain target number one for as long as he is in office but it still surprises me how far people reach to make it so. This topic, which basically has nothing to do with Bush but rather the actions of the New York Times, has somehow reverted to Bush ridicule (except from Serenity, who is being gentle with my tender feelings  I must suppose that our prejudices keep our thoughts one-sided. Absolutely nothing has been said in the Alley by any anti-Bush personage concerning the economy, which is robust and healthy, the unemployment rate, lowest in many years, the elimination of Al-Zarkawi or any other of the 45 playing cards in the Iraqi deck of most wanted. No, of course, I wouldn't expect to see any of that.....but let one topic like this one, having little to do with Bush, come up and these same people will somehow shift it over to Bush.Another thing that still surprises me is that Leftists will keep coming up with these sleazy actions, recognizable by so many ordinary citizens for what they are, and still wonder why they keep losing elections. LR once stated that when a president is portrayed in a bad light it is weakening for the country as a whole. Obviously some Democrats and leftists in power are more interested in their own political motivations than the weakening of the country and, quite possibly in this case, the welfare of our citizens and soldiers. That's sad... |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
Mike, I don't think my comments even came close to Bush bashing. And some of the details or specifics of the NY Times report, maybe that was a scoop or new NEWS, but certainly not that the US government tracks the finances of millions of people. Since when does that surprise anyone? It doesn't surprise me in the least, and that would be the same reaction from me no matter which party might happen to be in office. I happen to believe the Media must have free reign. I believe in freedom of information, and only in the most extreme rare circumstances, should information be kept under cloak and dagger. Look at what happened in Nazi Germany, and what is happening in China right now to the free flow of information. It is being crushed. And when that happens, when journalists are muzzled? we are all in great peril whether or not we are currently in a war scenario. Again, I think the money trail is crucial, and we have a right to know where our dollars are going, who is sending and who is receiving the war pocketbook. |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Mike in your opening paragraph, I quote you: "It routes about 11 million financial transactions daily among 7,800 banks and other financial institutions in 200 countries." Exaggerating? -- THOSE ARE YOUR WORDS, not mine. That is in one day, as well, if I understood you correctly. I haven't been Bush bashing either! I mentioned that both political parties are using fear as campaign strategy. So, please don't misinterpret me and sorry, if you have. Also, seems to me that you should check out the economy. Interest rates are growing and will be up again soon. The market is down. And the employment rates have been inflated. Minimum wage was not raised. A wise friend of mine told me this saying, "Convinced against his will, one has the same opinion still." (Someone famous said that but I don't know who it was.) So, I am not going to try to convince you of anything. But I will state that yes, I knew for a fact that this was going on four years ago. I saw papers disclosing it that were provided by the bank my elderly friend was dealing with. So, in my mind, it was no secret!!! Like I said, maybe the location of the Belgium processing center and the statistics were -- but the fact it was happening was not! Geez....isn't boxing fun! [This message has been edited by iliana (06-28-2006 12:16 AM).] |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
With all due respect, Balladeer (and do note that I certainly don't enjoy criticizing our elected officials, but do so because I truly believe some of their actions are harming our checks and balances system and alienating the most urgent needs of American citizens among other things) perhaps it would be appropriate to re-title this thread, "Lefists & Democrats Just Don't Get It" or something along those lines, for it seems your post has more to do with chastising Democrats and liberals in general more than questioning or critiquing their judgment over national security.....and mind you that many of both share this nation's best interests at heart in making our nation secure and only ask we enforce these security programs in a legal, sensible manner and go only after those who truly are affliated with the terrorists, not harmless political opposition or activist groups whose agendas are at odds with those of the administration and such. Believe me, I don't enjoy criticizing and raising my voice about the President, his actions and judgment, I really don't. But frankly, while you always tend to be defensive over any criticism tossed his way from political opposition, you yourself resort to the same frequent finger-pointing and decrying of Democrats and leftists collectively in general, which itself is well-documented here. I myself don't agree with The New York Times running the story especially if politely asked to sit on it for a while, and I also very much sympathize with your concerns that the behaviors of these New York Times editors and the individual Democrats in question, purposely or not, are influencing suspected terrorists of shifting tactics and eluding our security forces. It may just be that you happen to trust the government more than I do personally, but nonetheless, I'm gravely concerned over the overexceeding of executive power, the erosion of our checks and balances during wartime, the excessive use of Presidential signing statements as Arlen Specter noted today, and other such things, and how these very things too are weakening our country and the welfare of every American citizen. You can complain if you wish about no one starting a thread about al-Zarqawi's death (which obviously I'm glad he's been brought to justice and any sane person would agree) or other such things. Then again, I could have chosen to start a thread about House Republicans stalling the Voting Rights Act in a political fashion (which I was very close to starting but decided not to as to not upset you and others who support the party strongly). I could have started a thread about how most Republicans except for Snowe and Chafee and Collins and Lugar and a few others voting for the NINTH consecutive year not to raise the miminum wage for hard-working Americans, which I also chose not to so as to not upset you and others. And so forth. I too certainly don't consider my behaviors "Bush-bashing" as you may insist to call it. And if the mere, non-confrontational questioning of the administration's sense of judgment in ANY form is considered "Bush-bashing" in your view, then I simply believe that's an indication of exactly how severely polarized our nation is. Anyway, rest assured I too echo Kacy in that I believe it's absolutely necessary to have a money trail. All I ask for is sensibility in the use of these devices in that they're firmly and directly aimed at these terrorist networks who harm our very way of life, and I wholeheartedly believe the programs are currently exceeding that very scope, and we need to draw serious attention and consideration to that. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4004442.html an interesting article, well worth reading here is an exerpt: While other newspapers, including the Houston Chronicle, printed details of the program, Bush singled out the New York Times for censure, arguing that the newspaper's disclosure makes it harder for the administration to fight terrorism. "It's a nice political opportunity, and the Times is a target among their base," said Dennis Simon, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University. "The ardent conservatives in the Republican Party believe in biased mainstream media, and at the top of that list is the New York Times. So this is good politics for them." |
||
|
Alicat Member Elite
since 1999-05-23
Posts 4094Coastal Texas |
The New York Times was THE newspaper who originally broke the story is why. And that after the Administration took the advice of the New York Times following 9/11/2001 regarding tracking the money and monitoring banking activity. As per normal, there's really only two papers who break original stories: LA Times and New York Times. All the others merely copy verbatim whatever comes down the wire. |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
well alicat, I'm sure glad that ain't the truth, the whole truth, and nuthin but... as I've read media flashes the TIMES never even heard about, and that's like saying only two papers know what's happening. My, what a cynical POV! Is it time to throw out the Scotsman link?  |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Iliana, my apologies.Those were indeed the numbers I quoted. but it is okay to look into everyone's bank accounts....give me a break! That is your comment. The point I was trying to make was that 39 banks per country do not constitute referring to "everyone's bank accout", which I refer to as exaggerating. Speaking of exaggerating, I find that I did exactly that with reference to you and Kacey "Bush bashing". Your comments, after re-reading, do appear to be more political than personally aimed a the president. Mea culpa. As far as the economy is concerned, I AM aware of it. I live in it, too, yanno? To claim that it is not healthy and the unemployment figures are not valid and excellent would put you in a very small minority (comprised only of Democrats, of course) I stand by my feelings about the NYT. The article Kacey provided states that the Times spoke to the administration "for weeks" before printing the story. That tells me that it was much more than an old story that everybody knew. As I said before, they do not claim Bush broke the law or even did anything immoral. They just want the people to know....right. I happen to believe the Media must have free reign. I believe in freedom of information, and only in the most extreme rare circumstances, should information be kept under cloak and dagger. Look at what happened in Nazi Germany, and what is happening in China right now to the free flow of information. It is being crushed. And when that happens, when journalists are muzzled? we are all in great peril whether or not we are currently in a war scenario. Easy for you to say, Kacey. Say it from Iraq. They are the ones in peril, not you. Free reign for the media? May God protect us from the day that ever happens. As in everything else, there needs to be responsibility in reporting - more responsibility in wartime conditions. Making references to Nazi Germany and China as if by comparison or a place we are headed for or what might happen if our papers can't say anything they want regardless of the circumstances is ludicrous and so far out there it belongs on the far side of Pluto. You related to Mirtha??  Yep, Iliana, boxing IS |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
 I knew you'd have some 'mirth' fun with that line, Mike. Actually, I do trust that the media will exercise restraint about as well as the government does. LOLActally, they have sat on lots of stories in the past, for whatever reason. Having worked for two newspapers long ago, I know the media sometimes sits on something until the timing is ...well, 'judicious' may not be the best word. 'Ripe' might be better. But I don't want them intimidated or threatened by ANY political entity. |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Deer, quoting you: "To claim that it is not healthy and the unemployment figures are not valid and excellent would put you in a very small minority (comprised only of Democrats, of course)" Don't call me a Democrat...I'm not, nor am I a liberal. I weigh issues, then vote, thank you very much.  Regarding the employment figures: http://www.cepr.net/publications/undercounting_cps_2006_01.pdf The economy not sluggish? http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read/18754] http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/business/14897264.htm? source=rss&channel=journalgazette_business] I'll remind you of our National Debt http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/] Are there enough national assets left in America to sell off to cover that debt? Is there enough gold in the world to cover our paper debt? (It does, by the way, appear our assets are being sold off -- what was that a few weeks back about our ports...hmmmm.) Our economy is great; we've got a surplus in our federal budget -- tell that to the precious, brave boys and girls overseas who could have had better protective gear and armor, and still need that even though McCain got his bill passed - http://www.operation-helmet.org/history.html] -- those young men and women who have to be wondering why their government can't do that instead of private citizenry but will never complain (and I really think that is where you are coming from, too, dear Deer - will never complain, that is...except about Democrats and liberals....lol). And yet, there's pork barrel spending: http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Newscenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id= 1721 Our economy's fine -- tell that to stock investors who have seen a bad market in June after the announcement of higher interest rates...trying to decide whether or not a recession is about to occur. Tell that to globalists who worry that when the U.S. economy collapses, the whole world economy will collapse. This used to be the world's best economy. We are losing that status. China, India and the Asian markets in general are the growing economies now not us) and even Warren Buffet recommends traders invest in those markets for better returns on their money(I give many thank to our outsourcing and trade policies for this -- sarcasm). Everytime the slightest thing occurs, whether its weather, interest rate increases, announcements that oil prices MIGHT rise, a bad review on a movie, a simple negative business news article or a controversial one (like the one in the NY Times)....our stocks indices react -- why, because this is an economy based on speculation. War makes for a good stock market and that is why times have been good for people with their money in the "right" market. More and more, the people in the know are investing in foreign markets. http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42687] Surely, you cannot deny that the rate of inflation since the early 90s is over 25%. http://eh.net/hmit/compare/ Why do I think the economy is bad or sluggish or on a downturn -- logic. Our dollar is not worth what it used to be. I was talking to a friend from Indonesia the other day who works for PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as an oversite auditor nationwide. She mentioned to me and I knew this from when I lived in Indonesia that many of the wealthier people in that country used to convert their money to US dollars. Then she told me there is great concern about the dollar and their individual investments -- tell me that is not a sign of slowing or declining economics here -- the dollar and its value is the measure of our economic prosperity. I want to add that once when I was working for a nationally known legal publication as an assistant editor, I was asked by the CEO of a major manufacturer to not release information concerning a lawsuit about their proven age discrimination which netted a verdict of a couple hundred thousand dollars....their reasoning was it would cause their stock to drop. If journalists bowed to every request about withholding the truth, I would really, really worry. Albeit, in times of war, there should be extreme discretion. I could go on and on....but this is a tiresome argument. I'm glad things are good for you, Mike, truly. Maybe since things are so good, you could make a donation to that helmet fund (*wink*) -- I know I'm going to do that. I'll make a wish now. I wish things were good for everybody. [This message has been edited by iliana (06-28-2006 04:19 AM).] |
||
|
Ringo
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
quote: Noah, my friend, once again the facts that you present are those of the liberal propaganda machine (yes, we conservatives also have ours... now, back to our program). Here is the filler that wasn't mentioned by those in the press with a liberal Democratic bent: As of the middle of January 2006, 24 million people have been enrolled in medicare prescription... which the former president refused to support (I know it's not mediCADE, however it does fit the program). President Bush has created or expanded 900 health centers, bringing medical attention to an additional 4.3 million people. He approved 11 Health Insurance Flexibility and Accountability demonstrations, which at full implementation, could result in approximately 825,000 individuals receiving health coverage through Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. His new budget provides access to health care through more than 300 new and expanded Health Center sites, including 80 new sites in counties that have a high prevalence of poverty The 2007 Budget will provide new and affordable health coverage options for all Americans—targeted to those who need it most: low-income children and families; the chronically ill; employees of small businesses; and the self-employed. Through the (President's) initiative, States can provide health care to more beneficiaries with the same amount of funding by changing delivery systems and using mainstream coverage, including coordination with employer plans. At full implementation, approximately 825,000 individuals may receive coverage through 11 approved (program) waivers. The Transitional Medical Assistance (TMA) program provides coverage for former welfare recipients entering the workforce, and the Administration proposes extending the program through September 30, 2007. Similarly, the 2007 Budget proposes Cover the Kids, a national outreach campaign. This initiative will provide $100 million in grants annually to enroll additional Medicaid- and (low income)-eligible children by combining the resources of the Federal Government, States, schools, and community organizations. Since the the successful TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) program was created, the number of welfare recipients has continued to decrease, and employment and earnings among the target population have increased. The Budget reforms Federal financing for Children’s Hospitals Graduate Medical Education payments. Federal funds currently go to free-standing children’s hospitals without regard to which hospitals most need the Federal assistance. The reformed payments will focus on those hospitals with the greatest financial need that treat the largest number of uninsured patients and train the greatest number of physicians. Here is the 2007 budget for Medicade. The number is actual dollars (in millions) from 2005 (186,849), 2006(198,109), 2007(204,689). That cut that you are complaining about is a cut in the amount of INCREASE in the budget... not the amount of money. And with all of the increased spending to get medical care to the needy and poor of this country, a cut in actualy medicade would not hav been a disaster. It would have actually been a wash at the absolute worst. Just figured I would add something that could be proven by the figures everyone wants, and not by arguments about "supposed-ly" "... the rest is silence" from the song The Flesh Failures www.myspace.com/mindlesspoet |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, I admire your vigor and zest, Iliana. Let's look at a little of that.... You are going to quote the Political Gateway? Let's see how unbiased they are.. The most powerful man on the planet went to the most dangerous place on earth Monday to show us his war face. You know his war face. You saw it three years ago, on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Wistful, eyes misty, brows pointed upward at the center, almost too overwhelmed with gratitude to speak. Mission accomplished, boys! Way to take your Commander in Chief's word for it when he says you need to die! And see how much I appreciate it? Just check out this poignant expression! Now excuse me while I return to Washington and cut veterans' benefits. Got to pay for those tax cuts somehow! There is one of their editorials.....sounds unbiased enough to me! No, you need not remind me of the National Debt clock. Hopefully, I need not remind you that the last time you brought it up and I showed you the discrepancies, you admitted that you really didn't understand it anyway. We could always look that conversation up, if you like. what was that a few weeks back about our ports...hmmmm.) Yes, what was it? Btw, are ports national assets or private concerns? And what about all of the Democratic rhetoric about no foreign ownership? You seen anything since then to reverse all of the other foreign ownership of our ports? Me neither. To just throw out a cryptic remark like yours as if it proves a point is like trying to sew a vest on a button. You want to bring up the lack of supplies in Iraq? There are ALWAYS a lack of supplies and equipment in war areas. There was in WW! and WW2, Korea - I can assure you there was in Viet Nam. This is nothing new. You improvise - as millions of soldiers have done in the past. could it be better? Oh, yes, certainly, and I hope it gets there. Can you lay it on Bush's doorstep as something new? Hardly. I have no idea what you know about the stock market but there is always speculation and uneasiness before a pending or possible rate hike, the same as there are always ups and downs throughout the year. You point to June as if that's supposed to prove a point. It doesn't. Over the past couple of years the market has been excellent yet you make no reference to that at all. Shall I take one month where the market surged like wildfire and say that month shows how robust the economy is? It doesn't work that way. Tell that to globalists who worry that when the U.S. economy collapses I'll be glad to. Can you point them out to me? Everytime the slightest thing occurs, whether its weather, interest rate increases, announcements that oil prices MIGHT rise, a bad review on a movie, a simple negative business news article or a controversial one (like the one in the NY Times)....our stocks indices react -- why, because this is an economy based on speculation. That's true but I don't understand why you say it here. It has always been that way, since the beginning of the stock market. You present it as if this is something new - and attributed to our current leaders. It's not. Check out the tulip crash of the market in Holland sometime.... Surely, you cannot deny that the rate of inflation since the early 90s is over 25%. There has always been inflation and the dollar has always bought less as time goes by, Iliana. Let's use that nifty little calculator of yours a minute.. $100.00 in the year 2000 is worth $88.14 now, accordingto the consumer price index $100.00 in the year 1992 is worth $81.50 in the year 2000. hmmm...seems it was worse during the previous administration, right? Let's go back further... $100.00 in the year 1960 was worth $85.10 in the year 1968....those were Camelot years! You can't just take little snippants of comments like soldiers helmets, selling ports, the market having a bad month, dollars not buying as much as they used to.....and try to build a case for the current administration taking the country down the toilet and the collapse of the US economy. I can provide as many links stating how strong the economy really is. Yes, things are going well for me, thank you i put in my 40 hours, live on a budget, have a roof over my head, wish I could buy better things sometimes, wish I had enough money aside to retire some day (which is unlikely) so I suppose you could say I'm fine. I'll tell you what I'm not. I'm not a person sitting behind a computer with a tv in the room, a car outside, a closet full of clothes and food in the refrigerator whining about how horrible the economy is and how the country is going to hell. No, that's not a slur on you, Iliana. I know you are not, either, but there are plenty who are. We live in the greatest country in the world, enjoying more freedoms and a better lifestyle than anyone....and we moan and complain. You want to complain about taxes, for example? Check out Canada and Europe. You want to cite China and India as "growing economies"? Tell you what....let's hop a plane over to either country and see how the average person lives. Let me assure you that you would not want to trade places with 95% of the people in India, who live in incredible poverty. If those are the glowing economies you want to use as examples of how we should be, then God help us if it ever comes to pass.It's just the half-full, half-empty glass, Iliana. I will continue to see it as half-full and for me that makes it true. If you see it as half-empty then it will be that way for you....and either one of us will be able to come up with a million examples to prove our points. That's human nature on display..... |
||
|
iliana Member Patricius
since 2003-12-05
Posts 13434USA |
Mike, I'll tell you what. Why don't you hop on a plane and come on over to Houston's 4th ward...or just take a walk down under the I-45 or I-59 overpasses near downtown....or visit the Star of Hope shelter. Homeless in America has been going on for years, but it has gotten worse. Oh, by the way, I lived in a third-world country (Indonesia) for over three years and am married to a man born and raised in India (son of two American missionaries) -- I am correct in saying that those economies which I referred to are growing at a faster rate than ours. Well, yes, they have a good bit of catching up to do, and they are reliant of us having a strong economy. If we fail, they will fail. Yes, we do live in the best country in the world in my book. I just want it to stay that way. Building up a national debt the size we have is going to haunt our children just when the rest of the world is on a fairer playing field. I said back when I posted that I did not understand what the national debt was -- Mike, I did my homework and do understand what I am talking about now, but it is not my job to explain that to you. I am grateful for what we have; I just want to make sure it is there for my son, who btw, signed up for 8 years. Like I said before....my wish: that things will be good for everyone. [This message has been edited by iliana (06-28-2006 06:51 PM).] |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Jo, I just wanted to quickly say here that I wish your son the best in serving the nation, as well as wish him the best safety and strength each day he takes up this most brave cause. Indeed I share your wish, dearest friend, as does everyone here in this thread and everyone beyond this single thread. We may have ideological differences and conflictions in how to nurture this wonderful world for our children and their children, but every one of us here wishes nothing but the best for them all. It does worry my heart very much that I'm just a young man who has yet to even raise a family, who hasn't even dated yet, and imagining them being born in a world that is even more unstable than it is right now. I certainly don't want to see that happen just as much as those who disagree with me 90% or more of the time here do. I certainly think the best place to start is to take care of something once and for all that has been long overdue for decades now; reforming our rigid two-party system and democratic process so more individuals can be represented in our democratic system, free of the red and blue game. We certainly need many more Paul Wellstones, Christine Todd Whitmans and Kinky Friedmans, or more simply individuals who think for themselves and not stand with their feet bolted behind party lines. I believe if we can get through this first, and very difficult hurdle, it'll open a floodgate of so many new possibilities for the better in meeting the collective needs of every child, hard-working American family, single mother balancing two part-time jobs, etc. Until that happens, essentially in the most part we'll just continue to oscillate back and forth on empty promises. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
By the way, Jo is right; this is NOT new news. * First of all, this is OLD news. In doing some research, I've recognized that Bush himself has touted the government's efforts in tracking and shut down terrorists' international financial networks, long before this New York Times story was officially published June 23, 2006, that they had reason to suspect their banking activities were being monitored. And while specifics of the U.S. government's tracking of terrorist finances may not have been known, the administration has signaled repeatedly a campaign to track terrorists' money. Here's some examples of these implementation calls: * White House Press Release: September 24, 2001 "And, by the way, this list is just a beginning. We will continue to add more names to the list. We will freeze the assets of others as we find that they aid and abet terrorist organizations around the world. We've established a foreign terrorist asset tracking center at the Department of the Treasury to identify and investigate the financial infrastructure of the international terrorist networks. It will bring together representatives of the intelligence, law enforcement and financial regulatory agencies to accomplish two goals: to follow the money as a trail to the terrorists, to follow their money so we can find out where they are; and to freeze the money to disrupt their actions." * White House Press Release: September 26, 2001 "We're fighting them on a financial front. We're choking off their money. We're seizing their assets. We will be relentless as we pursue their sources of financing. And I want to thank the Secretary of Treasury for leading that effort." * White House Press Release: October 10, 2001 "Today, NATO nations are acting together in a broad campaign against terror. Britain is side by side with us in Afghanistan. The nations of NATO are sharing intelligence, coordinating law enforcement and cracking down on the financing of terrorist organizations. Some NATO members will provide logistic support to military operations. And others have offered to fight if we deem necessary. * White House Press Release: September 10, 2004 (Fact of the Day) "The targeting of terrorist financing continues to play an important role in the war on terror. Freezing assets, terminating cash flows, and following money trails to previously unknown terrorist cells are some of the many weapons used against terrorist networks. The United States has designated 387 individuals and entities as terrorists or terrorist financiers. The global community has frozen more than $142 million in terrorist-related assets. These steps make it harder for terrorists to build networks, recruit and train new members, and carry out attacks." * * Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
That's the problem, Noah, the specifics were revealed. And is this old news not worthy of creating a controversy by its being printed or a scoop by the NYT that had to be printed in the public interest? It can't be both. |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
I understand that, Denise, and I do continue to question the judgment of those New York Times writers here (I just believe it's way too premature to push retributive legislation and accuse them of treason) I also strongly believe that, the bottom line here, is that this administration also does not like the fact that the light is being shone on the reality that they themselves are engaging in many legally questionable activities without any external oversight. Let's face it; many of the closest supporters of whoever is in the White House have always had a biased grudge against the New York Times and other publications. Now I absolutely believe there should and MUST be limits to consider in the freedom of reporting, but the New York Times is also not the lap dog of the US government and should not need to censor themselves when reporting stories that any logical can figure out. Those who are most outraged here should also recognize and consider the true existence of the press and their obligation to society. And though I do believe it's important to question the publication in what "specifics" were revealed, it is also no secret whatsoever that the finance trails of terrorists were and are still being monitored. All in all, the Times is simply putting the facts together and stating the obvious. I also recognize that there has been a pattern of behavior from this administration that is anatagonistic toward journalism in general on other issues, regarding the treatment of detainees, Iraq, warrantless wiretapping, etc. Somehow, journalists practicing real journalism is this administration's worst nightmare. Heck, it's any president's worst nightmare I think. I think that is also why Tony Snow and others in the administration are reluctant about going after the New York Times prematurely; because they KNOW then they'd have to go after some of those appointed to the Bush Administration. This new rushed, premature resolution that House Republicans have put together (H.R 895) is symbolic of the hypocrisy of this administration; a bill that is so-called a moral stand against leaking of classified information, yet one coming six years into an Administration that has always been willing to leak even the most sensitive information if political benefit can be scored from it to excuse the invasion of Iraq, treatment of detainees, etc. Quite ironic it is thinking that when the Administration sought to silence critics of its pre-Iraq war intelligence claims, it chose to leak the classified identity of Valerie Plame, a CIA agent, as well as previously classified components of a national security estimate, to, what you say? Ahhhhhh yesssss....the New York Times. (Ding ding ding, what do we have for Johnny?) Funny to think that despite all that, these House Republicans didn't show equal volumes of outrage and protest that scandal. Where was all the protest when Valerie Plame, a CIA operative and a national security asset, as well as all of her contacts in the intelligence community, were put in danger? The fact is, there was minimal to none of that, perhaps because they actually deemed that act permissable. So yes, in some ways I do believe this is an act of scapegoating; in placing the blame on a target such as them for their own inability to keep a secret, passing the hot potato of their own incompetence entirely to them. I think most Americans here are going to question the judgment of the New York Times, and also that they don't want their tax payer dollars to be wasted on another politically-motivated investigation, tax payer dollars they believe should be spent on many of our underfunded domestic programs and such. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Today, I came across a blast from the past that I believe is absolutely worth reading again: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=403&invol=713 Former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, in one of his major cases in 1971 before his passing later that year, reviewed the New York Times v. United States case, regarding the "Pentagon Papers" where the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study collected by whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security, but it was decided that the Nixon Administration's efforts to prevent the publication of the information violated the First Amendment. It was argued in that case that the word "security" is vague and should not be used "to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment." Moreover, it was reasoned that since publication would not cause an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling the safety of American forces, prior restraint was unjustified. Hugo Black also was quoted for saying this in the case: * "In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell." * Unfortunately, as symbolized in the vote over legislation H.R 895 condemning the New York Times, many have decided to side with the ghosts of the Nixons and McCarthys of our times. Some talk show hosts like San Francisco's Melanie Morgan even want those New York Times editors to be sent to the gas chamber, while personalities like Fox News Radio's Brian Kilmeade want our government to put together an office of Censorship to screen the news again as the two links below reveal: * http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/06/29/MNGICJM9B21.DTL http://mediamatters.org/items/200606290009 * And THAT'S precisely why the administration is going to lose this case; both because this is NOT new news, and secondly, especially with the July 4th holiday approaching, we should ALL remember that the nation was founded partly on the ideals we hold dear regarding freedom of press and speech. For instance, we are all now aware of that catastrophic Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961, a story the Times knew very well about but kept it secret, and now we know where that secrecy got us, where even President John Kennedy later said he wished it had been disclosed, because it might have prevented that very fiasco. This is nothing but a politically-motivated attempt by Bush to rally his NYT-antagonizing base for the 2006 elections (funny how he's not equally as outraged about The Los Angeles Times and the Wall Street Journal reporting it too) and I believe it's going to backfire. Certainly no one is above the law, including ANYONE in the press, and I believe some sort of investigation is necessary. But I believe no president is above the law either, and this is also a diversionary effort by the administration, a "blame nothing but the media" tactic to shield them from their own incompetence, an administration already among the most secret in our nation's history if not THE most, zealously keeping information away from the courts and Congress, which are the government branches that have oversight under the constitution for the executive powers that be. Thomas Jefferson said, "Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." Not everyone should agree with Black's opinion certainly, but I believe we should also respect the words of our Founding Fathers, and though I still strongly believe revealing information that truly can threaten lives is wrong and there must be discipline and restraint among our press in that manner, I don't buy the argument that this disclosure is one that does just that, given our own government has already revealed details of this finance tracking program for years now as well and there's no tangible evidence it has endangered our country more. * (giggles) That's enough contemplating and arguing for the time being. Time for me to head off to Tom McCall Waterfront Park for the Waterfront Blues Festival, yay! Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
