First rule of TWOT: Do not talk about TWOT

C

Coinneach

Staff Alumnus
Second rule: see rule #1.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=17057

Newspapers reveal fund-tracking despite feds' pleas

By The Associated Press
06.23.06

WASHINGTON — Several major newspapers yesterday rejected Bush administration requests to keep secret a program to track people suspected of bankrolling terrorism.

Treasury Department officials acknowledged that in the weeks immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks they obtained access to an extensive international financial database in order to track down the sources of terrorist financing.

The information was obtained through use of subpoenas, which Stuart Levey, Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, called a "legal and proper use of our authorities."

The existence of the program was first reported last night on the Web sites of The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal.

While confirming the newspaper reports, administration officials expressed concern that disclosure of the program could undermine efforts to track terrorism-related activities.

"We know the terrorists pay attention to our strategy to fight them, and now have another piece of the puzzle of how we are fighting them," said Dana Perino, deputy White House press secretary.

(remainder of article at URL above)

There's nothing in the article that details how surveillance of (suspected) terrorists' financial activities is accomplished, only that is *is* accomplished. They already know this, as does anyone with a bank account. Therefore, the Feds' panic is, as usual, unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
Good for the newspapers. I'm tired of the secrets, tired of the 'sources and methods' or 'they watch what we do' excuses.

At least the government bothered to use subpoenas this time.
 
Don't like it - don't use the banks. :rolleyes:

Conduct all commerce using small shells and shiney trinkets. Make sure you're wearing a ski mask and surgical gloves at all times while conducting your commerce - they've got cameras everywhere and they won't hesitate to identify you with the fingerprints you leave on your wampum.
 
Are we at war or not?

So when did the rules change and the media become the protectors of the Constitution?

Have they taken any oaths to uphold it? Reporters, I don't think so.

How soon we forget about "Hearst" and the yellow journalism that he had going for him. (anyone watch Deadwood?)

Is Patty in charge of that big one? I think she pulled the wool over many eyes. Husband is X FBI. Does anyone care about the implications I just threw out?

HQ:rolleyes:
 
HQ, first, "at war" means exactly nothing. Fed snooping on private citizens' bank accounts has nothing to do the TWOT. Eight years ago, they did exactly the same thing, but justified it as TWOD.

Second, the noosepapers care about the BoR to the same extent as most of TFL's membership: namely, the bits that impact them personally at that moment.
 
HQ,
So when did the rules change and the media become the protectors of the Constitution?
Click to expand...
I dunno....maybe it was when our government decided it was no longer interested in the job? :D

I sense a pattern emerging here:

"The government is holding people without charges and due process"

Those traitors! They shouldn't be telling us about that!

"The government is tapping phones without a warrant"

Those traitors! They shouldn't be telling us about that!

"The government is tracing your phone calls without a warrant"

Those traitors! They shouldn't be telling us about that!

"The government is tracing your bank transactions"

Those traitors! They shouldn't be telling us about that!....

Like heck they shouldn't be telling us!
I don't know about you guys, but I consider the real traitors to be the ones using the Bill of Rights for charmin. I want to know about it. Furthermore, I want an explanation as to why they think it's necessary to violate my rights in order to protect me from people who have already minimized their risk from these sorts of incursions.

I want our government to respect my rights. I want the government to stop violating it's own laws.
 
Fed snooping on private citizens' bank accounts has nothing to do the TWOT.
Click to expand...
For anyone who is unfamiliar with SWIFT, the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication is a limited liability cooperative society based in Brussels, Belgium. SWIFT provides the means for nearly 8,000 financial institutions in over 200 countries to exchange messages (averaging 11 million messages a day) about money movements and payments. If you make a wire transfer from your American bank to someone's bank in Brazil, the instructions will probably go through SWIFT.
 
I think its a good idea

1. it was legal two judges and the commerce department said so
2. it has three levels of oversight to prevent misuse of info. (according to NPR)
3. the only person to ever misuse the system was IMMEDIATLY removed from acces to the system and has since been demoted.
4. IT WORKED at least until the times blew its cover. NPR siad two of the miami seven were identified using this system.

therefore unless you have terroist ties you have nothing to worry about. Plus the the SWIFT data is mostly just fo international money movements and how many of us move money overseas?

SW
 
Wolverine, you (like so many others) are missing the point.

No one is saying the program itself is illegal, a bad idea, or whatever. What we're objecting to is that the Feds are whingeing about us talking about its existence. :rolleyes:
 
First Amendment

The entire Bill of Rights was put into the Constitution to protect the citizenry from a too powerful central government. The Founding fathers felt that government secrecy was detrimental to the good of the people- thus the First Amendment. It is the job of the Press to discover what the government is up to and to inform the people. The People are supposed to be the ultimate power in our country. The Preamble to the Constitution says "We the People... do ordain and establish this Constitution". Those who wrote the Constutution wanted the people to know what the government was doing. We should not be faulting the Press for doing what the First Amendment gives them the right and responsibility to do. The First Amendment is no less important than the Second Amendment!
 
Coinneach said:
No one is saying the program itself is illegal, a bad idea, or whatever. What we're objecting to is that the Feds are whingeing about us talking about its existence.
Click to expand...
Why do you think talking about the existence of a program, a trap, that (almost by definition) cannot function without discretion is good?
 
The President, along with various members of the House and Senate, announced publically early on that they were targeting banking information in an attempt to both track down sources of money to terrorists and various parts of Al Queda.
There is little to keep secret, there have been stories about successes due to this operation - that the government itself released.
So this is a re-emphasis.

Further, the Admin has seen fit to hide other programs behind "National Security" - I'd love to tell you about it, but can't. Too dangerous - to me or them.

This is just another ploy to get votes - gay marriage, old WMDs that weren't what we were looking for. Can't wait to see what is next.
 
Mad Martigan,
I agree with Croyance here. Everybody knows that banks share info with DHS. They've got a sign at the teller's window that tells you so.
Moreover, terrorist cells operate in such a way that their risk is minimal to this sort of stuff. They assume that we're tracking the money, so I see no harm in discussing it.
We don't care to know the particulars, the technology, the techniques, all that crap. We *do* want to know the legality, constitutionality, and oversight procedures. That's our right as American citizens because it's our obligation to hold the government accountable for abusing it's authority.
 
We *do* want to know the legality, constitutionality, and oversight procedures. That's our right as American citizens because it's our obligation to hold the government accountable for abusing it's authority.
Click to expand...

I would agree that those are important factors. Of course, dragging them in to the national spotlight hasn't changed the fact that they were on th eup and up to begin with. At what point, IYO, does a media initiated national discussion of a discrete program intended to ambush, trap, or otherwise gather information without drawing attention to itself become inappropriate?
 
Martigan, this is not and never has been a Sooper Sekrit Program. The Feds have absolutely no reason to bitch about it being discussed, other than their usual hysterical paranoia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top