PDA

View Full Version : Bush Calls WSJ Disgraceful



LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 01:26 AM
Bush Says Report on Bank Data Was Disgraceful

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

Published: June 27, 2006

WASHINGTON, June 26 — President Bush on Monday condemned as "disgraceful" the disclosure last week by The New York Times and other newspapers of a secret program to investigate and track terrorists that relies on a vast international database that includes Americans' banking transactions.

The remarks were the first in public by Mr. Bush on the issue, and they came as the administration intensified its attacks on newspapers' handling of it. In a speech in Nebraska on Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney repeatedly criticized The Times by name, while Treasury Secretary John W. Snow dismissed as "incorrect and offensive" the rationale offered by the newspaper's executive editor for the decision to publish.

"Congress was briefed," Mr. Bush said. "And what we did was fully authorized under the law. And the disclosure of this program is disgraceful. We're at war with a bunch of people who want to hurt the United States of America, and for people to leak that program, and for a newspaper to publish it, does great harm to the United States of America."

The New York Times, followed by The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times, began publishing accounts of the program on Thursday evening.

In his remarks during a brief photo session in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Mr. Bush appeared irritated, at times leaning forward for emphasis, though he did not mention any newspaper by name.

Mr. Cheney, who had earlier said he was offended by news accounts of the financial tracking program, on Monday went a step further, singling out The Times for criticism in a separate appearance at a fundraising luncheon for a Republican candidate for Congress, Adrian Smith, in Grand Island, Neb.

"Some in the press, in particular The New York Times, have made the job of defending against further terrorist attacks more difficult by insisting on publishing detailed information about vital national security programs," the vice president said, adding that the program provides "valuable intelligence" and has been "successful in helping break up terrorist plots."

The executive editor of The Times, Bill Keller, said in an e-mail statement on Monday evening that the decision to publish had been "a hard call." But Mr. Keller noted that since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Bush administration has "embarked on a number of broad, secret programs aimed at combating terrorism, often without seeking new legal authority or submitting to the usual oversight."

He added, "I think it would be arrogant for us to pre-empt the work of Congress and the courts by deciding these programs are perfectly legal and abuse-proof, based entirely on the word of the government."

Representative Peter King, Republican of New York and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, released a letter on Monday in which he called on the attorney general to investigate whether The Times's decision to publish the article violated the Espionage Act.

In a television interview on Sunday, Mr. King described the disclosure as "absolutely disgraceful" and said he believed that the newspaper's action had violated the statute.

In Nebraska on Monday, Mr. Cheney reminded his audience that The Times had also disclosed the National Security Agency's secret program of monitoring international communications of suspected terrorists without court warrants. Mr. Cheney said it was "doubly disturbing" that The Times printed the article and was awarded the Pulitzer Prize, journalism's highest honor, for it.

"I think that is a disgrace," he said.

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine



, Mr. Bush appeared irritated, at times leaning forward for emphasis, though he did not mention any newspaper by name.




LMMFAO

Is he even aware the Wall Street Journal exists?

And that they published the same story the same night?

:D


The Chimp appeared irritated.

:D

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine


Representative Peter King, Republican of New York and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, released a letter on Monday in which he called on the attorney general to investigate whether The Times's decision to publish the article violated the Espionage Act.




Well, Peter.....

Better have Speedy Gonzalez indict the WSJ while he's at it :D




Mr. Cheney reminded his audience that The Times had also disclosed the National Security Agency's secret program of monitoring international communications of suspected terrorists without court warrants.

Mr. Cheney said it was "doubly disturbing" that The Times printed the article and was awarded the Pulitzer Prize, journalism's highest honor, for it.

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 01:35 AM
Wasn't it COMMON KNOWLEDGE following 9/11 that the administration was going to choke off the funding for terrorists??

Didn't they brag about this?

Was there really a single "terrorist" in this world who didn't know their banking transactions were being watched???

Fucking Idiots.

Big Train
06-28-2006, 01:50 AM
The real damage is that they named exactly and specfically the places where the monitoring was occuring, effectively making the time and money investment in the progam rendered useless and diverting the terrorists (the smart ones anyway) to use means which are even harder to detect. Which just makes the whole exercise harder. Disgraceful? Maybe, maybe not. Boneheaded and shortsighted: absolutely.

Treasonous? Not sure, but I'm leaning towards no. It's not as if they aided them directly, although they did put up a huge "danger falling rocks ahead" sign for anyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size.

The irony here is that this is the very program the fucking Times geniuses themselves called for after 9/11. Guess they wanted to call their own shots.

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 06:43 AM
Originally posted by Big Train
\


The irony here is that this is the very program the fucking Times geniuses themselves called for after 9/11. Guess they wanted to call their own shots.

No, BT

The true irony is in the fact that the NYT is the rag BushCO used to leak their pre-war propoganda to.......

as well as the name of the CIA NOC and her cover company Brewster Jennings, thus rendering it useless, and endangering lives.


:rolleyes:

Big Train
06-28-2006, 10:45 AM
Bottom line is the pages of the NYT, being used or not, advocated for this. They are into rendering government programs useless apparently.

Warham
06-28-2006, 12:02 PM
Liberals will defend the NYT and their Bush bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.

FORD
06-28-2006, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Neocons will defend FAUX and their America bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.

Guitar Shark
06-28-2006, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Liberals will defend the NYT and their Bush bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.

:rolleyes:

Get a new schtick, dude.

4moreyears
06-28-2006, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark

Originally posted by FORD
Neocons will defend FAUX and their America bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.



:rolleyes:

Get a new schtick, dude.

After he does.

Guitar Shark
06-28-2006, 02:27 PM
FORD will never change. I have at least some hope for Warham. ;)

EAT MY ASSHOLE
06-28-2006, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
Bottom line is the pages of the NYT, being used or not, advocated for this. They are into rendering government programs useless apparently.

True, they did, as all US citizens I'm sure expected our elected officials to do to protect our country.

BUT...the Times - and any responsible citizen - are at odds with the administration on the point of LACK OF CONRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT. David Addington and the rest of Bush Co. have taken INCREDIBLE, UNPRECEDENTED measures in securing power for the executive branch.

To call the Times treasonous is ludicrous. My suspicion it's just a ploy to get the base in a froth to make sure they turn out for the midterms.

It seems to be working on Warham at least...

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
FORD will never change. I have at least some hope for Warham. ;)


Really?

Based on what?

:confused:


I think the uglier things get with this administration, the firmer Warpig digs in his high heels.

:rolleyes:

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
Bottom line is the pages of the NYT, being used or not, advocated for this. They are into rendering government programs useless apparently.


And the WSJ, too?

Or are you applying a double standard here?

LoungeMachine
06-28-2006, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Liberals will defend the NYT and their Bush bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

DEMON CUNT
06-28-2006, 04:18 PM
Here we are after six years of Bush and conservatives still lack the ability to recognize irony.

Silly neocon shitbags!

DEMON CUNT
06-28-2006, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Liberals will defend the NYT and their Bush bashing agenda no matter what kind of danger it places American lives in.

Uh huh. Yeah, right. Newspapers making the world a more dangerous place. Are you like 12 or something?

http://www.insanereagan.com/images/OReilly_Blow_Up_Coit_Tower_.jpg

Nickdfresh
06-28-2006, 08:56 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
LMMFAO

Is he even aware the Wall Street Journal exists?

And that they published the same story the same night?

:D


The Chimp appeared irritated.

:D

As well as the LA Times...

Nickdfresh
06-28-2006, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
The real damage is that they named exactly and specfically the places where the monitoring was occuring, effectively making the time and money investment in the progam rendered useless and diverting the terrorists (the smart ones anyway) to use means which are even harder to detect. Which just makes the whole exercise harder. Disgraceful? Maybe, maybe not. Boneheaded and shortsighted: absolutely.

Jesus dude, like the smart ones were ever using commercial banking for money transfers anyway... The Admin. routinely gloated that they were monitoring possible terror funds...



Treasonous? Not sure, but I'm leaning towards no. It's not as if they aided them directly, although they did put up a huge "danger falling rocks ahead" sign for anyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size.

The irony here is that this is the very program the fucking Times geniuses themselves called for after 9/11. Guess they wanted to call their own shots.

Except the little problem is that they are conducting surveillance on American citizens as well...

BTW, is the Journal a bunch of "geniuses" too?

ODShowtime
06-28-2006, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Wasn't it COMMON KNOWLEDGE following 9/11 that the administration was going to choke off the funding for terrorists??

Didn't they brag about this?

Was there really a single "terrorist" in this world who didn't know their banking transactions were being watched???

Fucking Idiots.

exactly

DEMON CUNT
06-29-2006, 09:26 PM
Top secret website for the top secret terrorist finance monitoring secrets:

http://www.swift.com/

Shhhh, don't tell anyone about their magazine either!

http://www.swift.com/temp/43230/82588/dialogue4q2005%2Ejpg

Certainly don't tell anyone that they can download a free pdf files of the magazines.

Big Train
06-30-2006, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
And the WSJ, too?

Or are you applying a double standard here?

Not at all. I was not aware at the time of my post of the WSJ story (and I should, I have a subscription. Perhaps I should read it for the general articles , instead of the ones about making me more money). They are all guilty and all should be recognized as such.

Big Train
06-30-2006, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Jesus dude, like the smart ones were ever using commercial banking for money transfers anyway... The Admin. routinely gloated that they were monitoring possible terror funds...

Except the little problem is that they are conducting surveillance on American citizens as well...

BTW, is the Journal a bunch of "geniuses" too?

So they smart play would therefore be to stop monitoring and give them all another viable option? Jesus dude...

They are conducting survellience on you. Boo hoo. So are the marketing companies and the banks themselves for their own reasons. I don't see the ACLU running down that street..

And yes, the journal disappointed me too. As I just told Lounge, I was not aware of their story when I posted earlier. This employment thing keeps me from knowing who does what everywhere all the time.