You Just Have To Love The New York Times.

Can anyone really take these jokers seriously?



I mean come on.



Oh, wait, I'm getting ahead of myself.



Well, if you guys didn't notice the news, The NYT published an "expose" on how the government is tracking large financial transactions to try to find sources of terrorist financing and money laundering a little while ago.



Reactions to this have been highly negative from the government, including the Congressmen who have been loudly denouncing the Bush administration's abuses of power.



Things like this and this have been said.

Things like, well, this:

On Thursday evening, Dana Perino, deputy White House press secretary, said: "Since immediately following 9/11, the American government has taken every legal measure to prevent another attack on our country. One of the most important tools in the fight against terror is our ability to choke off funds for the terrorists."



She added: "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. We also know they adapt their methods, which increases the challenge to our intelligence and law enforcement officials."



Referring to the disclosure by The New York Times last December of the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program, she said, "The president is concerned that once again The New York Times has chosen to expose a classified program that is working to protect our citizens."

So, what you're saying is, basically,

"We’re at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous,"

(Thank you, Rep. Peter King!)





Well, the kicker arrived today, thanks to a few bloggers' intrepid delving into the archives of the NYT. See, waaaaaay back in 2001, right after the 9/11 attacks, the NYT posted a long, rambling editorial recommending, no, I'd go so far as to say demanding, a new program to stop terrorists' funding by tracking large banking transfers:

The Treasury Department also needs new domestic legal weapons to crack down on money laundering by terrorists. The new laws should mandate the identification of all account owners, prohibit transactions with "shell banks" that have no physical premises and require closer monitoring of accounts coming from countries with lax banking laws. Prosecutors, meanwhile, should be able to freeze more easily the assets of suspected terrorists. The Senate Banking Committee plans to hold hearings this week on a bill providing for such measures. It should be approved and signed into law by President Bush.

Woooo, heady stuff, there, NYT.



So, what you're getting at is that you want us to create a secret program so that you can gain cheap publicity by outing it later? Is that what you meant? Because that's what I thought you meant.



As opposed to, for example, actually trying to use LEGAL means to stop terrorists, without destroying the Constitution, or anything. Abuse of our Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms is perfectly ok, but a program that YOU YOURSELF RECOMMENDED? Whoa, somebody stop them!