As one of my readers pointed out, Chertoff, the Zombie of Homeland Security, was forced to admit there was no imminent threat to New Yorkers.
Must explain why Manhattanites are quaking in their Prada.
Posted by Christopher at July 7, 2006 01:46 PMNothing surprises anymore.
I just hope Bush is approached for a talk show because I'm really going to miss him when this season is over. I'm starting to love his t.v. persona. Maybe his cronies can have their own features and topics and it could be their version of the daily show! Bush vs. Jon Stewart. Should be easier than Bush vs. Bush
LMAO about Chertoff!! I'd hate to see him coming down a dark alley, dragging one foot, moaning, "brains brains --- i'll eat your brains."
as with the Miami 7, the newest threat group were in the "we hate America and would like to bomb it" phase of martyrdom. In other words, no threat at all. Never even been to NYC. Had only a fleet, if at all, passing contact with someone who may have at one time known someone with a little contact with some terrorists. This is all B.S. and exactly what we should expect as the results of Bush's War on Terror.....mainly, nada.
Posted by T2 at July 7, 2006 02:36 PMWake up Chuck, wake up Hillary, Pete's had a field day dragging the NYT around the block, this one's in your backyard and is such a sweet demonstration of the WH cabal racing to be the first to make a GOOD leak. Ya just have to believe that the FBI is incompetent BECAUSE of the WH not on their own.
Posted by mainsailset at July 7, 2006 04:19 PMInternet Chat Room? Your kidding, aren't you? What a joke. They must really believe that we are just too stupid for words.
Last night on Rose's show, Executive Editor Keller of the New York Times, told Charlie that the "big secret" about bank transfers had been constantly and continually talked about by Bush openly for years. In fact, Bush has used this to illustrate how much they are doing in the war against terrorists. Was there something else going on while our attention was diverted?
Posted by Judith at July 7, 2006 04:42 PMJudith, I was thinking the same thing.
Communicating using "Chat Rooms." C'mon, anyone wanting to keep communications relatively secret would not use a chat room. There are many ways to communicate with a group, real time and encrypted via the net without using chat rooms.
I call BS on this one.
I'm guessing that "Chat rooms" is a catch all phrase the reporter is using (or source). No we don't have the details, but something is not right with the way the story is being told. Could be an attempt to stigmatize "chat rooms" into a pejorative as well.
Posted by Simp at July 7, 2006 05:10 PM"Why is it bad for the Times to report on financial monitoring of overseas banking transactions that Bush has already bragged about, but now it’s OK for a federal official to reveal the information came from monitoring internet chat rooms?"
Who said it was OK? Aren't you making a big assumption about the New York Daily News?
It would seem to me that the Daily News would be interested in hyping a story about a potential threat to New Yorkers for the same reason the Times decided to go public with the SWIFT secrets: To sell papers. The Times' target audience is Bush-hating Manhattanites. The News' target audience is people who get hysterical. I see no essential difference between them. They both would compromise national security to sell a few more copies of their rags.
By the way, just because Bill Keller says his paper's story was "known about for years" doesn't mean it's true. Keller's been making the rounds of friendly talk shows for a reason. He's worried that the criticism of his paper's ethics is making a dent in its reputation. I'd be worried too.
Posted by John S. at July 7, 2006 05:16 PMJohn, the administration's tracking of overseas financial transactions has been known about for years. And you are entitled to your opinion about the willingness of either paper to compromise national security for sales, although I am sure that both papers have been intimidated into sitting on more stories than we could know.
That doesn't excuse Keller for letting Judy Kneepads be a propagandist for the administration, but it is a stretch to say that the NYT would undermine national security to sell papers.
Posted by Steve Soto at July 7, 2006 05:52 PMThe most serious leak in this story is the revelation that we are aware of the terrorists' powerful "make water flow uphill" technology that would allow them to flood Wall St. by blowing a hole in tunnels in the rock beneath the Hudson River.
I hope they got our spy out of the al Qaeda Skunkworks before they blew his cover.
Posted by biggerbox at July 7, 2006 05:56 PM"...known about for years..."
As a general matter, sure. Anyone could have assumed that such tracking was being done, and it would be a national scandal if it wasn't. (In fact, Lichtblau wrote a story last year that said the Bush Administration wasn't doing enough in this area.) But I have seen no reference anywhere that the SWIFT program specifically was known about or had been reported. And that's what people are objecting to.
You're right. Bill Keller didn't wake up one day and say "I'm going to compromise national security." But his sensitivity to the issue is alarmingly low.
Posted by John S. at July 7, 2006 05:59 PMThey'll probably discover it was some drunken, homeless, retard with a bic lighter.
Posted by angryspittle at July 7, 2006 06:04 PMNYT hs md t vry vdnt tht ntnl scrty s nt thr cncrn, ny mr thn t s fr th Dms.
[Editor: ignore=off]Yes, it must be getting close to an election campaign, as - even without Ashcroft - the DOJ is uncovering terra-ist plots every two weeks...next up, DEFCON ORANGE alerts. We find out that the FBI had an informant working in Liberty City, not only "suggesting" targets, but actually pulling together several hapless souls dumb enough to get gulled by this guy. The Sears Tower? Oh, please, pull the other one. Now we have - yet again - the Holland Tunnel as a "potential" target...only in the "planning stage", mind, but you know the "1 percent rule". And, btw, this will be spun as reason to keep NSA-type surveillance, because, look at the success in stopping plots before they get off the ground. Enough already, this Administration has zero credibility on anything, who can believe them now?
Posted by Eric Blair at July 7, 2006 07:14 PMSimp, there must be chat rooms on the Internet for terrorists. You know, they go there to talk and offer one another ways to terrorize countries. I hear they are very supportive of one another, and hold a convention once a year in Utah to talk about better ways to terrorize. The story is fabricated, plain and simple. Another bullshit story to reinforce how our leeder is protecting us from the boogy man.
Posted by Judith at July 7, 2006 07:32 PMIsn't there an area on Craig's List for people seeking terrorist co-conspirators?
"You're right. Bill Keller didn't wake up one day and say "I'm going to compromise national security." But his sensitivity to the issue is alarmingly low."
John S, that is not how Keller came across last night. Bush has said we are tracking terrorist financial dealings, following money transactions, etc., many many times. Much to do about nothing. Just another attack on the media for letting Americans know to what extent this WH has gone.
Posted by Judith at July 7, 2006 07:42 PMEric at 7.14 nailed it. This is way too convenient for BushCo. There are no accidents. EVERYTHING they do and everything they tell us or leak to us is politically-motivated. We are now in the midst of a pro-war propaganda blitz by BushCo, not to shore up our national security but to shore up their poll numbers and their candidates for November.
Posted by DeanOR at July 7, 2006 08:14 PMFunny, since my last post I discovered that in the novel I'm reading, published last year, fictitious terrorists want to blow up NYC commuter tunnels to flood Manhattan (especially Wall Street).
Posted by DeanOR at July 8, 2006 05:29 AMin the novel I'm reading, published last year, fictitious terrorists want to blow up NYC commuter tunnels to flood Manhattan (especially Wall Street).
as biggerbox cleverly pointed out above, new york is above sea level. if you blew up a tunnel, you would flood the tunnel. the water would stop rising when it reached the level of the river. come on, this isn't so complicated.
Posted by benjoya at July 8, 2006 06:46 AMit's all BS. Manhatten is above sea level...be really hard to flood it.
sheesh
Posted by marblex at July 8, 2006 07:14 AM's all BS. Manhatten is above sea level...be really hard to flood it.
Damnit! Why do I have to explain everything to you Broke Back Mountain Hollywood liberal left-coast faggots? Like I was telling the missus, and eventually had to slap the shit out of her to get her to agree with me. Al Gore began global warming to melt the ice caps and raise the sea level 12 feet. That's when the Holland tunnel floods Manhattan! See? Don't you get it! Al Gore is part of the plot, and I'm sure the phone records show that. Pop the tunnel, heat the ice caps...viola. Suddenly Manhattan is 2 feet underwater and everyone is drowned!
You liberals need to get afraid, and get afraid real fast! There's a Mullah with a copy of the Talmud with your name on it. By God, it will be tough for your kids to get over the idea of a bunch of virgins for them after they die. Don't you get it?!? We need to keep our kids from wanting virgins! And the only way to do that is by just saying no to sex at anytime, both before and after death. Abstinence after death should be a primary goal of all non-sex education.
Get afraid! Get afraid very fast before it's too late to fear anything.
Posted by phidipides as a neo-con at July 8, 2006 08:17 AM