saw this on Michelle

incredible

Color me surprised. This, to me, is progress - a good first step toward ending the treasonous leaking of highly classified security information.

Too late.

The New York Treason.

who does he thiink he is , Emily Letella?

this is NOT FUNNY at ALL. and he so minimizes and rationalizes his "decision"

he is power-tripping with the world and its people and civilization in the balance.

hey, algore, look over here - something to really get upset about

/seething

But you're right. admitting it is progress

I read this in several places earlier today. So, now that he has admitted committing treason, can we bring him up on charges now?

Freedom of the press cannot be allowed to entirely over-ride national security. The "free press" is NOT in charge of our security.

If there is ever another 9/11 on American soil it will be the NYT that screams that BusHitler didn't do enough to stop it. Scumbags.

I had my own thoughts about this earlier today. The Times ran the SWIFT story on page 1. This op-ed ran as an afterthought - attached to another unrelated discussion on the op-ed page.

Calame took three months to come around to the fact that his paper is nothing but a bunch of Democrat cheerleaders who put partisan politics ahead of national security.

No word on what he intends to do the next time the paper unveils another piece of US national security that keeps the country secure from foreign or domestic threats. He doesn't demand action against Keller, who approved the publication of the story in the first place. He doesn't demand changes that change the way national security stories are published.

Meanwhile, US national security is undermined, and we all suffer for the Times' belief that they know national security better than the Bush Administration.

the attitude is kinda : i in my superior wisdom made a decision that I now, in my superior wisdom deem to have been essentially done in good faith but perhaps not , in hindsight the super best decision I could have made, but that vis a vis the larger picture it was super good at the time and no real harm done, as after all everybody knew and so the big problem was using the term "secret" as per the swift revelation as opposed to the less perjorative term: "hithertofore unknown to most of you" .

So we cranked up the gullible leftoids into frothing over nothing, so lives were lost and American security compromised. Hey it's worth it if the dems win back the house and senate and white house. the ends justify the means, you guys! says so on the paper's masthead!

/out of his head - whew!

#8
If there's another 9/11, there will not be enough police around to help all the traitors in this country. The terrorists will help us in bringing them to justice.

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused.

Ok, so we blew a legal intelligence operation. Had we been right and the story was true we'd have been first with the story. We'll have to have a heartfelt talk with the person that leaked it. Until then...nevermind

You kind of wonder what the money-people behind the 2 political parties are thinking, and doing, and saying.

Loks like this guy was given his script, his choke-chain pulled, and he put this quasi-apology into another story to mollify his betters.

--still a dick-head, imo.

reminds me of a song:

Blood Money

The best things in life are free
But I need cash I’m just a poor Jihadi
Now gimme money (that's what I want)
That's what I want (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

Money don't get everything it's true.
but I still need some to fight Christians and Jews
So gimme money (that's what I want)
A little money (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

How do you think we pay for attacks
With car bombs, airplanes, subway tickets, anthrax?
Oh, we need money
That's what I want (that's what I want)
So gimme money (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

Beheading gives me a thrill
But simple bloodlust don't pay my bill.
Now gimme money (that's what I want)
That's what I want (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

Believe me; I ain’t talking trash
Try buying one-way airline tickets with cash!
So gimme money (that's what I want)
A little money (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

Some think to give me money’s a crime
I’ll be more careful after reading The Times
I’ll get my money (that's what I want)
A little money (that's what I want)
That's what I want (that's what I want)
So gimme money (that's what I want)
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

TO: Charles Johnson, et al
RE: DEATH!

DEATH TO NYT!

May its assets be seized and sold.

May its owners, board of directors and editors involved with this be tried and if convicted sentenced in harsh terms.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Pour la motivation des autres.]

P.S. Please pardon my 'french'.

I think Barney may either be collecting unemployment soon or working for Reader's Digest...

From the NY Times article (starts at paragraph 16).

Executive summary: "We printed national security secrets to spite BushHitler."

The New York Times
October 22, 2006

The Public Editor

Can 'Magazines' of The Times Subsidize News Coverage?

By BYRON CALAME

Banking Data: A Mea Culpa

Since the job of public editor requires me to probe and question the published work and wisdom of Times journalists, there's a special responsibility for me to acknowledge my own flawed assessments.

My July 2 column strongly supported The Times's decision to publish its June 23 article on a once-secret banking-data surveillance program. After pondering for several months, I have decided I was off base. There were reasons to publish the controversial article, but they were slightly outweighed by two factors to which I gave too little emphasis. While it's a close call now, as it was then, I don't think the article should have been published.

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone's private data had actually been misused. I had mentioned both as being part of "the most substantial argument against running the story," but that reference was relegated to the bottom of my column.

The source of the data, as my column noted, was the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or Swift. That Belgium-based consortium said it had honored administrative subpoenas from the American government because it has a subsidiary in this country.

I haven't found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal under United States laws. Although data-protection authorities in Europe have complained that the formerly secret program violated their rules on privacy, there have been no Times reports of legal action being taken. Data-protection rules are often stricter in Europe than in America, and have been a frequent source of friction.

Also, there still haven't been any abuses of private data linked to the program, which apparently has continued to function. That, plus the legality issue, has left me wondering what harm actually was avoided when The Times and two other newspapers disclosed the program. The lack of appropriate oversight — to catch any abuses in the absence of media attention — was a key reason I originally supported publication. I think, however, that I gave it too much weight.

In addition, I became embarrassed by the how-secret-is-it issue, although that isn't a cause of my altered conclusion. My original support for the article rested heavily on the fact that so many people already knew about the program that serious terrorists also must have been aware of it. But critical, and clever, readers were quick to point to a contradiction: the Times article and headline had both emphasized that a "secret" program was being exposed. (If one sentence down in the article had acknowledged that a number of people were probably aware of the program, both the newsroom and I would have been better able to address that wave of criticism.)

What kept me from seeing these matters more clearly earlier in what admittedly was a close call? I fear I allowed the vicious criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog and enduring faith in a free press — two traits that I warned readers about in my first column.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

we need to ressurect the press from World War 2, along with the generals and administration, and let them give lessions to all parties involved.

we also need to bankrupt the NYT.

people, and orginazations need to sue the NYT for the breech of security the NYT has created.

" I fear I allowed the vicious criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog and enduring faith in a free press — two traits that I warned readers about in my first column.""

what the...?

gosh, isn't he wonderful?

/what vicious criticism of whom by whom?

Oh my like seeing who whose on May Day in Red Square.

#7 Gal Granny: EGGS Ackley!

I am STILL under onus of the State Secrets Act, for information I learned of/had access to in-service, 1964-68!

There is no time limit, and I rest assured that if I were to blab, I would go straight to Leavenworth, but NY Times blabs, and dances with Sandy Burglar, free as a breeze...

And this all AFTER the government called Times reporters in, with others, to personally go over every aspect of the govt programs, answer ANY questions about legality/legitimacy, and after personal, Democrat-leadership-delivered passionate pleas TO HONOR SILENCE in this matter!

Calame, sounds like a lotion for RASH decisions!

the press these days thinks of them selves as courageous, as martyrs, as heroic, when they are being led by the nose, are sophmoric, don't do their homework and are so leftist, democrat -party -agenda-driven that everything they say and touch is tainted.

Of course the Times is now defending it and of course now CNN is comming out with anti republican rhetoric.

In the case of both of them they are nothing more than lackeys of the democratic party.

For CNN its hope to gain favor with both the incomming Democratic Congress and to curry favor with the Middle East.

For the Times its to defend a program that the Democrats stil hope to used. Execept not on terrorist but on the real enemies they see in this country.

The republicans.

So just admit it CNN and NY Times and Washington Post your not about the news but about supporting the party that will reward you and give you free reign to continue to misinform and perform propaganda.

Ombudsman must be one of the most miserable jobs in the media.

OT sorta

Leftists for a Second Holocaust

Excerpt:

All sane observers understand that the official program of Hamas, if implemented, would result in an epoch-making bloodbath. One broadcast by Hamas activists announced: “My message to the loathed Jews is that there is no god but Allah, we will chase you everywhere! We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews.”

But in the organs of the Israel-hating left, we read that the Hamas election victory is “the best news from the Middle East for a long time” (The Guardian). We read that it is time “to reinforce Hamas resistance [to Zionist ideology]” and its “ethical cry to the world” (CounterPunch).

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused.

In other words the MSM's spin that that the operation was illegal and that the administration was spying on individuals was completely wrong!

BTW this is a current poll on arabic AL Jazeera.

They veiw the democratis no differently than the republicans.

So the war will go on no matter who has congress.

The vote :
Do you expect that elections to the Congress to change the American policy in Iraq?

Yes - 21.3%
No - 78.7%

[Link: www.aljazeera.net...]

Excellent analysis of this article at Powerline.

All well and good that he admitted it. But the damage is done. And the next leak will also run; wanna bet? They know we watch their phones now and their bank accounts, etc. I'm left wondering if we have any SECRET programs at all any more.

What kept me from seeing these matters more clearly earlier in what admittedly was a close call? I fear I allowed the vicious criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog and enduring faith in a free press — two traits that I warned readers about in my first column.

It's all
Bush's fault.

Way back when the NYT magazine revealed (with photos) where Rumsfield's weekend home was located and pointed out the locations of the security cameras, Cafferty on CNN was a'hollerin' at artery-blowing volume about the "IMPOSITION OF FASCISM" after the NYT had revealed the terrorist phone monitoring program.

Some right-wing Islamophobic inbred Southern retard nut case (oh shit, that was me! :-)) posted this about the NYT "revelations". That seemed to have turned them off for a while.

To wit:
Alternate Hypothesis:
The NYT published the Cheney/Rumsfeld info to obscure the paper’s real intentions by piling on the “revelations” to hide the trees in the forest. Look at the previous three:
1. NSA monitoring of overseas phone calls involving suspected terrorists. The MSM did their usual bang-up job on explaining this one. How many pictures of guys in hardhats placing alligator clips on phone line distribution boxes were shown on the TV news? As I understand it, the NSA was merely combing through millions of uplinked/downlinked calls carried by satellite. Anyone who can put an alligator clip on an electron moving at 180,000 mps is a better man than I.
2. NSA “data mining” of calling patterns of selected phone numbers. This of course got played up by the MSM as “wiretapping” yet again. Having determined through program #1 that someone is in active contact with suspected terrorists, why would anyone want to know who else they might be talking to?
3. DOJ tracking of international fund transfers through a central clearinghouse in Europe. This was interpreted by the MSM as “poring over millions of bank records”. Hide the check register! They’re coming to take you away! Never mind that it was merely the sources and recipients of the international transfers. Not scary enough, must make it scarier.
The consistent pattern for all three of these “revelations” is that they were distorted a hundredfold by the MSM as a way of supporting their premise that Bush & Co. intend to impose a fascist dictatorship of some sort.
But look at it this way: maybe the intent of the NYT in “exposing” these confidential programs of monitoring communications and transactions was to cut them off, stop them, render them ineffective. No monitoring of terrorists’ phone calls, no pattern-matching to see who else might be involved, no tracking of international fund transfers. All three of these aspects would be able to proceed apace without interference.
Here’s the alternate interpretation: the NYT has an infrastructure in place to bolster their sagging financial fortunes, plummeting stock prices, etc. They don’t want anyone to find out they’ve been the recipient of funding from terrorist networks, and their role is to help conceal such arrangements. In return, they inform their benefactors as quickly as possible of weak links in their plan.
Hell, anybody can be a conspiracy nut! :-)

#21 carridine

#7 Gal Granny: EGGS Ackley!

I am STILL under onus of the State Secrets Act, for information I learned of/had access to in-service, 1964-68!

Carridine, my mother was under the onus of the State Secrets Act her entire life. Quite literally there are 10 years of her life that I know little or nothing of, even though she has been dead for 25 years and those 10 years were before I was born. I will never find out more than the tiny bit that I know about that period of her life. My children will never know. My granchildren may know - if they live long enough.

When she had brain surgery - long after she left government service - the entire surgical team was screened and there were federal agents in the room in case she said something under anaesthetic.

And I have just recently within the last year discovered that they name that I always knew her by was not the name she was born with. Close, but not the same.

Its even affected MY life: when I was 5 I was taken into the police station for fingerprinting - many, many years before children were ever fingerprinted.

When I got my passport it came stamped with an entire page of places that I could not travel to - Berlin, France, anywhere at all in Asia.

Sometimes it really bothers me that in so many ways I know so little about her - at least anything that was "her" between her childhood and her role as my mother. She was sworn to secrecy though, and she kept that trust to the grave and beyond.

Wow!

I'm halfway thru the Lightstalkers thread, and posters are 'responding' to Ayer's questions about The Pieta Photograph, by sneering and doing everything they can to DE-LEGITIMIZE his asking of the questions!

He repeatedly states, clearly and in so many words, he is NOT ATTACKING Tyler, but (like Times in THIS thread) trying to see underlying dynamics of Media-Manipulation by the locals, at the time...

And yes, as stated elsewhere, the guy's honesty and courage mark him as a loose cannon, too honest to trust! Hara kiri, NOW!

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused.

Not that this admission will slow down the lunatic Left's calls for Bush to be impeached over it.

galloping granny

WOW! At first I though, I bet your mother worked on the Manhattan project but then, the passport thing made me think she was a spy. wow! someday, maybe you can do a Freedom of Information Act to find out! Just wow!

Whaddya mean, da Times was wrong.

Da Times was treasonous, I tell ya.

The Bush criticisms of the NYT weren't ACTUALLY vicious and if Calame doesn't already know this, he will soon enough.

So, the real question is, "Why did he think (feel) that they were vicious?" I'm serious.

While Calame's reasoning seems, to us, to be hilarious, he IS being introspective and honestly seeking enlightenment. He needs to be even more introspective and question the path that got him to label Bush's criticism as vicious.

Did someone lie to him? If so, who and in what way?

Did he just assume that Bush's criticisms were unfounded and thus unfair (i.e. vicious)? If so, why did he make that assumption and does he still assume that about Bush now that he was proved wrong in one case?

Such reasoning could really open his eyes.

#35 Kirly

galloping granny

WOW! At first I though, I bet your mother worked on the Manhattan project but then, the passport thing made me think she was a spy. wow! someday, maybe you can do a Freedom of Information Act to find out! Just wow!

Nope, no FOI release in my lifetime. Nor probably my kids. There is at least another 50 years to run before they will release anything about her at all.

Here's what Calame calls "vicious criticism":

"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."

"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."

"Traditionally in this country in a time of war, members of the press have acknowledged that the commander in chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public," Mr. [Tony] Snow said. ''This is a highly unusual departure."

"If you want to figure out what the terrorists are doing, you try to follow their money,'' the president said. ''And that's exactly what we're doing. And the fact that a newspaper disclosed it makes it harder to win this war on terror."

(Quotes collected by Powerline.)

Re al-NYT? Pot, call kettle!

In both cases ,these anti-Israel kitty litter liners newspapers deserve it, and may they both drown in a sea of red ink.

Excuses, excuses, excuses.

At least there is this:

Maybe the NYT's "problem" will fix itself.

"What kept me from seeing these matters more clearly earlier in what admittedly was a close call no-brainer? I fear I allowed the vicious accurate criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog hatred for the United States and enduring faith in a free press the infallibility of the New York Times — two traits that I warned readers dissembled about in my first column."

There, I fixed it for him. Don't they have editors at the Times?

Empty Suit? No.

He's a stuffed suit, chock full of BS, lies and obfuscation.

If you've ever got a reply from him, you'd instantly know that he sticks to the party line.

And their stock -- and REPUTATION -- just keeps dropping like a stone...

Too little, too late. It seems they noticed that this backfired on them. The damage has been done. I wouldn't be suprized if the MSM leaks another "calssified" stroy befor the election.

#16 ted

What has the venerable ol' Reader's Digest ever done to deserve that?!

/I heard that Dan Blather is hiring...

Question for lawyers:

Can I sue the NYT just because I live close to the Oak Ridge National Labratory and the NYT betrayed me?
My delicate psyche has been damaged beyond reason.

...but that reference was relegated to the bottom of my column.

Just like this conflicted mea culpa.

/Stop me, before I unethically bury another paragraph which could hurt the LLL Party.

#46 equifax
I'm not a lawyer, but I stayed...

/You can sue anyone at anytime over anything. Ain't America grand?!

equifax

p.s. I can explain those 17 late payments to four different creditors, and the IRS are all damnable liars!

Too little too late. Now that bitch judge in Detroit (Anna Taylor) has gotten rid of the program.

1. Is Kneller on vacation? How did this go out before the election?

2. I don't think this is unrelated to the woeful finances of the NYT.

Just think how many people probably read this "apology" in print! To do so, they would have had to have been interested in a "piece" by Calame entitled "Can 'Magazines' of the Times Subsidize News Coverage?" Then they would have had to read 15 paragraphs of that particular snooze-fest. And then they would have had to have been enticed to read still more Calame drivel by the obfuscatory sub-headline, "Banking Data - A Mea Culpa." Shit, I'm a political junkie and if I had read those words in print I would have assumed the text that followed was going to be some boring crap about our nation's banking system. I estimate the number of print readers who read Calame's "apology" at, approximately, his mother.

TGFTI -- Thank God for the Internet!

Sorry folks, this is too damn little - too damn late. No equivocation here - they were treasonous and deserve to all be tried and executed. Do those socialists think they would get away with that in Russia - even today? They would be shot just like the brave JOURNALIST was except nobody would give a damn. She died for the truth and the slimes dies for lies...I made a rhyme.

The slimes dies for lies...

#32,gallopin grannie;

I, too, had an overstamped Passport, and I was Active Duty in Germany! It was my Father's position. I also had clearance, so I got a double whammy. I am covered by the same Act as well, which stinks because he probably has great stories to tell. No Berlin Corridor, no certain parts of Fwance, Hell no any East Bloc or Asia. I could fly into some places, but never ever by car or train. Too many folks disappearing back then.
It was an exciting time, but a dangerous time.
May the NYT burn for their arrogance and hatred of America.

rick

Amazingly, the NYT is like North Korea's leader, Lil Kim. Oooops, I am sorry. I won't do that again.

The NYT suffers from Bush Derangement Syndrome and they have hurt this country because of it.

NYT and Lil Kim

It just goes to show how right President Bush was yet again, when he said, "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

There is no doubt about whose side the NYT is on.

Anyone who buys this rag should remember that.

Meanwhile, as mentioned a couple months ago, I continue my personal policy of depositing a nice volume of expectorant on any NYT papers I see for sale in airports or newsstands.

This is another example historians will reference when disembling the slow death march of our contemporary MSM.

Is it not amazing to witness the blind arrogance on display?

The lemmings, of course, don't realize they're doomed until they hit the water, and then it's much too late to repent.

The New York Times are just like the precious Democrats -
Infallible, sh*t don't stink praise Allah and big Mo.

Memo to NY Times: The terrorists want you all dead. They would want you dead without GWB as President or the Republicans controlling Congress.

That why anthrax was sent to you shortly after 9/11.

I take it very personally when people seek to kill me. It bothers me that the NY Times doesn't take it personally, when monsters seek to murder its personel.