Patterico's Pontifications

6/23/2006

More on the (Former) Anti-Terror Program

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Terrorism,War — Patterico @ 10:24 am



The Washington Post has a Page A01 story on the Swift (former?) anti-terror program today, and commenter Halcyon says the Wall Street Journal is also running with the story.

The WaPo story makes it even clearer why the publication of these stories is such an outrage. (I can’t read the WSJ story, but it looks like the WaPo is playing catch-up, based on what its editors read online last night. It’s obvious to me that WaPo editors read last night’s online reports, had a reporter call up someone for a quick interview, and threw together a story.)

The WaPo article is primarily based on an interview with Stuart Levey, undersecretary of the Treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence, who says that the program is on “rock-solid legal ground,” and that he believes it has been “has been universally embraced and praised.” He says “he could confirm that the information has been used to ‘confirm the identity of a major Iraqi terrorist facilitator.'”

He also said that strict controls are in place, adding: “We can only search the data we receive in furtherance of a terrorism lead. In fact, the analysts who have access to the data can’t even access the database unless they type in the search they want to do and articulate why it’s connected to terrorism.”

Thank God the New York Times and Los Angeles Times are saving us from this evil program!

Anyway, it’s wrong for the government to have private information about our finances! The government should be strictly limited to knowing the following:

Your address, your place of employment, your salary, the names and social security numbers of your children or other dependents (plus their birth dates); the amounts you may have given to charity; the amount you spend on a mortgage and with what bank; the amount of interest you received on any savings account; the amount you gained from any stocks or investments you might have sold during the past year; any money that you gained from rentals, alimony, unemployment compensation, or IRA distributions; any money that you spent on student loan interest, health savings accounts, child care, care for the elderly, adoption, 401Ks, or moving; etc., etc., etc.

(The list is from Stuart Buck.) The idea that the government could also learn details about your international wire transactions — well, that’s just too much!

This could affect you, too! I mean, who among us hasn’t wired money internationally to people suspected of being terrorists?!

It’s unprecedented! It raises concerns!! So what if mass-murdering terrorists were caught, using a legal program that implemented strict controls? So what if Congresscritters were briefed and liked the program?

None of that matters. A few anonymous government employees and a few American journalists were concerned!

And that’s the end of that.

6 Responses to “More on the (Former) Anti-Terror Program”

  1. The blunt reality here is that there is a war against the war. It is the jihad of privacy fetishists whose self-absorption knows no bounds. Pleas rooted in the well-being of our community hold no sway. –Andy McCarthy via Michelle Malkin.

    Privacy “fetishism” is the new pacifism. And it’s just as spurious and not even as theoretically admirable.

    Anwyn (164e26)

  2. […] But not strong enough for Emperors McManus and Baquet. They did all the weighing necessary, and made the determination that you need to know. More on the outrageous nature of all of this here. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » New York Times Publishes Classified Details of Legal and (Formerly) Effective Anti-Terrorism Program (UPDATE: So Does LAT) (421107)

  3. Amen, Anwyn and Patterico.

    For all the attorneys here: is there any criminal charges that could reasonable be brought against the Times, or any civil cause of action a civilian might bring?

    Patricia (2cc180)

  4. Patricia, Comment #3. I think so and so do several others. Just scroll down three posts to https://patterico.com/2006/06/22/4757/new-york-times-publishes-classified-details-of-legal-and-formerly-effective-anti-terrorism-program/ and read the comments.

    nk (50d578)

  5. […] It sounds to me like the Wall Street Journal, like the Washington Post, printed on-the-record reactions from government officials who knew that the N.Y. Times and L.A. Times were going to publish articles anyway — because these officials had pleaded with the editors of those papers not to print the stories, to no avail. […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Direct Your Anger at the NYT and LAT, Not the WSJ, for Leaking Classified Information About a Successful Anti-Terror Program (421107)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0949 secs.