It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NYT Revealed Nothing!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   
IT WASN'T SECRET!!!!

SWIFT AS THE PROGRAM IS KNOWN AS HAS A PUBLIC WEBSITE AND A MAGAZINE!!!!!!!!!

NYT went to the website and read the magazine produced by SWIFT, thats all. NO SECRET!

EDIT: ACTUAL WEBSITE!!!
www.swift.com...
AND THE MAGAZINE!!!!!!
www.swift.com...
Cooperating in the global fight against abuse of the financial system for illegal activities
www.swift.com...

Also, BUSH, THE PRESIDENT, Talked about Using SWIFT in 2001!!!! It hasn't been a secret since 2001, wait, it was never a secret, they have a PUBLIC WEBSITE AND MAGAZINE!!!




posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   
yes, but it gives the an excuse to make our free press a little less free, now, doesn't it.

I didn't know they had a website, but anyone with half a brain would know that they have the ability to track the financial records down and are doing it. I don't believe there is much of a secret there. and well, hate to tell them this, but there's kind of a black market when it comes to these kinds of transactions anyways....but maybe not in the dollar amounts they are talking about. the illegal immigrants have a system to get their money home from the US for far less money than western union and such.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 04:10 PM
link   
I haven't seen the actual Times story. Has anyone? Do we know what they actually said? Can we map it to what was said in the past by Bush to show that nothing new was 'revealed'?

I highly doubt anything new was said. I think rather Bush is still miffed about the NSA thing and also there's a chance he'll get into trouble from citizens from other countries for what he's doing with SWIFT.



Still, there doesn't seem to be much risk for the White House under US law.

As for the laws of other countries whose citizens have been affected, that is another matter entirely. According to Reuters, the Belgian government has already launched an investigation into the data transfer, which may be illegal under local law. It's possible that other countries will follow suit.

Source



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
here is the story
www.nytimes.com...

Doesn't matter, whether it was all known, semi-known, or not known at all.

It was condensed into a nice report, handy, all in one place.

They are NYTWYTS for printing it..



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   
spacedoubt -

Firstly, what is a NYTWYTS?

And are you saying that if a newspaper prints something that is already known, there's some kind of problem with this?



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
yes, but it gives the an excuse to make our free press a little less free, now, doesn't it.


On the contrary, Pres. Bush being the antagonist on this issue by making a case
that the NYT is the 'culprit'...
as opposed to actually being a peoples' advocate...
and the administration is spinning or snowballing this incident....possibly to cower or mum up the other
news outlets in the future.

oops...i 'see' what you mean
good show



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
spacedoubt -

Firstly, what is a NYTWYTS?

And are you saying that if a newspaper prints something that is already known, there's some kind of problem with this?


Hi there BH...

Nitwits...


And yes, there is a problem.
if it is alrady known, how is it news?
And if it's not known..it should never have been printed..

Thats why I think it was a really bad decision, and was printed with malicious intent..



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   
"Thats why I think it was a really bad decision, and was printed with malicious intent.." Spacedoubt

How was it printed with Malicious Intent when it was already known to the public?
Or is the SWIFT Magazine and Website Malicious towards Bush to?
JFK dying was printed in the papers when it was already known...
Dale Sr. death was printed in the news when it was already known...
9/11 was reported on in the newspapers even though it was already known...

So, why report something when it is already known? That was a good question, got me thinking, and I came up with that reply.

If I had a WATS left I'd give you one, you respond calmly, without name calling, or blind ignorance like Zappafan who claims the SWIFT website doesn't mean anything, or the magazine, or Bush talking about it since 2001, NYT exposed it even though it had more exposure then the Paris Hilton Sex Tape for the past few years. Just No One Cared, until NYT printed a story about it and Bush took offense.

WHich leads me to a question of my own, when did Bush start reading the papers? He publically admitted he didn't read the papers or watch the news, so how did he find out about this?



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that al Qaeda did not know the level of access that we had to the SWIFT database beforehand. After the article was released, they realized that a certain co-operation had been going on that could reveal some of their financing tactics and sources.

The biggest piece of this mystery for me is that, if it was no big deal, and already widely known, then why did Republicans and Democrats, including John Murtha, plead with the NYT to not run the story?

[edit on 29-6-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
"WHich leads me to a question of my own, when did Bush start reading the papers? He publically admitted he didn't read the papers or watch the news, so how did he find out about this?"
------------------------------------------------

isn't his wife a school librarian??? maybe she reads him the news everyday, ya know, she misses her work??


I don't know, all I know is that the news on tv for the most part has turned into just crap!!! you could sit and listen to it for hours, same bs stories over and over again, and in the end, you might come up with a few tidbits of useful info.

but then, this is probably a good example of where quality investigative reporting will get you...so, well, who can blame them...



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that al Qaeda did not know the level of access that we had to the SWIFT database beforehand.


Your understanding? How in the world could it be known what Al Qaeda knew before this article? Where did you gain this 'understanding'? This is pure speculation. And based on absolutely nothing.



After the article was released, they realized that a certain co-operation had been going on that could reveal some of their financing tactics and sources.


Again... Have you been in contact with them or reading their newsletter? C'mon, where did you get this information?



The biggest piece of this mystery for me is that, if it was no big deal, and already widely known, then why did Republicans and Democrats, including John Murtha, plead with the NYT to not run the story?


Who knows? But to assume that it's because some secrets were revealed in the atricle is just more guessing.

Can I ask what your understanding is of the "details" that were released in this article?

Edit: jsobecky, sorry for being so 'crabby'.
Stressful day. I am curious as to your answers, though.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Your understanding? How in the world could it be known what Al Qaeda knew before this article? Where did you gain this 'understanding'? This is pure speculation. And based on absolutely nothing.

Well, I have been very curious (as many others are, I'm sure) as to what exactly was so sensitive and damaging about the release of this story. So, I've been trying to catch as many discussions about it as I can to try to understand the issue.

The closest thing I've come up with was a discussion that went something like this:

a. Everbody knows about SWIFT

b. Everbody knows that the US monitors financial transactions routed thru SWIFT from the US to outside the country

c. The story alluded to the notion that the US was also monitoring financial transactions from other countries thru SWIFT

d. There is some speculation about the level of co-operation that SWIFT willingly gave the US in terms of access to their databases.

Thus, if someone were to try to escape the watchful eye of the US, they might send funds through a Canadian bank, for example. Now they know that they are not as safe as they thought.

The discussion I refer to was on MSNBC, if I recall.

I did not intend to come across as being a know-it-all or whatever. I'm just trying to muddle through it, the same as everybody else.



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Here is a link to Keith, the guy I first heard this from. It has the website, magazine, and video of the President talking about SWIFT.

Here is the link
www.crooksandliars.com...

So, again, NYT REVEALED NOTHING!



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join