GREAT WORK!
Posted on 06/26/2006 8:35:39 PM PDT by steveyp
The New York Times
September 24, 2001 Monday Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Column 1; Editorial Desk; Pg. 30 LENGTH: 545 words HEADLINE: Finances of Terror
Organizing the hijacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon took significant sums of money. [snip] Washington and its allies must also disable the financial networks used by terrorists.
[snip]
Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies.
[snip]
Though some smaller financial transactions are likely to slip through undetected even after new rules are in place, much of the financing needed for major attacks could dry up.
[snip]
If America is going to wage a new kind of war against terrorism, it must act on all fronts, including the financial one.
(Excerpt) Read more at select.nytimes.com ...
I think another good place to send this is to the NYT letters to editor and let their faithful readers see the hypocrisy.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
E-mail to letters@nytimes.com.
Thanks for posting that here; I've already sent them a letter but forgot to give the link.
I hope all freepers take a second to remind the NYT editorial staff that at one time they endorsed the Bush administration to do exactly what it's doing.
It seems too many New Yorkers have forgotten 9/11.
Try this link to read without paying:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5094&en=18f9ed2cf37511d5&hp&ex=1151121600&partner=homepage
Oopps nope the link still requests payment.
Sorry.
BUMP!
Steve -
I have e-mail a lot of political talk show radio hosts with your terrific find.
Hugh Hewitt has posted it on his website:
http://hughhewitt.com/
" BY NOW IT'S UNDENIABLE: The New York Times is a national security threat. So drunk is it on its own power and so antagonistic to the Bush administration that it will expose every classified antiterror program it finds out about, no matter how legal the program, how carefully crafted to safeguard civil liberties, or how vital to protecting American lives."
"The administration strongly urged the New York Times not to expose this classified program, and for good reason. According to the Times itself, the program has proven vital in hunting down international killers. "
The Weekly Standard's excellent article exposing NYT agaenda.
EXCELLENT!
I wonder if anyone just saw Brian Kilmeade filet Senator Levin over troop withdrawal on Fox and Friends--?
SEE POST NO. 25 FOR THE FULL EDITORIAL. I compared it to the LEXISNEXIS hit and it's the same, except it's formatted like I would if required to use HTML.
Great find. Thanks for posting.
Oh thanks, I didn't notice that. Good job!
NYT says: Bush Admin "most secret Administration ever"
NYT does: not reveal its sources of damaging leaks
NYT says: Bush assumes extra-Constitutional power (despite fact that Bush was elected and President is granted warmaking power in the Constititution)
NYT does: assume power for itself to decide what information should remain classified (despite fact that it is NOT elected and has NO governmental power under the Constitution)
NYT says: Terrorists cannot be defeated militarily, it's best left to law enforcement
NYT does: render every non-military law-enforcement program working to hunt down terrorists useless by publishing methods and program specifics
NYT says: Administration should implement all the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission
NYT does: render one of the most important programs that complied with the Commission recommendations useless, by publishing it OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF THE CHAIRS OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION
NYT says: "There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies."
NYT does: Blow the cover of, and thus ruin the effectiveness of, a program that does EXACTLY what it demanded in September 2001.
What front in this war has the Times not tried to undermine?
Peach has been busy mailing this link to whoever she can think of. I wouldn't be surprised to see it mentioned on Brit Hume's show this evening.
Hugh Hewitt's website now credits Free Republic (and someone else) with this information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.