|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Bush, Cheney threaten New York Times over exposure
of surveillance programs
By Patrick Martin
28 June 2006
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
In a brazen effort to intimidate the media and halt any further
exposures of illegal US government spying, President Bush, Vice
President Cheney and several Republican congressional leaders
have denounced the New York Times and suggested that the
newspaper could face criminal charges for its report on US government
surveillance of international financial transactions.
The Times reported June 21 on its web site and then
in its June 22 print edition that the Department of the Treasury
had secretly accumulated an enormous database on international
financial transactions by obtaining access to the records of the
Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications,
a Belgium-based clearinghouse for major banks and other financial
institutions. Similar reports were published by the Los Angeles
Times and the Wall Street Journal June 22, and then
more generally throughout the US media.
Bush used a pro-war photo-op at the White House Monday to attack
the media reports, saying, the disclosure of this program
is disgraceful. Were 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.
Cheney singled out the New York Times by name. Some
of 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, he told a Republican fundraising luncheon
in Nebraska.
Connecting the latest exposure to previous revelations about
massive domestic wiretapping and data mining by the National Security
Agency (NSA), Cheney added, What is doubly disturbing for
me is that not only have they gone forward with these stories,
but theyve been rewarded for it, for example, in the case
of the terrorist surveillance program, by being awarded the Pulitzer
Prize for outstanding journalism. I think that is a disgrace.
White House press secretary Tony Snow denied the obvious truth
that the comments by Bush and Cheney were intended to intimidate
critics and silence the media. Its not designed to
have a chilling effect, he said. But the New York
Times and other news organizations ought to think long and
hard about whether a publics right to know, in some cases,
might overwrite somebodys right to live.
The claim that these illegal spying operations, which target
millions of ordinary people in the US and around the world, are
driven by the imperative of defending the American people from
terrorist attack is a lie. Like the Patriot Act, the Homeland
Security Department and the assertion of unchecked presidential
powers, these programs are directed against the democratic rights
of the people. Those who have implemented them know full well
that the greatest potential threat to the American corporate elite
which they serve comes from among the American working population,
not bands of Islamic terrorists.
The accumulation of information on international financial
transactions is simply one more element in the Bush administrations
creation of a massive, centralized database on the American people,
an indispensable part in the preparations for widespread domestic
repression against those opposed to the war in Iraq and the governments
right-wing social policies.
There is not the slightest indication that any terrorist attack
has been exposed, disrupted or even delayed as a result of the
surveillance of banking transactions. Nor has there been any reporting
on some of the more curious financial operations that preceded
the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. These
include the alleged transfer of $100,000 from intelligence operatives
of Pakistannow the Bush administrations close allyto
presumed suicide hijacker Mohammed Atta, and the widely reported
dumping of stock in United Airlines and American Airlines in the
days leading up to 9/11.
The barrage against the Times is a calculated maneuver
by the White House that bears the imprint of Bushs chief
political hatchet-man, Karl Rove. His modus operandi is,
whenever the administration is caught in a crime, to escalate
the provocation and smear critics as apologists and even allies
of terrorism.
While neither Bush nor Cheney explicitly called for prosecution
of the Times, this demand was raised by Congressman Peter
King (Republican of New York), chairman of the House Homeland
Security Committee, who began the orchestrated series of attacks
on the Times.
Like Bush and Cheney, King described the publication of the
report as disgraceful. But he went further, declaring,
Were at war, and for the Times to release information
about secret operations and methods is treasonous. He said
he would urge Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to begin
an investigation and prosecution of the New York Timesthe
reporters, the editors and the publisher.
In a McCarthy-style diatribe delivered on Fox News, King added,
Nobody elected the New York Times to do anything.
And the New York Times is putting its own arrogant, elitist,
left-wing agenda before the interests of the American people.
He made it clear that the venom directed at the Times was
as much for its exposure of the NSA spying as for the most recent
report on surveillance of banking transactions. The Times
is more of a recidivist, he said, using a term usually reserved
for repeat criminals.
On Monday, King actually sent a letter to Gonzales seeking
an investigation into whether the publication of the report on
banking surveillance violated the Espionage Act.
As with its political offensive in support of the disastrous
and deeply unpopular war in Iraq, the White House clearly banks
on the complicity of the Democrats and the cowardice of the media
to allow it to brazen out a defense of its illegal spying.
In contrast to the revelations of systematic monitoring of
international and domestic telephone calls, in defiance of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, there has been little or
no congressional criticism of the surveillance of bank transfers,
which was also conducted without obtaining warrants from any court
and without legislative approval.
While Bush claimed, Congress was briefed, and what we
did was fully authorized under the law, it seems that only
the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, a Republican,
and one or two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee were
notified. Congresswoman Jane Harman, the senior Democrat on the
House Intelligence Committee, said she received her first briefing
on the program only recently, after the White House learned that
the New York Times was preparing to publish a report on
the subject. They knew it was going to leak, she said,
adding that the program should have had greater oversight.
Significantly, in keeping with the cowardly and complicit role
of the Democrats, she said nothing publicly about the financial
surveillance operation when she was briefed, and refuses to criticize
the program itself.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, the top Senate Democrat,
said the banking surveillance program doesnt seem
to be based on the same shaky legal analysis as the NSA
spying. Like Harman, he criticized not the spying itself, but
the decision of the administration to ignore its duty to
keep Congress informed.
Senator Charles Schumer of New York issued a statement essentially
supporting the program, saying, Allowing law enforcement
to examine bank records in order to stop the flow of money to
terrorists makes a lot of sense, and this program appears to allow
for just that.
Another senior Senate Democrat, Joseph Biden of Delaware, said
he would have preferred that the Times not expose the operation,
although he did not support any effort to penalize the newspaper
for its actions.
Both the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times
wrote defensively about their decision to publish, in terms that
revealed how both newspapers were placed under government pressure
to pull back from any reporting on the assault on democratic rights.
In a letter posted on the New York Times web site Sunday,
Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote, Most Americans seem
to support extraordinary measures in defense against this extraordinary
threat of terrorism, but he added there were concerns over
the legality of the governments actions and over the adequacy
of oversight. Keller noted that those who wrote the US Constitution
rejected the idea that it is wise, or patriotic, to always
take the President at his word, or to surrender to the government
important decisions about what to publish.
Los Angeles Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet commented,
History has taught us that the government is not always
being honest when it cites secrecy as a reason not to publish.
No one believes, in retrospect, that there was any true reason
to withhold the Pentagon Papers, although the government fought
vigorously to keep them from being published...
Meanwhile, a further revelation of government spying appeared
in Newsweek on the weekend. The magazine reported that
the Treasury Department had used a largely unpublicized provision
of the USA Patriot Act to obtain over 28,000 financial records,
including thousands of bank accounts, wire transfers and
other transactions involving individuals, companies and nonprofit
organizations inside the United States. While nearly 4,400
individuals were targeted for this financial snooping, the results
from a law enforcement perspective were meager: 90 indictments,
79 arrests, and 10 convictions, none of them apparently for terrorism.
See Also:
New exposure of US government spying
Bush administration compiling massive database of bank records
[24 June 2006]
NSA phone spying program:
a blueprint for mass repression
[15 May 2006]
Framework for a police
state
US government phone spying targets all Americans
[12 May 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |