Raw Story :NYT admits it held domestic spying story for a full year

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/New_York_Times_admits_it_held_1215.html

On the second page of a report which reveals the White House engaged in warantless domestic spying, the New York Times reveals that it held the story for a full year at the request of the Bush Administration, RAW STORY can reveal.

The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush's decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails, without warrants.

Further, the Times notes that they have omitted information in the article they did write, agreeing with the Bush Administration that the information could be useful for terrorists. Excerpts from the Times' article follow.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?hp&ex=1134795600&en=c7596fe0d4798785&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted.

.. BushInc owns and buys the presstitutes.

America is so fascist.

And it hurts.

Sue

But we all knew that anyway.

Among many. Fuck the NYTs.

I agree with this person's rant! OH MY GOODNESS, they HELDDDDDDDDDDDDD this info at the REQUEST of the Bush Adm?????????

Yeah, see, we'll lose if you release this bad info about us, could you hold it back so we can win?


this is why so many (80% of my acquan. & friends) people I know don't care or TRUST the gov't and the media...

HOW HORRIBLE this news is. I called

800

205

OHIO

and let them know (senators dewine & voinovich Ohio) I demand harsh actions against the white house for these crimes! I told the lady I didn't expect rubber stamp, er, dewine (yes, I said that) to do anything, but Voinovich sometimes stands up to Bush's insane policies and this is the worst actions proven yet against the President and demand my senators to hold them accountable!

This type of media control seems to be unprecedented - what would be a legitimate excuse for the NYT not revealing this information sooner. Did the Bush White House make them sit on this, saying it might prevent another terrorist attack? Ultimately this is a violation of the public trust. At some point, unaccountable government and corrupt media becomes the biggest threat. The danger of terrorism dwarfs in comparison to the threat from Washington.

If the powers of the executive branch continue to be abused there will not be much freedom left to defend

the Patriot Act is a bad idea. The neocons cannot be trusted to use it correctly because they hate *us* so much that they would be tempted to use it against us. So if they are in power, I don't want the PA. If someone more responsible gets into power, I might reconsider. It should only be used to go after *real* terrorists, not political enemies.

Tammy

rather than real terrorists or so it could be persuasively argued: that quelling political enemies is the real purpose of the Patriot Act I have proffered many times on this board. ;)

... just like Tom Delay used the FBI to track down the AWOL Texas Legilators.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. No, I wouldn't support such an act even with the "gppd guys". No thanks. It's time for a little more open government. Way past time.

But even for the NYT, this is incredible.

I have never seen one that captures the pyscho more than that one.

I've never seen a VP who captures the psycho better than this one.

or at least lose so much credibility that it's mentioned with the Moonie Times instead of with other papers of at least semi-repute?

I'm so sick of this endless barrage of NYT sellouts and scandals. It is time to clean total house on the paper...starting at the top but going all the way down.

The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush's decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails, without warrants.

Unbelievable.

Was it known before the election? It sure didn't sound like Kennedy knew and he's a pretty senior Democrat.

Which Dems knew and kept this quiet. I too doubt that it is Kennedy.

It was probably the Majority & Minority leaders of the Senate and of the House; the Chairs & ranking minority members of the Senate and House intelligence committees; and the Speaker of the House. Bush decided a while back that no other members of Congress than these would get to see the 'most sensitive' classified information.

If any of these nine members of Congress were to reveal the classified information that has been shared with them, they would be prosecuted.

BUT it sounds very much like Lieberman. My other speculation would be Biden.
However, that is purely speculation.
I can't imagine anyone else (other than the Neocon cheerleading squad) sitting down and letting this happen.

If it was executive order, what difference would it make WHO knew? And if was something that should have been run through Congress, why wasn't it? How do we know that the Times isn't making this up to cover their asses, or are acting under the Bush empire's orders to implicate the Democrats by saying so? I'll believe it when I hear someone in Congress admit it.

:grr:
rocknation

knew and when! I want names!!!!!:grr:

How dare they attack the President in the middle of an election year . . .

Oh, wait . . .

I remember a similar revelation in the 80's...during the Raygun days...that the DIA or some other super-covert agency had been granted authority to "monitor" all overseas calls and electronic traffic. The deal is this is legal if the calls being monitored are intercepted from "public airwaves"...meaning if the phone call is being beamed via microwave or satellite, it's fair game to be listened to. It's kinda the same rule that allows people to own police scanners or listen in on cellphone frequencies.

While I wouldn't want some bored aparachnik listening into my phone calls or monitoring my emails, I can't imagine there's much fire here. Considering the volume of calls and messages and other information, unless you're being targeted (and this regime will find ways), this is a byproduct of "modern technology".

It does make a good issue for opponents of the Patriot Act...which I also oppose renewing and support Senator Feingold...hopefully it can be made to make this regime squirm with many of the right wing libertarians who are really starting to get pissed off at booosh for the immigration issue and the gun provisions that have the NRA-heads up in Arms. How else would a kool-aid sucker as Larry Craig not only come onboard, but be a co-sponsor with Feingold.

They have a LOT of resources and don't doubt that they can find out who is writing things about them here on DU and other places.

This is truly a White Rose society and don't kid yourself that these people have no problems turning the White Roses bloody red.

Let me tell you, if I had a NYT subscription, not only would I be ending it as of today, but their ombudsman would be getting a letter of righteous fury explaining why.

Not only can we have no trust in the administration, we cannot trust the people we pay to bring us the news--when it is news. I cannot imagine that terrorists would not be paranoid about their communications, so why would it be any major problem to let them know that they are being monitored? I do not think any of this is going to change the rules of engagement on either side.
Further shows how Congress has no guts.

journalists but you do elect members of both houses, which deception do you find worst?

On one hand, most people realize that politicians are bought and sold every day. But I think Americans have traditionally trusted the media to do their job as the watchdogs of government.

and can be controlled by special interests.

Congressional members are elected because we believe they will provide us with the best representation of our wishes for governance, while we pay journalists to provide us with news on a timely basis--not once it has become so stale there is little or nothing that can be done to respond to the event.

Didn't you get the memo? It was signed by Diebold.

Too near the November '06 elections.

You just have to consider it more like a collection of articles about historical events, rather than current news, since they seem to hang onto everything until it's too old for anyone to do anything about.

DU is a MUCH better news source than the NYT could ever be -- even if they were actually trying.

No credibility left.

Hacks, just a bunch of scared little sissified pulp writers masquerading as journalists. It makes my stomach turn.

they suck!

I heard a rumor that it sank?

Would that have made any difference? And senior Dems, Repubs, and the NYTimes withheld this information before election time? They say the "held it for a year"...Did they have this information before the election?

"In a report on Friday, The New York Times said that, in 2002, Bush had authorised the US national security agency (NSA) to keep tabs on thousands of US and foreign citizens in the country without court-approved warrants..."

Gotta wonder how long this info has been floating around DC. Hmmm.

that would be journalism.

I wager that the NYT has always been told about many things "on background" that they have agreed not to write about. The key is to make them feel as if they are PART of the power structure, and to appeal to their sense of "responsibility". Access is traded for discretion. The only thing surprising is that this information is coming out at all.

Suckers.

As W said:


"We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections,"

So, na-na-na- na to you all!

They consistenly discover and publish cutting edge information that cuts to the core of this rotten administration.

With a society with no public trust anarchy appeals to more, as we see the younger generations riot at the drop of a hat.There is no more self respect, or thread of what America is , or even more what America stood for until only recently.America is not a consciousness, unless it's manufactured by the spin meisters, or the constant corporate propaganda advertising brainwashing that has washed all character out of Americans.With the loss of the credibility of such icons of trust as the NYTimes, and Congress and Washington at all time lows, this society has hopefully hit bottom. The alternative is a rise in crime, and societal descent into corruption of all sorts never seen before.

But hey, on the bright side, the year's delay in timing might be not as bad as it could've been. Publication was timely in the sense that it may have helped strengthen the resolve of some wobbly Senators who voted with the dems to block renewal of the unPatriot Act.

And he wants to use 9/11 as an excuse to violate the Fourth Amendment.

The fact that he sat and did nothing, zero, during the felling of the twin towers is all of the evidence that anyone needs in order to confirm Mr. Bush's lack of concern. This is not a "post 9/11 America". This is just America.

Let's start right now with demands for immediate resignation.




Also, I suddenly realize something as I type this-
What if those two towers were only the beginning of what was to be an attack in every city in America? What if it was much greater than what was happening while he sat in that classroom?

And another unrelated thing- as I think about it, the fact that he did just sit there tells me that he knew it was an attack confined to only those planes in the air at the time.

About a year after the attack as I was converting to MIHOP. But then I decided that Bush is really just a useful figurehead and that the real Pres. was whisked away to a bunker while the figurehead was accidently left behind.

letters@nytimes.com
Write them and let them know what you think. Cc the letter to other news media (if you need e-mails let me know).

If enough people flood the presstitutes, maybe they'll cease bending over for this administration quite as frequently.

We have been monitored for years. Check this out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

God, the New York Times has become Pravda. It's pathetic.

Just because I can... :)

And here it goes.

UN-FUCKING-BELIEVEABLE.

The media is nothing but a fucking TOOL. What else has the media sat on, and for how long, at the "request" of the Bush Administration?

When the FUCK does this country WAKE UP and DO SOMETHING about these arrogant pieces of shit in the White House?

Is this country so fucking stupid that it's content with lying pieces of garbage promoting themselves as "moral" conservatives with "family values" while they run amok?

I mean Jesus Christ how far does this fucking bullshit have to go?!?

I like it ! :)

this is majorly freakin' serious...

thaat RWers are always whining about?

The NYT has about credibility now as the Washington Times. Atleaast with teh Washington Times you know you're reading bullshit...There's no veneeer of credibility.

You law-types out there, do those terms carry water in this matter?

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2012

The Emperor's New Hump
The New York Times killed a story that could have changed the election—because it could have changed the election

By Dave Lindorff


In the weeks leading up to the November 2 election, the New York Times was abuzz with excitement. Besides the election itself, the paper’s reporters were hard at work on two hot investigative projects, each of which could have a major impact on the outcome of the tight presidential race.

One week before Election Day, the Times (10/25/04) ran a hard-hitting and controversial exposé of the Al-Qaqaa ammunition dump—identified by U.N. inspectors before the war as containing 400 tons of special high-density explosives useful for aircraft bombings and as triggers for nuclear devices, but left unguarded and available to insurgents by U.S. forces after the invasion.

On Thursday, just three days after that first exposé, the paper was set to run a second, perhaps more explosive piece, exposing how George W. Bush had worn an electronic cueing device in his ear and probably cheated during the presidential debates.<snip>

Yep...all the news that's fit to print...provided it doesn't embarrass the Bush Administration.

Doint the Shrub's bidding at the expense of the American people.

One year ago this revelation would have ammounted to zilch.

"After Katrina everything changed" should be the DU motto.

According to this article in the Washington Post

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10473310/


By Paul Farhi

Updated: 11:57 p.m. ET Dec. 16, 2005
The New York Times' revelation yesterday that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct domestic eavesdropping raised eyebrows in political and media circles, for both its stunning disclosures and the circumstances of its publication.

In an unusual note, the Times said in its story that it held off publishing the 3,600-word article for a year after the newspaper's representatives met with White House officials. It said the White House had asked the paper not to publish the story at all, "arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny."

The Times said it agreed to remove information that administration officials said could be "useful" to terrorists and delayed publication for a year "to conduct additional reporting."

Details contained in new book

The paper offered no explanation to its readers about what had changed in the past year to warrant publication. It also did not disclose that the information is included in a forthcoming book, "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration," written by James Risen, the lead reporter on yesterday's story. The book will be published in mid-January, according to its publisher, Simon & Schuster.<snip>

I think the answer is in the last paragraph. They were trying to beat the reporter's book. If it had not been for that, I don't know that they would ever have published it. Wonderful when the media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the government. Makes me think of the F word. That's the word Fascist, by the way.