June 27, 2006
UNFORTUNATELY, A RIGHT WING BOYCOTT OF THE TIMES COULDN'T BE LESS EFFECTIVE (Via Tom Maguire)
Letter to the Editors of The New York Times (John W. Snow, 6/26/06)
Mr. Bill Keller, Managing EditorPosted by David Cohen at June 27, 2006 10:44 AM
The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036Dear Mr. Keller:
The New York Times' decision to disclose the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a robust and classified effort to map terrorist networks through the use of financial data, was irresponsible and harmful to the security of Americans and freedom-loving people worldwide. In choosing to expose this program, despite repeated pleas from high-level officials on both sides of the aisle, including myself, the Times undermined a highly successful counter-terrorism program and alerted terrorists to the methods and sources used to track their money trails.
Your charge that our efforts to convince The New York Times not to publish were "half-hearted" is incorrect and offensive. Nothing could be further from the truth. Over the past two months, Treasury has engaged in a vigorous dialogue with the Times - from the reporters writing the story to the D.C. Bureau Chief and all the way up to you. It should also be noted that the co-chairmen of the bipartisan 9-11 Commission, Governor Tom Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton, met in person or placed calls to the very highest levels of the Times urging the paper not to publish the story. Members of Congress, senior U.S. Government officials and well-respected legal authorities from both sides of the aisle also asked the paper not to publish or supported the legality and validity of the program.
Indeed, I invited you to my office for the explicit purpose of talking you out of publishing this story. And there was nothing "half-hearted" about that effort. I told you about the true value of the program in defeating terrorism and sought to impress upon you the harm that would occur from its disclosure. I stressed that the program is grounded on solid legal footing, had many built-in safeguards, and has been extremely valuable in the war against terror. Additionally, Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey met with the reporters and your senior editors to answer countless questions, laying out the legal framework and diligently outlining the multiple safeguards and protections that are in place.
You have defended your decision to compromise this program by asserting that "terror financiers know" our methods for tracking their funds and have already moved to other methods to send money. The fact that your editors believe themselves to be qualified to assess how terrorists are moving money betrays a breathtaking arrogance and a deep misunderstanding of this program and how it works. While terrorists are relying more heavily than before on cumbersome methods to move money, such as cash couriers, we have continued to see them using the formal financial system, which has made this particular program incredibly valuable.
Lastly, justifying this disclosure by citing the "public interest" in knowing information about this program means the paper has given itself free license to expose any covert activity that it happens to learn of - even those that are legally grounded, responsibly administered, independently overseen, and highly effective. Indeed, you have done so here.
What you've seemed to overlook is that it is also a matter of public interest that we use all means available - lawfully and responsibly - to help protect the American people from the deadly threats of terrorists. I am deeply disappointed in the New York Times.
Sincerely,
[signed]
John W. Snow, Secretary
U.S. Department of the Treasury
My boycott started at least 15 years ago.
Posted by: erp at June 27, 2006 1:10 PMWell, what about their advertisers? A quick surf over reveals: Continental, ScotTrade, Chase Bank, CitiBank, Samsung, etc.
Posted by: Mike Beversluis at June 27, 2006 1:16 PMThat would work. Get an email list of the CEO's of companies advertising in the NYT and we can start letting them know how we feel about being sold out by the likes of the arrogant Bill Keller.
Posted by: erp at June 27, 2006 2:15 PMIt's going to be hard to dislodge the local advertisers from the Times, because many of those people think in the same elitist terms that the paper does, and believe much of their target audience does, too (they may not agree with what the Times did in publishing the story, but they couldn't think of getting their message out by using the Post or Daily News, and correctly perceive that much of their target audience thinks its above them to read either of the tabloids).
Targeting the national advertisers might be more effective, and probably would be a better way for any protest to go, as opposed to government prosecution (no point in making Bill Keller into the John Peter Zenger of the 21st Century to the rest of the left -- go after the leakers within the government, who probably contacted the Times, L.A. Times and Wall Street Journal at the same time, and let market forces from the general public take the NYT's stock price down another notch or two).
Posted by: John at June 27, 2006 3:31 PMI cannot think of a better example of the relativist rot that we have been living with since the sixties. I assume the NYT poohbahs got together late at light over expressos and almond croissants to weigh carefully their duty to the nation versus their duty to speak "the truth". As those crazy wogs who slaughter and behead people will alwys be with us and can't be expected to do any better, and as obviously we are responsible for any excitement they evince just because we are we, "the Truth" must win. So, bugger the nation and, by the way Bob, any chance of a ride back to Westchester?
Posted by: Peter B at June 27, 2006 8:14 PMThis sort of corporate arrogance is far beyond anything Microsoft, Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Costco or Coca-Cola has ever done.
Advertiser boycotts don't work - no one who supports them actually follows them in their own everyday affairs, and just about every single major US and foreign corporation advertises in the NYT, if one pulls out another would take its place. Its just a silly idea.
Have DOJ open a leak investigation. Offer the reporters immunity if they turn out their govt source - if they refuse throw them in jail. Its a process that has worked well in the past in some cases.
Posted by: Shelton at June 28, 2006 10:24 AM