This latest defense sounds to my ears rather like excusing the publication of the departure time of a troopship with the excuse: Well, everybody knew that the US was moving troops by water. There's a big difference between knowledge of the general outline of a program and knowledge of its specific operational details. Here are some details from the June 23 story that you have to wonder whether the terrorists knew before:
i) The US and its allies are tracking not only bank accounts, but also information from stock exchanges and mutual fund managers.
ii) The US does not however have easy access to individual ATM transactions on American soil.
iii) Wire transfer information is not available in real time, but only after a lag of several weeks.
iv) Nor is it logistically possible to get real-time information on credit-card purchases - of, for example, fertilizer or timing devices.
v) The United Arab Emirates fully cooperates with the program.
vi) Individual member banks are growing unhappy with the program and want it to end.
Doesn't that strike you as potentially useful information - especially points iii and vi?
The Times should have the courage of its convictions. Instead of pretending that the information revealed was useless, it should forthrightly admit: Yes we may possibly have helped the terrorists - but we believe that any risks to security were more than worth it. Then we could argue that latter point. Their current line of defense is disingenuous and cowardly.
Search This Blog
Monday, July 03, 2006
The Details of the Swift Program that the Terrorists Would Not Have Known
From David Frum's Diary:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment