Establishing Truth By Repeating Nonsense

I recently ran a post titled Establishing Truth By Perpetual Repetition about false global-warming scenarios, and after skimming Sunday blog chatter I feel compelled to write a variation on that theme. On his CNN show Reliable Sources, Howard Kurtz again said SWIFT has a website, as if that means something important; and Eric Lichtblau said that what he and James Risen reported in Bank Data Sifted in Secret to Halt Terrorists was not secret. The Lichtblau who wrote that story needs to speak to the one appearing on Kurtz's show; video and partial transcript* available ViaInsta at Ian Schwartz's  Expose the Left.

The full text of the New York Times story is now behind the paywall, so here's a link to a version of the story in the International Herald Tribune and I will note only in passing that the word "Secret" does not appear in the headline there.

Ah, but the text is faithful to the version I read at the NYT:

• Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database...
• Officials described the Swift program as the biggest and most far-reaching of several secret efforts to trace terrorist financing....
• Nearly 20 current and former government officials and industry executives discussed aspects of the Swift operation with The New York Times on condition of anonymity because the program remains classified.
• Swift executives have been uneasy at times about their secret role, the government and industry officials said....
• While the banking program is a closely held secret, administration officials have held classified briefings for some members of Congress and the Sept. 11 commission, the officials said....
• Swift's 25-member board of directors, made up of representatives from financial institutions around the world, was previously told of the program. The Group of 10's central banks, in major industrialized countries, which oversee Swift, were also informed. It is not clear if other network participants know that American intelligence officials can examine their message traffic.
• In terrorism prosecutions, intelligence officials have been careful to "sanitize," or hide the origins of evidence collected through the program to keep it secret, officials said.
• The idea for the Swift program, several officials recalled, grew out of a suggestion by a Wall Street executive, who told a senior Bush administration official about Swift's database. Few government officials knew much about the consortium, which is led by a Brooklyn native, Leonard H. Schrank, but they quickly discovered it offered unparalleled access to international transactions.
• Despite the controls, Swift executives became increasingly worried about their secret involvement with the American government, the officials said.

Against all of this, the transcript shows, Lichtblau says Administration officials were "publicly talking about how they are tracing and cutting off money to terrorists, weeks and weeks before our story ran," and that USA Today ran a story recently saying terrorists know their money is being traced. "It is by no means a secret," Lichtblau says. And I'm sure that's how he pitched his story to the editors of the Times.

As for Howard, I still don't understand why he thinks telling us that SWIFT has a website is even interesting.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instalanchers, and thanks to Glenn for the link. Please do take a look around, since I've only recenty revived regular blogging on PostWatch. As for the present post, you can't fault Lichtblau for failing to follow the corporate talking points as shown in the Baquet/Keller communique. How awkward that it doesn't make any sense.

UPDATE DEUX: More on this from NRO's Stephen Spruiell here and here, and as long as you're visiting PostWatch I found Soccer Dad's comments on a recent live chat by the Washington Post's Scott Wilson another compelling example of Argument Impairment Syndrome, this time as regards Israel.

*UPDATE III: Hat tip to Patterico, who adds a link to CNN's full transcript of Kurtz's program. Apparently some guy named Hugh Hewitt appeared on that show as well. Must look into it.

Comments

[Michael]

The "reporter" Lichtblau knew - repeat knew - that he was getting classified information. That, in and of itself is against the law. There is no provision that shields the press - though this repetition thing is trying to convince everyone that there is some special dispensation for media hacks. Just think of the sweeping stupidity it takes to believe that the US Government would write a law protecting classified information and then exempt people who are not only digging for it all the time, but will then immediately blast anything they find into their front pages.

Hewitt was right - Lichtblau needs to be front and center at at grand jury hearing and ordered to disclose his sources. But first he needs to be arrested and charged with receiving classified information - which is against the law and carries severe penalties. Then the federal prosecutor can offer some leniency if he cooperates and burns his sources. Those are the ones we REALLY want to get.

Once they're identified and charged with treason, all "unnamed sources" will clam up for good and the media will be back to their real skill - printing gossip about Hollywood entertainers and whispering campaigns about who is and isn't gay.

[JoeS]

Poor Liberals who read the NYTimes.

Either Keller and Lichtblau are stupid or
Keller and Lichtblau think their readers are stupid.

(or both)

I think we should contact NYTimes advertisers.

[Phil]

I've seen a number of people pushing the meme that SWIFT has a website, as this exposes the flaw in the claim that there were secrets.

For those who still have trouble understanding why this argument is false, check out www.cia.gov.

The CIA has a website, so I guess it follows that nothing the CIA does is secret.

[Christopher Fotos]

Exactly, Phil.

[Tate34Anne]

Do not enough cash to buy a house? You should not worry, just because this is achievable to get the loan to resolve all the problems. So take a secured loan to buy all you need.

[bad credit loan]

Its being long NYTimes advertising wrong image. They think people don't the situation we are facing and accept whatever they wrote, and Phil I do agree with you.