Times Sat on Wiretapping Story for a Year

On Friday, the New York Times said that it had sat on the story about warrantless, domestic electronic surveillance, "for a year" at the request of the White House. In part, Executive Editor Bill Keller said:

"The fact that the government eavesdrops on those suspected of terrorist connections is well-known. The fact that the NSA can legally monitor communications within the United States with a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is also public information.

"A year ago, when this information first became known to Times reporters, the Administration argued strongly that writing about this eavesdropping program would give terrorists clues about the vulnerability of their communications and would deprive the government of an effective tool for the protection of the country's security...

"As we have done before in rare instances when faced with a convincing national security argument, we agreed not to publish at that time...

"What is new is that the NSA has for the past three years had the authority to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States without a warrant.

"It is that expansion of authority -- not the need for a robust anti-terror intelligence operation -- that prompted debate within the government, and that is the subject of the article."

What would have happened in the 2004 election had the Times broken this story in October 2004? Keller does not make it clear whether "last year" means a literal 12 months; the phrasing, in fact, suggests that it does not.

Technorati Profile
Technorati tags: Patriot Act, Politics
gada.be tags: Patriot Act , Politics