NY Times Demanded Bank Monitoring Program It Just Destroyed

Hugh Hewitt and Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters point out that shortly after September 11 the New York Times demanded the same type of anti-terrorist bank monitoring program that the Times just kneecapped by revealing the classified program to the world:

The Bush administration is preparing new laws to help track terrorists through their money-laundering activity and is readying an executive order freezing the assets of known terrorists. Much more is needed, including stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also must be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies. ... Washington should revive international efforts begun during the Clinton administration to pressure countries with dangerously loose banking regulations to adopt and enforce stricter rules.  . . . .

The Treasury Department also needs new domestic legal weapons to crack down on money laundering by terrorists. The new laws should mandate the identification of all account owners, prohibit transactions with "shell banks" that have no physical premises and require closer monitoring of accounts coming from countries with lax banking laws. Prosecutors, meanwhile, should be able to freeze more easily the assets of suspected terrorists.

It didn't take long, did it, for the New York Times to abandon the critically important, must-win war on terror in favor of a petty partisan war on George W. Bush.

Which is fine, because our very survival depends on destroying George W. Bush -- but destroying the terrorists is optional.

Right?

____________________________

Equally appalled are Michelle Malkin (who has more great updates to World War II posters from the "army of photoshoppers") and Bryan Preston at Hot Air.