No, not really, although the carefully hidden conspiracy theorist in me finds the idea sort of intriguing.
I have followed with some interest the debacle concerning the revelation of the Financial Tracking Program (FTP) in the New York Times, et. al. I can't help but think that the Bush Administration's primary concern is not that their "secret" has been revealed, but rather that this has raised the Old Matter to the forefront of public awareness once more.
Throughout Bush's presidency, his administration has dealt in secrecy on multiple levels--off the top of my head, I think of the Domestic Spying Program and the Dubai Ports Deal. There are other examples. The problem is not necessarily that Bush is breaking the law (although there is considerable skepticism about the FTP), but rather that he is doing shady stuff in such a way that the public can't check him on it. It's very monarchical, in the 16th century sense of the term--keep the people as far removed from the affairs of state as possible.
Now, in calling for such ridiculous measures as the revocation (is that a word?) of the Times' press creds and the arrest of journalists, the Administration and their companion Rightists have argued that publication of this program will jeopardize the war on terror, indirectly leading to loss of life. The argument is frankly absurd--and I have tried to give them the benefit of the doubt by reading a variety of perspectives. I can't help but think they are off their collective rocker. Not only is it OBVIOUS that the Administration would use methods like this to fight terror (and the Times published nothing particularly "specific," nothing that would endanger an operation), but it was also public knowledge in a UN report on financial tracking. To write an article observing that the Bush Administration uses the SWIFT system to watch income and outgo is almost redundant, in fact; the only reason it was worth the time and space in the paper is because some of the methods Bush uses to acquire financial information may be a bit "gray"; i.e., he doesn't follow the traditionally approved channels.
WHICH IS WHY, I think, the Administration is so fired up about this. It's not a matter of national security; it's a matter of approval ratings. In an Administration already deeply entrenched in secrecy and accused of manipulation and lies, at a time when approval is low and elections are looming, the very last thing they need is yet another reminder of their shady dealings.
The sad part is that, instead of thinking through the issue, most right-wing evangelicals will flip on FOX News and assume (without even reading the article in the Times) that there has been a massive breach of security protocols. And we will all be reminded of how precious a commodity free speech is, and how recklessly it is cast aside. | 
