This is the central issue, right?

The assertion that the nation's security was somehow threatened by this revelation?

I have yet to see any proof of that assertion.

After all, we're talking about banking records that are examined "after the fact" (sometimes months after the fact).

This isn't like wiretapping a phone call to nab a guy that's about to bomb the Sears Tower.

This banking thing is to "bring people to justice", like that guy from Bali.

My contentions are a) that the terrorists already new about this, b) that the NY Times was well within its rights to publish the information, and c) that this is just an obvious political ploy to rally the conservatives (TM) in advance of an important election.