Bush authorized domestic wiretaps without warrants

[rushmc 18]

Quote

So just when is it OK to bring the President up on federal charges?

After he makes up WMD stories and invades a country?

After his army kills tens of thousands of people?

After he breaks the rules about torture?

Or now after he invades the privacy of others with domestic spying.

I bet this one has more attention fromt eh American public than ALL the others combined....

He is a crook, and if this was the leader of any other country, we would be asking the UN to prosecute him on charges of Genocide (and many other things)

TK

...first off....WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM??

....oh hell, there is so much wrong in the above post it is not worth the time........

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Trent 0]

Quote

You're absolutely right. However, after 9/11 the atmosphere was so emotionally charged it was next to impossible to recommend something that could be interpreted as "soft on terrorism". Nevertheless, while the Dems did vote for the Patriot act, they also insisted on the sunset clause to allow the country to re-evalute the statutes after things calmed down. And now that they are calmed down, many people (not just dems) are beginning to have second thoughts about some of the overly-intrusive portions of the original act. For instance, the government shouldn't be able to simply monitor everyone's choice of books at the library. Sure, if they want to identify a person or group of person's, then they should have to authority to monitor them. And this change was adopted and passed by the full Senate although it was later taken out in committee. I hope they put it back.

That is besides the point to this whole conversation. People were screaming their heads off about how Bush (not the NSA or federal gov't, but Bush himself) violated all these rights by authorizing the NSA to conduct secret wiretaps on individuals and groups within the US. They cried about how they never knew anything about it. They cried that Bush broke the law.

Evidently, they are wrong here. The law as they've voted for it, seems not to have been broken. They seem to have been briefed. They seem to have had their agenda exposed by LYING about not getting any information about it. These chumps got caught with their pants down. They tried to use this "story" to help end the Patriot Act provisions that were political hotbuttons. The "scandal" they'd hoped for has backfired on their ass, but I suppose that means it'll disappear as soon as possible.

Whether or not you agree with the Patriot Act, it IS law until it expires. Any issues about whether or not the Patriot Act should "be", is another discussion.

Oh, hello again!

[TheAnvil 0]

TK is from Planet Zhills. He's pretty cool even if he does tilt towards the left.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

More bad news for the poor hungry sharks...

look, you want to debate the merits of the program then lets go. I have some questions about this myself but, if you like the debate because you think it is a political gotcha.......well, you got nothin there.....

Nancy Pelosi: I Was Briefed on NSA Program

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi confessed late Saturday that she signed off on President Bush's decision to have a top intelligence agency conduct "unspecified activities" to gather intelligence on possible terrorists operating inside the U.S. in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

If I brief you on my agenda to confiscate all Republicans' guns, does that mean you approve of it?

Since when did being briefed on something constitute "signing off" on it or approving it?

Confess now, you got this from Newsmax, didn't you?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

So just when is it OK to bring the President up on federal charges?

After he makes up WMD stories and invades a country?

After his army kills tens of thousands of people?

After he breaks the rules about torture?

Or now after he invades the privacy of others with domestic spying.

I bet this one has more attention fromt eh American public than ALL the others combined....

He is a crook, and if this was the leader of any other country, we would be asking the UN to prosecute him on charges of Genocide (and many other things)

TK

...first off....WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM??

....oh hell, there is so much wrong in the above post it is not worth the time........

I think it is, please tell us the factual errors. And use the definition of fact used by the English speaking peoples in general, not the current White House.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 18]

Thanks, I needed that...

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Congressional oversight for this was apparently in place. The individual who leaked this information to the press should be found, tried, and executed.

Dont worry Vinny in the next few years this will be the way its done. Then you can execute all the leftists you want with impunity. Just be sure to be in the right agency when our government ceases to exist.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

More bad news for the poor hungry sharks...

look, you want to debate the merits of the program then lets go. I have some questions about this myself but, if you like the debate because you think it is a political gotcha.......well, you got nothin there.....

Nancy Pelosi: I Was Briefed on NSA Program

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi confessed late Saturday that she signed off on President Bush's decision to have a top intelligence agency conduct "unspecified activities" to gather intelligence on possible terrorists operating inside the U.S. in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

If I brief you on my agenda to confiscate all Republicans' guns, does that mean you approve of it?

Since when did being briefed on something constitute "signing off" on it or approving it?

Confess now, you got this from Newsmax, didn't you?

Point taken, but my point is that this whole matter is being brought up now for political and finacial gain. So, saying that this is a secrete program, that only Bush knew about and used, is a lie. Others new, and when it comes out in the paper now it is some kind of big revelation??

As far as the program goes, if it is as explained, then I have no problem with it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[TheAnvil 0]

Our gov't cease to exist? Not in my lifetime, I do believe. I do think the individual(s) that leaked this info is/are left leaning.

This fucktard worm of a human being who leaked this made a choice. He/she made a choice to go to the press with information he/she knew to be classified. In order to possess that information, he/she would also have known that disclosing such information is criminal. The gov't entrusted this piece of shit with information and they betrayed that trust. Fuck them. Should volunteers be required, I'll be one of many volunteers to shoot the worthless scumbag WHEN they are found.

The NY Slimes reporters/editors also know damned well that Congressional oversight exists on such things. They didn't bother to put that in their article. Just the perfect piece for them to run while the successful Iraqi elections took place, eh?

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Our gov't cease to exist? Not in my lifetime, I do believe.

Oh Really?

Our military leaders are already planning for it.
( Please notice I got the interview from an approved news source that you will not deride as being leftist.)


Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.
[url]http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/11/20/185048.shtml

[rushmc 18]

Boy, I was starting to worried about all of this but know I don't have too. Why? Well it is all alright because......Clinton did it!!


Sunday, Dec. 18, 2005 10:10 p.m. EST
Clinton NSA Eavesdropped on U.S. Calls


During the 1990's under President Clinton, the National Security Agency monitored millions of private phone calls placed by U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries under a super secret program code-named Echelon.

On Friday, the New York Times suggested that the Bush administration has instituted "a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices" when it "secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without [obtaining] court-approved warrants."

But in fact, the NSA had been monitoring private domestic telephone conversations on a much larger scale throughout the 1990s - all of it done without a court order, let alone a catalyst like the 9/11 attacks.

In February 2000, for instance, CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft introduced a report on the Clinton-era spy program by noting:

"If you made a phone call today or sent an e-mail to a friend, there's a good chance what you said or wrote was captured and screened by the country's largest intelligence agency. The top-secret Global Surveillance Network is called Echelon, and it's run by the National Security Agency."

NSA computers, said Kroft, "capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world."

Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told "60 Minutes" that the agency was monitoring "everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs."

Mr. Frost detailed activities at one unidentified NSA installation, telling "60 Minutes" that agency operators "can listen in to just about anything" - while Echelon computers screen phone calls for key words that might indicate a terrorist threat.

The "60 Minutes" report also spotlighted Echelon critic, then-Rep. Bob Barr, who complained that the project as it was being implemented under Clinton "engages in the interception of literally millions of communications involving United States citizens."

One Echelon operator working in Britain told "60 Minutes" that the NSA had even monitored and tape recorded the conversations of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond.

Still, the Times repeatedly insisted on Friday that NSA surveillance under Bush had been unprecedented, at one point citing anonymously an alleged former national security official who claimed: "This is really a sea change. It's almost a mainstay of this country that the NSA only does foreign searches."

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[tkhayes 126]

so sorry to hear that you believe the "King" is untouchable.

if you want accountability in government, then you need to also entertain the possibility that that can be prosecuted for wrong-doings.

BTW, the planet I am from appears to be one that thinks it is wrong to kill people without just cause. Ours and theirs.....

TK

[rushmc 18]

Quote

so sorry to hear that you believe the "King" is untouchable.

if you want accountability in government, then you need to also entertain the possibility that that can be prosecuted for wrong-doings.

BTW, the planet I am from appears to be one that thinks it is wrong to kill people without just cause. Ours and theirs.....

TK

Well, when you can show some examples of the "wrong-doings" you post, please add them for me to consider. Cause to this point you have not shown any........

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[tkhayes 126]

since you missed it the first time...
1. invading a country (Iraq) with no just cause
2. causing the deaths of civilians and Americans via (1) above (genocide)
3. wiretapping illegally.

tk

[rushmc 18]

Quote

since you missed it the first time...
1. invading a country (Iraq) with no just cause
2. causing the deaths of civilians and Americans via (1) above (genocide)
3. wiretapping illegally.

tk

I'm still waiting............

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[IanHarrop 37]

I love this justification - Its okay because others did it.

Try that the next time a cop pulls you over for speeding. "Its okay officer, I've seen other people speed"

Sorry, I don't buy this argument.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[rushmc 18]

I wasn't making that argument............

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[IanHarrop 37]

Quote

I wasn't making that argument............

Sorry I must have misunderstood, the first line of your post said.

"Boy, I was starting to worried about all of this but know I don't have too. Why? Well it is all alright because......Clinton did it!! "

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[rushmc 18]

doesnt' suprise me that is the way you would take it however.

My point is, the left is trying to make this into something to once again try and take down Bush.

Statements about lying about the war, torture and now this phone tap thingy make the bullshit meter flap so hard it created a breeze.

If the left ever gets a bit of intelectual honesty in thier discussions then we can move to dicussion about the topics but, as long as it is just about how bad Bush is well.......as the French said to the characters in Monty Pythons In Search of the Holy Grail.

"Come back sometime so we can taunt you again".....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[IanHarrop 37]

I also get tried of the CDIF argument.

I think its foolish to support a leader, or a group, and disregard the mistakes that are made are.

On these forums I see people supporting both the left and the right without thinking.

doh - edit : blinking -> thinking

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[Andy9o8 0]

So far, I give some of you a "B" at best, with a "C" being the average grade. I think a lot of you (on either side of the argument) are going off on a tangent on the issue (as I've framed it) by just pushing the "play" button and giving the usual "left/liberal vs. right/conservative" talking points. You folks, on each side, need to turn off the autopilot. Oh, well, I guess habits are hard to break.

OK, my take on it is this: forget, for the moment, which Congressional leaders were or were not consulted. Remember, we're talking about DOMESTIC surveillance without warrants. The legislative branch does not approve or monitor warrants; the judicial branch does, so this is not a President vs. Congress issue. Domestic wiretaps are deemed a form of search & seizure, so the US Constitution requires a judicially-issued warrant before a domestic wiretap may be used. Now, a mechanism exists to submit domestic surveillance warrants to judicial scrutiny in secret to preserve national security; there's a secret Court set up to do just that. So secrecy wouldn't be compromised by submitting it to the court; and in any event, it's the law that it must be submitted to the court.

If the wiretaps need to be done, fine. If they need to be done in strict secrecy, fine. But doing so without obtaining a judicial warrant is quite simply unconstitutional. And a democracy is worthless if its government circumvents its own rule of law, even in times of crisis (or, some might say, especially in times of crisis). Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson and FDR each circumvented constitutional protections in the name of national security during wartime, and the verdict of objective, long-term history is not kind upon any of them for doing so.

[rushmc 18]

OK, more to my point.

The paper that "broke" this story lied on many points. The article made the assurtion that Bush "in a major policy change" started this program.

Once again, those of you that read NewsMax bash it because it is not credible but, in story after story this New Youk paper lies and mis leads. Do you think this paper to be credible? (papers name omited purposely)

Reference the following. Those overseas should pay special note....

Monday, Dec. 19, 2005 11:45 a.m. EST
Clinton Used NSA for Economic Espionage


During the 1990s, President Bill Clinton ordered the National Security Agency to use its super-secret Echelon surveillance program to monitor the personal telephone calls and private email of employees who worked for foreign companies in a bid to boost U.S. trade, NewsMax.com has learned.

In 2000, former Clinton CIA director James Woolsey set off a firestorm of protest in Europe when he told the French newspaper Le Figaro that he was ordered by Clinton in 1993 to transform Echelon into a tool for gathering economic intelligence.

"We have a triple and limited objective," the former intelligence chief told the French paper. "To look out for companies which are breaking US or UN sanctions; to trace 'dual' technologies, i.e., for civil and military use, and to track corruption in international business."

As NewsMax reported exclusively on Sunday, Echelon had been used by the Clinton administration to monitor millions of personal phone calls, private emails and even ATM transactions inside the U.S. - all without a court order.

The massive invasion of privacy was justified by Echelon's defenders as an indispensable national security tool in the war on terror.

But Clinton officials also utilized the program in ways that had nothing to do with national security - such as conducting economic espionage against foreign businesses.

In his comments to Le Figaro, Woolsey defended the program, declaring flatly: "Spying on Europe is justified."

"I can tell you that five years ago, several European countries were giving substantial bribes to export business more easily. I hope that's no longer the case."

During hearings in 2000 on the surveillance flap, Woolsey told Congress that in 1993 alone, U.S. firms obtained contracts worth $6.5 billion with the help of timely intelligence information.

"We collect intelligence on those efforts to bribe foreign companies and foreign governments into awarding an airport contract to a European firm rather than an American firm," Woolsey said in a 1994 speech, in quotes picked up by the New York Post.

Predictably, European officials were outraged by what they regarded as a massive abuse of the NSA's spying capacity.

"[This is] an intolerable attack against individual liberties, competition, and the security of states," complained Martin Bangemann, then-European commissioner for industry.

But the complaints went unheeded in Washington.

In 1996, President Clinton signed the Economic Espionage Act, which, according to the Christian Science Monitor, authorized intelligence gathering on foreign businesses.

"The Clinton administration has attached especial importance to economic intelligence, setting up the National Economic Council [NEC] in parallel to the National Security Council," the Monitor reported in 1999.

"The NEC routinely seeks information from the NSA and the CIA," the paper continued, citing anonymous officials. "And the NSA, as the biggest and wealthiest communications interception agency in the world, is best placed to trawl electronic communications and use what comes up for US commercial advantage."


...not meant to say sincel Clinton did it, it must be OK post.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Trent 0]

You must have missed my first couple of posts.

Quote

Now, a mechanism exists to submit domestic surveillance warrants to judicial scrutiny in secret to preserve national security; there's a secret Court set up to do just that. So secrecy wouldn't be compromised by submitting it to the court;

So far so good, it was hard getting people who were anti Patriot Act to understand that there still was judicial oversight in most cases.

Quote

and in any event, it's the law that it must be submitted to the court.

From my reading of the PA and FISA, this is not true. There are circumstances where it can be approved by the intelligence comittee. But then again, I've read the whole act and could have gotten lost in the back-and forth. I'd suggest people go read BOTH the PA and FISA, then come back to bitch.

Oh, hello again!

[SudsyFist 0]

Sorry to get in on this one late...

Quote

Since October 2001, the super-secret National Security Agency has, without court-approved warrants, eavesdropped on the international phone calls and e-mails of people inside the United States. President Bush said Saturday that the White House had kept the congressional leadership informed, which a Republican lawmaker confirmed.

There's the key word: international. Intercept of communications outside the U.S. from posts outside the U.S. is standard operating procedure for the NSA, folks.

The only thing new here is the specifying of U.S. citizens and/or U.S.-based emitters as tasked targets (for intercept outside the U.S). This means that, for example, an operator monitoring Saudi Arabia might receive tasking to intercept anything coming *from* a specific site or individual in the U.S. *to* their target area, rather than just monitoring specific Saudi targets, for instance.

In my not-so-informed opinion, this is a very good thing, as it enables the community to put together a more detailed and accurate picture more quickly when a target is operating within the U.S. and maintains multiple international contacts. And again, the NSA is operating well within its role by intercepting communications *outside* of the U.S.; the subject line of this thread is inaccurate.

Now, is this revelation prone to abuse? Certainly, and it looks like some measures have actually been put in place *before* a hooplah was made over it (high-level per instance escalation for authorization, congressional oversight, etc.).

As a terrible cynic, I'm definitely not a fan of this administration, but I support the president in this case, and I think his administration did a great job rolling this out.

As for the leak and resulting damage, I don't think any domestic perps are suddenly changing their methods of communication as a result of this hitting the news; it's no secret that not encrypting senstive comms, whether domestic (within reach of domestic law enforcement and counter intelligence) or international, is unwise in this day and age. It sounds to me like the leak was politically motivated, and the condemning response is a return shot. Political games... *sigh*

[IanHarrop 37]

Quote

OK, more to my point.

The paper that "broke" this story lied on many points. The article made the assurtion that Bush "in a major policy change" started this program.

Once again, those of you that read NewsMax bash it because it is not credible but, in story after story this New Youk paper lies and mis leads. Do you think this paper to be credible? (papers name omited purposely)

Reference the following. Those overseas should pay special note....

Monday, Dec. 19, 2005 11:45 a.m. EST
Clinton Used NSA for Economic Espionage


During the 1990s, President Bill Clinton ordered the National Security Agency to use its super-secret Echelon surveillance program to monitor the personal telephone calls and private email of employees who worked for foreign companies in a bid to boost U.S. trade, NewsMax.com has learned.

In 2000, former Clinton CIA director James Woolsey set off a firestorm of protest in Europe when he told the French newspaper Le Figaro that he was ordered by Clinton in 1993 to transform Echelon into a tool for gathering economic intelligence.

"We have a triple and limited objective," the former intelligence chief told the French paper. "To look out for companies which are breaking US or UN sanctions; to trace 'dual' technologies, i.e., for civil and military use, and to track corruption in international business."

As NewsMax reported exclusively on Sunday, Echelon had been used by the Clinton administration to monitor millions of personal phone calls, private emails and even ATM transactions inside the U.S. - all without a court order.

The massive invasion of privacy was justified by Echelon's defenders as an indispensable national security tool in the war on terror.

But Clinton officials also utilized the program in ways that had nothing to do with national security - such as conducting economic espionage against foreign businesses.

In his comments to Le Figaro, Woolsey defended the program, declaring flatly: "Spying on Europe is justified."

"I can tell you that five years ago, several European countries were giving substantial bribes to export business more easily. I hope that's no longer the case."

During hearings in 2000 on the surveillance flap, Woolsey told Congress that in 1993 alone, U.S. firms obtained contracts worth $6.5 billion with the help of timely intelligence information.

"We collect intelligence on those efforts to bribe foreign companies and foreign governments into awarding an airport contract to a European firm rather than an American firm," Woolsey said in a 1994 speech, in quotes picked up by the New York Post.

Predictably, European officials were outraged by what they regarded as a massive abuse of the NSA's spying capacity.

"[This is] an intolerable attack against individual liberties, competition, and the security of states," complained Martin Bangemann, then-European commissioner for industry.

But the complaints went unheeded in Washington.

In 1996, President Clinton signed the Economic Espionage Act, which, according to the Christian Science Monitor, authorized intelligence gathering on foreign businesses.

"The Clinton administration has attached especial importance to economic intelligence, setting up the National Economic Council [NEC] in parallel to the National Security Council," the Monitor reported in 1999.

"The NEC routinely seeks information from the NSA and the CIA," the paper continued, citing anonymous officials. "And the NSA, as the biggest and wealthiest communications interception agency in the world, is best placed to trawl electronic communications and use what comes up for US commercial advantage."


...not meant to say sincel Clinton did it, it must be OK post.

So what was the point? I didn't question whether or not it happend with Clinton and won't be surprised if the dig up evidence that a number of presidents have it. I must be missing something...

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy