Bush Authorized NSA Eavesdropping in U.S.

[VelociMorte]

Report: Bush Authorized NSA Eavesdropping in U.S.

Friday, December 16, 2005



NEW YORK — President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States — without getting search warrants — following the Sept. 11 attacks, The New York Times reports.

The presidential order, which Bush signed in 2002, has allowed the agency to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States, according to a story posted Thursday on the Times' Web site.

Before the new program began, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders to do so. Under the post-Sept. 11 program, the NSA has eavesdropped, without warrants, on as many 500 people inside the United States at any given time. Overseas, 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time.

The Times said reporters interviewed nearly a dozen current and former administration officials about the program and granted them anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.

Government officials credited the new program with uncovering several terrorist plots, including one by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting Al Qaeda by planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, the report said.

But some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said. Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions.

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the group's initial reaction to the disclosure was "shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law."

Asked about the administration's contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn't comment until it sees some evidence. "They've veiled these powers in secrecy so there's no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight."

The Bush administration had briefed congressional leaders about the program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.

Aides to National Intelligence Director John Negroponte and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to comment Thursday night.

The Times said it delayed publication of the report for a year because the White House said it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. The Times said it omitted information from the story that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists.




Personally, I don't have a problem with this. What I do have a problem with is that someone ran their f*cking mouth about it and compromised an ongoing operation that has undoubtedly saved the lives of countless Americans.

[rubberneck]

The Bush administration had briefed congressional leaders about the program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.

How is this even news? The Administration directed the NSA to conduct survellience on US Citizens with the full knowledge of the Court and the Senate yet some how it was done in secret. From what I understand the intercepts were done on the receiving end not here in the states. What the times also failed to disclose is that the author of the article also is the author of a book that is due out shortly and that the times sat on the story until shortly before the books release.

What ever respect I had for the left in this country is long gone. God forbid we try to protect ourselves. It's not like Lincoln held people without charging them. It's not like Roosevelt rounded up tens of thousadns of Americans and locked them up. It is not like Roosevelt tried and executed German spies outside of the US legal system. If the day that another attack happens on US soil let it be the NY Times building. Maybe then they can see the folly of their ways.

[Solid]

Here's all I'm hearing-
ACLU: Wah wah wah wah waaah

While government monitoring is a serious issue, America's security agencies are still far more regulated than France or England's in terms of eavesdropping, arrests, etc... I suppose this is because America has only had limited (before 9/11) contact with Terrorism, whereas England had the IRA and France the.. well, everyone hates the french.

Either way, I agree with Rubberneck that this is not big news. It is and deserves to be, however, news in that the American public deserves to be kept informed of regulation of their civil liberties.

JMO,

Solid

[Sten]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, it is not a bad thing to watch the government.

[longrange1947]

Originally Posted by Sten

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, it is not a bad thing to watch the government.

While that quote is true, no one in this gov't has that power. Please do not act as if it was so.

This was a political ploy to stop the Patriot Act from being extended. These piece of crap Pols that acted all shocked knew very well what was going on and would have screamed bloody murder is we had not stopped something through this program.

My bet on the leak was a pol that was first informed sometime ago but was against the Patriot Act from being extended. He knew that a tempest in a tea pot would scuttle it.

They look for key words and names. They can not look at everyones damed conversations. Lets get real here, 500 Americans, wonder what their background is? Maybe if you join a terr group or talk about blowing up the Empire State Building, then yuou might attract attention.

[rubberneck]

Originally Posted by Sten

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, it is not a bad thing to watch the government.

You're right that absolute power corrupts absolutely and in this case that applies more to the NY Times than the Bush administration.

If the Times had reported the story correctly it should have read "The NY Times now reports that the NSA at the direction of the President, with the Knowledge of the Senate Intelligence Committee and with the approval of the national security court has conducted eavsedropping operations on US citizens. The Times can also report that because of intelligence gathered by the NSA the Bush administration was able to thwart an operation to destroy a landmark in NYC saving countless innocent lives. The suspect was later convicted of the plot and sentenced to a lengthy prison term". Instead we get a piece that claims that these operations were conducted secretly (despite the knowledge of Congress and the Federal Courts) and written in such a way as to portray this as a sinister act. I suspect that those who would have died if that plot was successful would agree with that but who cares. This is all about making the President look bad even if that means some people have to get hurt.

I guess we shouldn't snoop and then cry when hundreds or thousands die.

[BMT (RIP)]

I monitored cell phones before they went digital. The most exciting thing i heard was "Babe I'working late tonight". Bride "if you sleep with her tonight you better have me a new fur coat before you get home'.

BMT

[Pete]

I think one of the best responses was from a talking head on I think Fox the other night.

NSA monitors a conversation between a terrorist in Iraq and his buddy in the USA. The terrorist asks "What building are you going to bomb in the morning?" and the USA guys replies "-------" THE PRECEEDING STATEMENT WAS BLACKED OUT DUE TO US LAWS.

[Kyobanim]

Seems that the Times sat on the story for a year and refused to let the reports that wrote the story to talk about it, all this with the full knowledge of the WH. There's probably a lot more to this than we will ever know, such as an executive order.

[Firebeef]

Newsworthy? Does anyone doubt that Pres Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter...etc... never issued such an order?? ....that we will never know about.......and quite possibly only a handful of people will ever know about? After Sept 11th, these same media types screamed bloody murder about what woulda coulda shoulda been done to prevent those attacks. Let's see the current population of the US is around 280 million (+/-) .... that "up to a thousand" folks were hyper-scrutinized based on actions or key words that showed up in e-mails or in phone conversations doesn't quite sound like gestapo tactics to me. Of course Ted Kennedy and pals were on TV, rabid, outraged and foaming at the mouth and cryin for the Prez to "restore" democracy. Gimme a break and pass the Tylenol, puh-leeeze!

[Radar Rider]

The left is so hypocritical that they make me want to vomit. This is not new, nor limited to government agencies. Think back to 1996, when Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House. On December 21st of that year, a Florida couple, John and Alice Martin, were going Christmas shopping, and "just happened" to have a scanner and tape recorder in the car with them. They claimed to have "accidentally" monitored the cell-phone conversation of Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, as he spoke from his car in a conference call with several other key Republicans, including Gingrich. They just "happened" to record it "for history."

I'm sure it's common for people to accidentally intercept and tape private cell phone conversations while going Christmas shopping. Happens to me all the time.

The Martins then turned the tape over to Washington Democrat Jim McDermott, a member of the House Ethics Committee, which was about to rule on Gingrich's ethics violations. McDermott, in turn gave the tape to the New York Times and other newspapers. The New York Times then printed a transcript of the call's participants discussing how Gingrich should respond to the Ethics Committee.

Of course, it's just a "coincidence" that the Martins are active in Florida Democratic politics, just as it was a "coincidence" that they gave the tape to a Democrat on the Ethics Committee instead of the Independent Counsel or the Republican committee chair. Perhaps it was also an "accident" that McDermott gave the information to the press, rather than discussing the tape with his fellow committee members.

I suppose that as long as a democrat is doing it, then it's okay.

[Sten]

I am still going to say it is important to watch the government. You QPs are all used to working with the best and brightest. That is not the case for the rest of us, as a general rule the vast majority of government is staffed and directed by the merely adequate.

This is not a left right issue. I am not attacking POTUS or the White House; I am asking to closely watch all politicians. The political animal (left, right, liberal, conservative, commie, socialist, libertarian, all of them..) is scum who would sell any of us out to get reelected. I am not comfortable letting that person have a free hand with my rights (or my pay check or my family or or or.). I am watching the erosion of the 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th amendments and I fear that the second amendment is not going to be far behind. We have to draw the line on what we are going to give up to the Muslim extremists.

We as a nation have to be ever vigilant of our rights and freedoms or we will loose them. As it stands now we have good people fighting a good fight. I am more concerned down the road if people who are not so scrupulous have such a free hand. What is to stop a political party from using the NSA to gather some intel on their opposition party? You are going to say that is nonsense and liberal whiny crap but it is a pretty common tactic in South America/old Soviet/Chinese politics. List your opposition as a terror or rebel group and then destroy them. It is not out of the realm of possibility here, is it?

The GWOT is the most complex military/social problem to face our nation in a very long time and it is not going to be solved quickly or easily. If we are going to give up freedom for security I would like to vigorously debate that trade off. It is easy to give rights away; it is very hard to get them back.

Our government is for the people by the people, we need to remind the jackasses in Washington of that sometimes.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Sten

What is to stop a political party from using the NSA to gather some intel on their opposition party?

Something is wrong only if it PO's the Libs and the MSN.

So just who did take all those FBI files over to the White House? Who looked at them? What was in them?

Who in congress told the IRS to look into individuals tax records?

Voter fraud/the dead voting/voting in FL and NY at the same time?

There is plenty of abuse in the system right now. Most of it done by the libs and seconded by the MSN. Everything is "OK" if it moves the liberal cause forward. Even the death of US troops and the defeat of US forces on the battlefield.

[Peregrino]

Originally Posted by Sten

What is to stop a political party from using the NSA to gather some intel on their opposition party?

Where is J. Edgar Hoover when we really need him? Peregrino

[Sten]

Originally Posted by Pete

Something is wrong only if it PO's the Libs and the MSN.

So just who did take all those FBI files over to the White House? Who looked at them? What was in them?

Who in congress told the IRS to look into individuals tax records?

Voter fraud/the dead voting/voting in FL and NY at the same time?

There is plenty of abuse in the system right now. Most of it done by the libs and seconded by the MSN. Everything is "OK" if it moves the liberal cause forward. Even the death of US troops and the defeat of US forces on the battlefield.

Right! we need to stop all abuse.