WAR: Bush Allowed NSA to Spy on U.S. International Calls

Unfortunately the securities Departments have had the power to use private business for years. As people to go undercover as operatives, or to pull stings on organized crime and other things. (Funny thing is that was one of the things the colonist fought the British over illegal search and seizure.) '' Also there is not international law concerning web traffic yet. And as it still runs into bottlenecks where someone can sift through the info and read what it wants then the American Government will look. This was way before 9/11 yet it still didn’t work to stop them. ''

To me the government spying organizations has not yet learned their lesson. They failed because of lack of communication like in Katrina; the lack of connecting the dot when they had the info (such as firing the information sifters because of their race or sexual preferences), and following through on law that the terrorist had already broken (immigration laws INS). _javascript ''

This has been reported over and over. I really don’t think new powers, as unfettered surveillance will help only hurt. When they had the info they still could not do it what takes do you really think that they can do it now with a new department added, extra powers, and a warlike environment?

To me the over flow of information WILL go to the wrong hands and end up biting America in the Butt. BTW has anyone seen Syriana? ''


[edit on 12/09-2005 by BlackThought]

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
REPLY: I believe the US Code as it pertains to national security trumps state laws. As a start, you would have to file a state lawsuit against the telephone company, at which point the burden of proof falls upon you. I hope you're independently wealthy.....

This is not an issue of whether Federal law trumps State statutes with regard to national security. At this stage, the issue is not even one of national security requirements.

The issue is simply this: California's privacy laws (and similar laws exist throughout the country) require telecommunications companies operating in the State to guard the privacy of their subscribers by requiring prior notification, or authorization via duly issued court order!

The nature of the surveillence obviously made prior notification impossible; however, by cooperating with the governemt without benefit of indemnification by under the auspices of a duly issued court order, the telecoms which allowed their equipment to be used by the goverment in conducting this surveillance have violated CA PUC 2891.1.

The telecoms cannot, if called to task for their participation, claim that they were forced to cooperate with the government, since the mechinism prescribed by code to impliment that cooperation, namely a court order, was never offered nor requested.

As I see it, the telecoms invovled cannot even provide, in their defense, the claim that any particular subscriber's information was not compromised. Under the privacy provisions, it is the burden of the telecoms to protect their subscriber's information!

The law does not require the subscribers to verify that the telecoms have complied with the law; simply stated, if information was released without notification or warrant, the law was violated.

Sans warrant, and considering the data-minning techniques likely employed by the NSA (which will of course never be detailed for the public), it is unlikely that either the companies or the government will be able to identify all the individuals surveilled, or the scope of the information gleaned.

Further, I do not believe that a law suit would be the most appropriate first step. A violation of the PUC code has been alleged, therefore the logical first act would be to file a complaint with the California PUC.

A favorable ruling from the PUC would then open the door to civil, and possibly, even crimminal suits being filed.

Faced with such an onslaught (imagine all those greedy subscribers clamouring for their piece of the tort pie!) it is likely that the telecoms would have no choice but to unleash their lobbyists upon Capitol Hill to wreack rightoeous wrath upon the adminstration officials responsible for thier dilema.



REPLY: ".... at this stage." True, but all in all, good luck; it still comes down to a national security issue.
On the other hand there's Carnivore (and there's another one), which does pertain to data mining, and goes back to the Clinton era.

As for phone privacy (cell phones and cordless), I could use my Yuasa tuner to capture any conversation I wish, but I don't.

I'm waiting for another thread about the Italians tapping phones now, for security for the up-coming olympics....

Also... no mention of what I asked about a "right" to privacy?

Originally posted by Muaddib

............

wth?......

Is that your defense for your argument?.....

"wth?" " "


Little Mouse,

Those are your responses to a post that cost me 20 points for "overquoting" by a pasimonious moderator, simply to see if you can think outside of the narrow confines known as the box????

Originally posted by Bhadhidar

Originally posted by Seekerof
Question, mate:
Which exact law or laws did the Bush Adminstration break?
Can you point out the exact one(s)?

seekerof

"No information regarding calling patterns, credit or financial information,subscriber services, or demographic data shall be disclosed by any telephone companywithout first obtaining the residential subscriber's consent..."

The burden of proof would lay solely on the Government to show that NONE of MY confidential information was collected in violation of the law, and that subsequent to collection, none of my information was ever disseminated to unauthorized persons (which will be a neat trick, since none of the people who might have had access would have been authorized to do so under the letter of the law!) without my consen

I would disagree here. The burden of proof is upon the accuser, not the accused, in the US.

Also, you are assuming that the telco had prior knowledge and was complicit in the eavesdropping. Do you have proof of this?

yes they admited helping the government collect data. Just like contractors admit planting stories in Iraqi newspapers.

Interesting, BlackThought. When did this happen?

Just like contractors admit planting stories in Iraqi newspapers.

I'm looking forward to this info...

U.S. Army admits planting fake news in Iraq media

www.aljazeera.com...


US 'admits' Iraq propaganda drive

news.bbc.co.uk...

here


www.msnbc.msn.com...

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for December 1 With Rummie and Bucanan


[edit on 12/09-2005 by BlackThought]

I thought so.

First of all, i know what your reaction will be, but aljazeera.COM is not a source that is taken seriously. That is, unless you are anti-American.

It is often mistaken for aljazeera.NET, which is only marginally better as a source of unbiased info.

And, unfortunately, BlackThought, you have fallen for the sensational-but-untrue headline which is not supported by the facts:
Sensational headline: U.S. Army admits planting fake news in Iraq media

Supporting statement:

The U.S. army in IRAQ admitted that it is running a secret campaign to plant pro-American articles in Iraqi papers, the Los Angeles Times reported.

What is true about the above statement is :

The U.S. army in IRAQ admitted that it is running a .. campaign to plant pro-American articles in Iraqi papers

There was nothing secret, or illegal, about the "campaign".

But this is a diversion, and way off topic. One more question, though: Where are you from? Just curious...

I am from the deep south of America in the Bible belt, where I grew up and saw kkk and fought with skinheads in the street. Where I saw innocent people go to jail because of skin color. The America some people see is not all of what America is in its heart.

I was referring to the content of the article and the way it was found out. You support lying to make yourself look better. They were lying about many things that they themselves saw on the street.



They would not admit it until the contractor was pressured then they admitted it then. If it was above board why did they lie when first asked about it? On NBC the Spokesman from the telecom company admitted it on a TV news program.

Originally posted by BlackThought
I am from the deep south of America in the Bible belt, where I grew up and saw kkk and fought with skinheads in the street. Where I saw innocent people go to jail because of skin color.

Thank you. I myself am from near the Mason-Dixon Line, where many slaves passed through on their way to escape the tyranny of the south. I have seen the damage and ruin inflicted in the name of the Bible.

I was referring to the content of the article and the way it was found out. You support lying to make yourself look better. They were lying about many things that they themselves saw on the street.

They would not admit it until the contractor was pressured then they admitted it then.

The contractor was pressured until he changed his story? By whom? That doesn't sound good, BlackThought. It sounds like he was pressured because he was not supplying the answers thay wanted to hear. So this story which was forced out of him is suspicious.

If it was above board why did they lie when first asked about it?

It doesn't make sense that they had initially lied, and doesn't matter if they eventually did, because their story was extracted under duress. One only wonders if the duress went as far as torture.

It is increasingly vogue in this country to view every action by the gov't that is even slightly questionable as potentially encroaching on, or at least representing a danger to, U.S. citizen's rights and freedoms. Worse yet, those who do not share this attitude are seen as flunking some sort of test, and viewed as less than intelligent. Unfortunately, this attitude is as divisive and does nothing to foster discussion. It's the same old "If you don't see the matter as seriously as I do, then you must be wrong, or lazy, or partisan, or......".

While we need to be constantly vigilant, we don't need to be so suspicious about every motive that is behind our gov't's actions. Sometimes, believe it or not, decisions and actions are done with our best interests in mind.

The reason I have said all this is because of your statement "yes they admited helping the government collect data. Just like contractors admit planting stories in Iraqi newspapers." This shows a huge distrust of our country, imo, and one I don't share.

Telcos don't spy without a court order, or wiretap unless it is covered under the law. I don't buy into this partnership of conspiracy with the gov't. Also, why NSA would need the telco is beyond me. All this, plus the links given by another poster [Seekerof?] quoting John Hinderaker go unnoticed and ignored by those who will not rest until Bush is found guilty on this. That is very troubling to me.

The way I look at it who cares if the NSA is recording me? Ok., they may get my wife's secret recipe for fried chicken, or the fact that I am looking at getting a new job. Who cares!!!???? I have nothing to be worried about. I am not a terrorist. I don't want to kill the president. If those things were true, then I should be worried. I am a law abiding citizen, and I have no reason to worry about being recorded.

Strictly speaking, what NSA is doing is not wiretapping. They listen to electromagnetic waves propogating through the air, as anyone can do. They are just damn good at it since they have been doing it for decades.

I am SO GLAD that the government is spying on enemies of America. If they weren't, I would feel that they were negligent. Of course, this has been going on a long time before Bush. I would be surprised if they weren't spying on certain groups, especially after 9/11. Keep up the good work! If you aren't trying to blow people up, don't worry about it. If you are, you must be stopped. Besides, like I told a paranoid friend, nobody is spying on YOU, you're not anybody, anyway. Relax.

I was talking to my landlord today. where we live, well, I've already stated on other board that the laundrymat that I go to is like the tower of babel. there has to be at least 4 or 5 different languages being spoken in the place. so, my landlord is telling my about his friend's sister. they are Iranians. I've met his friend...hard to understand really, don't know how long they've been here really. but, well, I don't think he is native born! well, his sister is planning to start college soon.....ya!!! studying, well, microbiology....

ya know, I really don't care what race a person is, and well, believe that we all deserve the same dignity and respect. but, I've talked to the natives of this area and seem to get the impression that the immigrants are more than ever, and alot of them that I have seen have been kind of Islamically clad. but, how dumb can america be??? we know that there are Iranians...albeit not all, that would like to blow us to kingdom come!!! we've took over a arab country already because of their wmd's and had in custody two of what seems like, very valuable people to the terrorists...two women at that, and what were they??? microbiologists, trained at our universities!!

they will open up this great controversy over illegal wiretapping, hoping to get a few tidbits of information that will "save us all", but they will still train them in our universities???

I'm sorry but something just doesn't add up!!!

As has been explained, what the NSA did pertaining to the wiretaps is legal, and justified considering the threat.
What I would like to remind you of is something I remember very well, and is presented for consideration by everyone, to bring a bit of balance to the issue at hand:
In 1964, when the KKK was at it's most prevalent, President Kennedy and his brother Bobby instructed the FBI to do whatever it took.. wiretapping, torture, illegal detainment... whatever it took. Politicians on both sides of the aisle went along with it, and were solid supporters of it.

Thankfully, it worked, and the back of the KKK was broken, and remain irrelevant to this day.
The public knew about it, and were happy it was being done. The members of the KKK were against it, and the rest of the public at large couldnt care less. The wiretaps only affected those guilty, or who collaberated with the "enemy" (the KKK and supporters).

Today, wiretaps are being done against an enemy, and their supporters, that makes the KKK look like participants of an Avon house party...
and some people are outraged....
The Dems seem to have forgotten what the Kennedy's did.....
and a recent poll shows almost 70% of the public agree with the wiretaps...

Have times changed all that much, or is the mindset of a few that has changed?

The Justice Department has opened an investigation into who leaked this information to the NYT:



Hopefully whoever did this will be caught, as it's jeopardized a very important tool in the war on terror.

This was just a small piece of the turd to appease people, he is hiding a much bigger turd. I wonder how much it cost them to have the major network continue their spin in the face of outright deception? Are people still looking at your tv in the same way. Those tv shows, movies and the head puppets must be expensive. Those 24 hr news shows can be used in many ways. Your tax money at work to keep you in check.

dj, you beat me to it. I'm glad there's an investigation into this matter. I believe that a law should be made holding the media accountable for publishing articles that harms national security. I believe in freedom of the press but not when it can wreak havoc on our ability to monitor our enemies.

I don't care what others may think of me. I say that the public shouldn't be allowed to know every little detail of what the government does.

BTW,Justice Dept. Probing Domestic Spying Leak .

There's some damned good people here at ATS, although they're called "Bushies", "sheeple", "Neo-cons" just to name the more polite terms. Hey, there's nothing wrong with loving America and hating the enemy.

Keep up the good work people.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
...
There's some damned good people here at ATS, although they're called "Bushies", "sheeple", "Neo-cons" just to name the more polite terms. Hey, there's nothing wrong with loving America and hating the enemy.

Keep up the good work people.

Hope you weren't referring to me... I call Bush, Bushie. Detest the term "sheeple" for anyone. It is a demeaning term and not meant to foster understanding or verbal interchange.

Interesting though that there are so many folks who seem to want the government to have total control. I don't mind that there are things the people should not know. That's reasonable, but when the watchdogs let the fox raid the henhouse... Sometimes you gotta punish the watch dogs.

Will be interesting, in the light of so many government untruths to see how they cover themselves with the governmental coat of integrity.

And may I close by saying, Mrs. Bush, er... Condi for Prez!!!

Originally posted by Intelearthling
dj, you beat me to it. I'm glad there's an investigation into this matter. I believe that a law should be made holding the media accountable for publishing articles that harms national security. I believe in freedom of the press but not when it can wreak havoc on our ability to monitor our enemies.

You are right, i would also like there to be an investigation as to how some news network keep getting such information and why, such as CNN and any other news network, and they keep warning terrorists on what the government is doing to try to catch those who want to kill civilians, or inflict damage to the US and other western countries in a massive scale.

I think there are many people, and in these same forums too, that don't understand the difference between "free speech" and giving information to our enemies which puts at risk our national security.

I believe among those who keep crying "free speech" when they want "all government secrets out" are just making it easier for terrorists and other enemies which we do have...

Anyone with some common sense would realize that those who work with terrorists, or who are terrorists, would also try to use "free speech" as a tool to make their activities easier and gain information to cause damage or harm to the western world.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
I don't care what others may think of me. I say that the public shouldn't be allowed to know every little detail of what the government does.

There's some damned good people here at ATS, although they're called "Bushies", "sheeple", "Neo-cons" just to name the more polite terms. Hey, there's nothing wrong with loving America and hating the enemy.

Keep up the good work people.

You are damn right.

You will see some member now who will try to claim that we are government agents for saying this..... I guess common sense means "you are a goverment agent" these days....


[edit on 30-12-2005 by Muaddib]