Bush's Spying: Scandalous, or Echo of Clinton-Era "Echelon"?

TimesWatch ^

[april15Bendovr]

Bush's Spying: Scandalous, or Echo of Clinton-Era "Echelon"?  

     Friday's big scoop by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau on domestic spying by the National Security Agency, "Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts," no doubt had the effect the paper intended, throwing the White House on the defensive and causing the renewal of the Patriot Act to be thwarted, a long-time goal of the Times editorial page.

     But is this sort of terrorist surveillance truly a new and troubling thing? The government's Echelon spy program was reported on during the Clinton administration, in a 2000 report on CBS's "60 Minutes." In words that ring familiar, host Steve Kroft intoned:

     "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 and four English-speaking allies: Canada, Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand. The mission is to eavesdrop on enemies of the state: foreign countries, terrorist groups and drug cartels. But in the process, Echelon's computers capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world."

     This is what the Times reported Friday: "Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the [National Security Agency] agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said."

     Not that Bush and Republicans are content with the Times' revelations. Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas accuses the Times of (as the AP puts it), "endangering American security to sell a book by waiting until the day of the terror-fighting Patriot Act reauthorization to report that the government has eavesdropped on people without court-approved warrants."

     Cornyn was referring to a book by Times reporter and story author James Risen, whose book "State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush administration" will be published by the Free Press in January. The Times failed to make a note of that in its Friday story.

     Blogger Tom Maguire thinks a correction is in order on this Saturday paragraph from intelligence reporter David Sanger ("In Speech, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying"): "Mr. Bush's public confirmation on Saturday of the existence of one of the country's most secret intelligence programs, which had been known to only a select number of his aides, was a rare moment in his presidency. Few presidents have publicly confirmed the existence of heavily classified intelligence programs like this one."

     Maguire points us to this phrase just a few graphs on, showing that more than "select" aides knew about the program and that Bush had repeatedly briefed Congress on it (with no outcry from the liberal senators now excoriating Bush over the program's existence): "He said Congressional leaders had been repeatedly briefed on the program, and that intelligence officials 'receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization.'"

     Reporter Sanger also uses one of the paper's favorite phrases to describe Bush's Saturday radio address to the nation in which he criticized Congress: "He also lashed out at senators, both Democrats and Republicans, who voted on Friday to block the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, which expanded the president's power to conduct surveillance, with warrants, in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks."

     Indeed, President Bush reacted strongly, saying in his address that as a result of the Times' report, "our enemies have learned information they should not have."

     John Hinderaker at Power Line sees a Valerie Plame parallel: "How does the Times know this? Because intelligence officials who are hostile to the Bush administration, and disagree with its policies, leaked the information….Under the Plame precedent, this case is a no-brainer. The intelligence officials who leaked to the Times should be identified, criminally prosecuted, and sent to prison."

     One wonders if the Times will get behind that prosecution as vigorously as they did when it was I. Lewis Libby in the spotlight.

     The Times followed up with a worried front-page "news analysis" by Scott Shane (of the Joe Wilson appreciation society) on Saturday, "Behind Power, One Principle."

     "A single, fiercely debated legal principle lies behind nearly every major initiative in the Bush administration's war on terror, scholars say: the sweeping assertion of the powers of the presidency. From the government's detention of Americans as 'enemy combatants' to the just-disclosed eavesdropping in the United States without court warrants, the administration has relied on an unusually expansive interpretation of the president's authority. That stance has given the administration leeway for decisive action, but it has come under severe criticism from some scholars and the courts."

     Confederate Yankee accuses Risen and Lichtblau in their Monday follow-up story of "sensationalizing the scope of Bush's executive order" and has more useful background on Bush's legal justification of using surveillance against terror suspects.

[mnehring]

I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying.

[funkywbr]

No the key point is that President Bush actually has probable cause to do this, what was Cliton's reason?

Filtering out internet porn sites to see who was into giving BJs on the cheap?

[ClancyJ]

Just another assault by the enemies of America.

We have enemies here and they are abetted by the New York Times and the Democrats.

I am sick of it.

Time for a major boycott of any New York Times input whatsoever.

[badbass]

That's what I thought when I heard all of the hoopla over this. Didn't Clinton do it daily? I remember Echelon and something called Carnivore as well. I've always just assumed we were long past this stage of Big Brother, living with the legacy of Clinton. I don't have any problem with surveilling non-citizens at all. I consider this somewhat of an improvement, since the callers had direct links to Al Quaeda.

[ClancyJ]

This is an effort to stop the very effective protection of the U.S.

Notice we have had NO attacks since 9/11 here. Well the Times, the media and the democrats will see to it that there are attacks here. We are seeing that action in progress.

And, note - it will be the responsibility of the media, the Times and the Democrats. Do you really want a democrat protecting your country? Notice how they do it.
By abetting all enemies in and out of this country.

[El Gato]

I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying.

Exactly. And this morning, I finally figured out why they could not go to the Courts for regular wiretap warrants. The targets of the surveillance were identified by their association with known or suspected foreign terrorists. Those associations would in most cases have come from NSA monitoring of the communications of these foreign overseas terrorists. That information would not be releasable to a court, and of course there might also be questions of timeliness.

Additionally, and possibly more importantly, the terrorists overseas would suspect that the US was monitoring their calls, and thus would change numbers frequently to throw the monitors off. Those in the US would be less paranoid, and thus monitoring their calls would reveal the changed numbers of the overseas end of the line. It would not in many cases be necessary to monitor what was said on those calls monitored by the US number, only the "who was called" information would be needed, and then those numbers could be monitored for content. However I'd monitor the content of the calls to and from the US numbers as well.

It would be interesting to know how many of those monitored were US citizens, how many were legal immigrants, and how many were illegals, including people who had overstayed legitimate visas as well as those with falsified papers.

[april15Bendovr]

By the way these papers have been selling I would say there already has been a boycott and major layoffs of their employees.

[april15Bendovr]

Could you imagine approaching the 9th circus court for wire taps or other Lefty judges like them?

[sheltonmac]

I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying.

If the president is not spying domestically, then where are the complaints that he isn't doing enough to keep the country safe? If we are so concerned with national security, shouldn't the president's reach be extended to include domestic spying? After all, there may be terrorists here already. Why not tap every phone in the U.S. and be done with it?

[sheltonmac]

It would be interesting to know how many of those monitored were US citizens, how many were legal immigrants, and how many were illegals, including people who had overstayed legitimate visas as well as those with falsified papers.

What exactly would that tell us? I suspect that if we knew that, then everyone here would be calling for the head of the person who "leaked" the information.

[april15Bendovr]

Ever wonder if the liberals in the MSM don't like the patriot act due to actually wanting to give aid and comfort to our enemy?

Its like the argument they used to have when President Clinton gave nuclear satellite guidance technology to the Chinese. "We shouldn't be so powerful?"

[ClancyJ]

Nothing will satisfy me other than complete destruction.

I have had it with the ignorant media enemies of America.

If I have to listen one more time as they try and interpret the President's remarks for us as they snicker about the importance of poll numbers all the time totally having no knowledge of history, the facts of war and the responsibility they have to join in the efforts to protect us, I will destroy my tv.

I am ready to destroy the freedom of the press. Why? Because the press seeks to destroy my freedom, my country, my president. This is war.

[mitchbert]

Notice we have had NO attacks since 9/11 here.

An important point, and in fact we hear repeatedly that some planned attacks were foiled by the intelligence gathered.

Perhaps there's proper reasons why we haven't been told specifics, but I can't help thinking President Bush could put this whole matter to bed full stop by actually explaining what plots were stopped and when. There have been many small victories in the WOT that have happened all over the world that haven't seen the light of day. I realize many can't be discussed without compromising security assets, but I have to think some could be brought forward. It would mute the Dems attacks considerably IMO.

[airforceF4]

Presidential Executive Orders have a long history. We have affirmative action, in part, due to an EO. The NSA and DIA have had this capability for decades--not a new story. How the heck do you suppose information is gathered--in a coffee house? On a street corner?
Just quit blaming Clinton--every POTUS since JFK has used this. Bush has got to understand that he has to be very direct and honest with the citizens of the USA. Spin, blame and name calling is a waste of time. Tell us a straight story--we're tougher than you seem to know, Mr. President.

[ClancyJ]

No, I do not agree. Let President Bush run the war and reveal what he wants to reveal.

The problem is that we have enemies in our government, in our media. The president cannot say that but you know full well he understands that.

By getting him to continually let the help him make decisions, get him to reveal more and more, plays into their gameplan of destroying this country and our safety.

Always remember - We Have Enemies in this Government and in the Media and they seek to destroy this country.

[Rapscallion]

Only fools believe the war is over. There are still two counties (North Korea and Iran)with nuke programs aimed at the US and our allies.There are three countries working on bio-attack materials against the US. Chemical warfare stores still exist in Iran, North Korea and Syria. Terrorist organizations to carry out evil against us are too numerous to name: Hezbollah, Hammas, Islamic Brotherhood, if not al Qaeda, are alive and operational.

MESSAGE TO DEMOCRATS: If there is another attack "democrat" will be a term of hatred and scorn, disloyalty and self-destruction. Kennedy, Reid, Pelosi, Kerry, Boxer, Levin, Rangel et al., will be hunted as terrorist sympathizers worthy of listing beside Benedict Arnold, John Walker, and Albert Ames.

[eastforker]

It has been rumored in the past that someone from the David Koresh compound had the "key" to Echelon. That is why it had to be destroyed.

[mitchbert]

No, I do not agree. Let President Bush run the war and reveal what he wants to reveal.

I wasn't clear...I don't feel anyone other than the President should have the discretion to release the info. I just feel that if HE did it on a few points where he felt he could it would go a long way to shutting down the naysayers.

[ClancyJ]

Oh, ok I agree. But, it does not matter with the naysayers - they will just move on to another facet of the president's efforts.

Being President in this country is extremely hard - I do not blame the president from ignoring the media. I just can't understand how he can even be passably polite to them as they seek to undermine him every step of the way.

Their whole viewpoint of superiority over what is revealed to the American public is a farce. They are in fact totally ignorant of history and have been educated by liberals in our school systems to be nice little socialists. So, therefore, they are less educated than the older in our society and have been thoroughly indoctrinated by their educators and their bosses to the socialistic, worldrule agenda.

It is up to middle America to protect this country. We cannot depend on the liberal states to do it.

[sheltonmac]

I am ready to destroy the freedom of the press. Why? Because the press seeks to destroy my freedom, my country, my president. This is war.

I think you might appreciate this thread.

[marron]

If you can operate under normal civilian law, you are not yet at war. If warrants and judges and men in suits can handle it, you are not yet at war.

If you are at war, you have moved beyond normal civilian law. War is the state of affairs that exists when civilian law is no longer adequate to the circumstance. That is what war is.

When you declare war, you are making a public acknowlegdement of that fact, and you are putting your own people on notice that for the time being, against a defined threat, you are going to do whatever it takes, you are going to identify the threat, identify its support system, and then you are going to destroy it. You are going to re-shape the facts on the ground, overthrow governments, re-draw borders, push whole peoples from one place to another, and kill anyone who won't surrender.

When the circumstances have been re-shaped, the die-hards are dead, and their pals have given up the fight, when in other words it has become possible to return to civilian law, by definition the war is over.

[april15Bendovr]

Yes but the liberals have a short memory. They forgot we are still at war.

[ClancyJ]

Ever wonder if the liberals hate the Patriot Act because it might discover that they take direction from foreigners as to legislative actions?

Ever wonder if we would discover that they are being paid/bribed by foreigners?

Just what do you do when your media is against the leader of your nation? What do you do when your media seeks to abet the enemy?

What do you do when your media leaks national secrets which aid and abet the enemy in his efforts to destroy us?

Nothing? Because you fear that you might be discovered making a drug deal? Nothing? Because you might be discoved participating in an unsavory action yourself? (Note - this is in no way directed at you personally - but just the general attitude of the country.)

I sometimes wonder if all this jabbering about "my civil liberties" is just jargon meaning "my unlawful or unsavory private actions".

[sheltonmac]

Ever wonder if the liberals hate the Patriot Act because it might discover that they take direction from foreigners as to legislative actions?

That's a reasonable concern--especially when you consider that no politican would ever stoop that low. Our leaders in Washington always have the best of intentions. I mean, the very thought that they would pass a law none of them actually read if it wasn't in the best interests of the nation is just silly.

I sometimes wonder if all this jabbering about "my civil liberties" is just jargon meaning "my unlawful or unsavory private actions".

Exactly how intrusive would the government have to get before you complained? In your opinion, is it even possible for the government to go too far? If so, how will we know when that line is crossed?

Just curious.

[toddlintown]

"I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying."

Keep yelling. I tried to explain this yesterday by comparing it to a package delivered from Germany to Chicago. It's certainly not a domestic delivery if it originated from Europe. It's international mail.

The dems know this but by continuing to lie, they hope that more morons will agree to their slant on the argument.

[ClancyJ]

I fully expect that laws and empowerment for the President can be designated with time limits, and oversight restrictions.

But - gee - to do nothing and let the country be stolen right under our noses is so much more ........ uh....safe, I guess.

Corruption is not limited to Washington officials. American citizens are involved in plenty of it but I do not intend to sit by and endanger my family so that they can manipulate the laws to further their corruption.

Maybe they all should consider just following the laws of the land - at least they would not have to fear the government finding out about their activities would they?

[dkarma]

I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying.

---

YES IT IS!! ANY time someone in the US is part of a conversation it is domestic spying. I watched an interview with a former cia director and he said that any time a US citizen is on the line it is domestic spying. ALSO Clinton was spying WITH PERMISSION FROM FISA COURTS....are you all forgetting that point??? Clinton had permission!!! Bush did this spying without permission!!!! Whether it keeps us safe or not is a MOOT POINT!!! His actions were illegal and impeachable! IMPEACHMENT NOW!!!

[dkarma]

To: april15Bendovr

Ever wonder if the liberals hate the Patriot Act because it might discover that they take direction from foreigners as to legislative actions? - This is absurd. As a liberal I take direction from the fact that I see corruption in our midst not "foreigners"....pfft

Ever wonder if we would discover that they are being paid/bribed by foreigners? - Bahahaha...more rediculous assertions.

Just what do you do when your media is against the leader of your nation? What do you do when your media seeks to abet the enemy? - Yeah right most of our giant media corporations DONATED MILLIONS TO GET BUSH REELECTED in 2004! LOOK IT UP. ABC NBC CBS FAUX all donated multiple millions of dollars to get bush reelected....who's left newspapers...comon stop skewing the truth.

What do you do when your media leaks national secrets which aid and abet the enemy in his efforts to destroy us? -What do YOU do when it was the VP and his staff who leaked it to the media (Plamegate)???

[JTN]

I'm going to keep yelling it from the rooftops. The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying.

If one of the parties is in the U.S., then it's domestic spying. And your statement isn't necessarily true.

A surveillance program approved by President Bush to conduct eavesdropping without warrants has captured what are purely domestic communications in some cases, despite a requirement by the White House that one end of the intercepted conversations take place on foreign soil, officials say.

The officials say the National Security Agency's interception of a small number of communications between people within the United States was apparently accidental, and was caused by technical glitches at the National Security Agency in determining whether a communication was in fact "international."

Telecommunications experts say the issue points up troubling logistical questions about the program. At a time when communications networks are increasingly globalized, it is sometimes difficult even for the N.S.A. to determine whether someone is inside or outside the United States when making a cellphone call or sending an e-mail message. As a result, people that the security agency may think are outside the United States are actually on American soil.

...

National security and telecommunications experts said that even if the N.S.A. seeks to adhere closely to the rules that Mr. Bush has set, the logistics of the program may make it difficult to ensure that the rules are being followed.

With roaming cellphones, internationally routed e-mail, and voice-over Internet technology, "it's often tough to find out where a call started and ended," said Robert Morris, a former senior scientist at the N.S.A. who is retired. "The N.S.A. is good at it, but it's difficult even for them. Where a call actually came from is often a mystery."

[Coyote1968]

First. FISA allows the President to do all that he did without end running the courts. He just took it upon himself to remove that check to his power. Apparently in contravention of the Fourth Ammendment to the Constitution.

Remember that document. Says that since too much power tends to be bad lets make sure that there are checks and balances on each branch of government so that people don't get trampled.

And saying that "liberal" Congressmen were briefed and they didn't say anything what about that? Well, they are not allowed by law TO say anything. They are simply briefed. They are not allowed to tell anyone about the breifing, including their staff or any outside counsel. They are also not allowed to act on what they have been told in any way. The Senators in question did the only thing they were allowed to do. They both wrote letters to the person that breifed them (Dick Cheney) saying that they had grave misgivings about the legality of the program. This turned out to be a good idea as the President and Vice President did what they intended to all along and said as soon as this story broke that Congress had been breifed on it including some "liberal" Congressmen. Thereby implying that it had been signed off on when it had not.
More Later. Must Work :)

[ClancyJ]

You are on the wrong board. This is not a site that will promote impeachment of the President of the United States. In fact, I will be reporting your tagline.

You need to wake up and listen to the truth instead of Democrats Underground. Apparently you have bought everything the dems have sold you for so long you believe them.

[ClancyJ]

Oh, I was going to report you - but see that someone else beat me to it. You are already banned.

Enjoy your ignorance.

[ChuckHam]

There's another one here. They are breeding like rabbits.

[Wristpin]

I think Dkharma might be Al Queda....

[aShepard]

...... The key point all these reports neglect is that these taps were on calls and e-mails either originating or terminating internationally. This is not domestic spying......

I'm not sure how the computers sort out all the electronic stuff from originating in the US and not terminating in the US; or originating overseas and terminating overseas; or crossing international boundaries, which ever way.
Who cares!

Thank God that we have an administration that wants to monitor communications activity, to wherever in the world; from wherever in the world


Thankfully, I have no potential criminal activity to hide, so like all other law abiding US Citizens, I should have no problem in hunting down the problem makers, regardless of the cost of "personal liberties"