NYT: NSA Spying Broader Than Bush Admitted

Yahoo.Com ^ | 12/23/2005 | AP

[Bullitt]

NEW YORK - The National Security Agency has conducted much broader surveillance of e-mails and phone calls — without court orders — than the Bush administration has acknowledged, The New York Times reported on its Web site.

The NSA, with help from American telecommunications companies, obtained access to streams of domestic and international communications, said the Times in the report late Friday, citing unidentified current and former government officials.

[Patriot Hooligan]

Always keep this in mind:

William Tecumseh Sherman

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."

[The Red Zone]

The volume of information harvested from telecommunications data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the paper said, quoting an unnamed official.

Maybe US spooks are planting these stories. "Hey terrorists, we've got little birds telling us all about you" whether we really do or not.

[KDD]

In 2004 and 2005, Bush repeatedly argued that the controversial Patriot Act package of anti-terrorism laws safeguards civil liberties because US authorities still need a warrant to tap telephones in the United States.

"Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order," he said on April 20, 2004 in Buffalo, New York.

"Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so," he added.

On April 19, 2004, Bush said the Patriot Act enabled law-enforcement officials to use "roving wiretaps," which are not fixed to a particular telephone, against terrorism, as they had been against organized crime.

"You see, what that meant is if you got a wiretap by court order -- and by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example," he said in Hershey, Pennsylvania.

"A couple of things that are very important for you to understand about the Patriot Act. First of all, any action that takes place by law enforcement requires a court order," he said July 14, 2004 in Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin.

"In other words, the government can't move on wiretaps or roving wiretaps without getting a court order," he said. "What the Patriot Act said is let's give our law enforcement the tools necessary, without abridging the Constitution of the United States, the tools necessary to defend America."

The president has also repeatedly said that the need to seek such warrants means "the judicial branch has a strong oversight role."

"Officers must meet strict standards to use any of these tools. And these standards are fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States," he added in remarks at the Ohio State Highway Patrol Academy.

He made similar comments in Baltimore, Maryland, on July 20 2005.

Vice President Dick Cheney offered similar reassurances at a Patriot Act event in June 2004, saying that "all of the investigative tools" under the law "require the approval of a judge before they can be carried out."




The irony in this story is that The Executive branch of the government doesn't appear to trust our U.S. Secret Court with all the circumstances that it might run into while it secretly spies on American citizens.

In my entire life I never expected to be able to write the above sentence as a reflection of a reality of life in America.

[silverleaf]

great quote!

[Hoodat]

NYTimes Sedition Broader Than First Revealed

[Bullitt]

We have traitorus people among us in this country. Those that would sacrifice American lives to drown a sitting President. If we dont start charging people with treason, we will not be safe here in America. Start with the NY Times and work your way down to the ACLU. The enemy is there.

[Bullitt]

Yeah that is a great qoute

[Bullitt]

quote as well.

[rebel_yell2]

To the contrary. I think that this story has doomed the Dims to minority status for at least another election cycle. "Bush bugged Bid Ladin" won't sell in Kansas.

[Wristpin]

Then there was the Nuclear sniffing revelation yesterday.

What we have here is a conspiracy. This time it's not old retired spooks like the VIPs. Someone with an active clearance.

[bcsco]

Paged through all the replies and didn't see this so I'll state it...Could it be that the NYT has discovered that its phone conversations have been monitored, thus their adamant push at this non-story? Another thread I read earlier questioned what we could do to counter these leaks. While no one in that thread really answered the premise reading it, then this thread makes me wonder whether the AG office and Dept. of Homeland Security may not be conducting surveillances to determine who is leaking this stuff. One way would be to monitor telephone conversations.

[giotto]

"I hate newspapermen...If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."

LOL! So true. In one of Woody Allen's movies, the lowest level of Hell is allocated to the media, and I couldn't agree more.

[Kaslin]

The New York Slimes and the left just don't get it. Will they ever? I doubt it

[W04Man]

I SAY AGAIN!!! Bump!

And that goes for all you liberal newspapers too!

[LS]

No, this is good. It continues to draw the line between those who are concerned with American security and those concerned with regaining their political power. And it couldn't happen at a better time. Americans DO NOT WANT TO BE BOTHERED WITH THIS CRAP at Christmas, and are resentful that it is forced on them.

Trust me, all is good.

[LS]

"Designed to push the President's approval ratings back down . . . ."

Not working, is it? They continue to slowly climb. But they still don't get it. Bush is NOT RUNNING AGAIN.

All the MSM idiots are doing is sealing the long-term fate of the Dems as the new "Federalists." Watch the utter collapse after the next two big election losses. It will be fun.

[LS]

Napoleon: "I have more to fear from five hostile editors than from an enemy division."

Robert E. Lee (paraphrasing): "It seems we left all our best generals in the newspaper offices and put all our best newspaper men leading our armies. Perhaps we should send all our generals to the papers, and let the editors direct the armies."

[LS]

No, what has changed is that with mob families you had ongoing, constant operations where, if you missed one "window of opportunity," you could get a warrant and get them later.

With terrorists, your windows of opportunities are often measured in minutes, at the costs of thousands of lives. Indeed, if a dirty bomb is set off in NY, you won't go there for up to 30 years (for an excellent look at the reality of this, see a British movie called "Dirty War").

The fact is, the court---even the one that the international secret wiretaps should go to---is way, way too slow.

Perhaps what is now needed is a new, rotating 24-hour "court" consisting of a judge who is actually IN the NSA every minute of the day who can instantly approve these taps.

[bray]

This book will be out in about 1 week now. Does the Old York Times mention that BJ entered The Gonzales house w/o after a judge said no to a warrent??

Merry Christmas

[stocksthatgoup]

The New York Times must think we are all dense. Of course this is a widespread program. In order to detect, to locate Al Qaeda communication we literally sift through virtually ALL world wide international connections to locate the enemy.