Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NSA chief not concerned by congressional inquiries
Yahoo.Com ^ | 1/6/2006 | Reuters

Posted on 01/07/2006 10:33:31 AM PST by Bullitt

"Media coverage surmises that administration and agency officials may have acted unlawfully -- notions I reject, categorically!" NSA Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander assured agency employees in a December 22 message.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: patriotleak
Was this broadcast anywhere? Or is James Risen the only voice that the MSM will print and air?
1 posted on 01/07/2006 10:33:33 AM PST by Bullitt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Bullitt

The NSA has no reason to be concerned. They will not release ANY classified information of any significance to Congress.

Congress does not have a need to know.


2 posted on 01/07/2006 10:39:48 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

I wonder if we can look forward to some media members sitting down before Congress at some point.


3 posted on 01/07/2006 10:47:34 AM PST by Bullitt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
The NSA has no reason to be concerned. They will not release ANY classified information of any significance to Congress.

Congress does not have a need to know.

Yeah! Who needs that stupid ole checks and balance anyways. /sarc

4 posted on 01/07/2006 10:48:48 AM PST by md2576 (Desensitize loss of freedom with fear of imminent attacks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bullitt

"I wonder if we can look forward to some media members sitting down before Congress at some point."

Could be, but I wouldn't count on it. The media knows a lot of stuff. That's scary to some who might otherwise want to ask difficult questions.


5 posted on 01/07/2006 10:50:57 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: md2576
Yeah! Who needs that stupid ole checks and balance anyways. /sarc

Yeah! Who needs that ole constitutional treason clause anyways? /even more sars

6 posted on 01/07/2006 10:52:43 AM PST by 101st-Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

True probably, but wouldnt you like to see Kerry telling some NSA employee that he is terrorizing Al Qaeda members??


7 posted on 01/07/2006 10:52:43 AM PST by Bullitt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bullitt

8 posted on 01/07/2006 11:01:32 AM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bullitt

I wonder if we can look forward to some media members sitting down before Congress at some point.>>

Of course! The MSM is the source of all knowledge!

If they could only read and write.

On matters scientific they have no clue, and obviously have no intention of ever trying to gain a clue.

Good Old MSM!


9 posted on 01/07/2006 11:05:48 AM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: md2576

"Yeah! Who needs that stupid ole checks and balance anyways. /sarc"

Right on, we need to let any and all terr perps come in unhindered to kill Americans as they please. /S


10 posted on 01/07/2006 11:17:04 AM PST by Ursus arctos horribilis ("It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!" Emiliano Zapata 1879-1919)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

I agree congress does not have the need to know. Say for the sake of argument that NSA, through technical means, has tapped into a foreign IP address, and that IP address is yielding emails between a known terrorist and someone in the United States. Suppose these emails are yielding operational details about coming attacks here or overseas. NSA and the President would do everything to hide the existance of this intelligence source. Can you imagine telling congress details of this? More than likely we would read about it on the front page of the NYT. Even within the military and NSA, this type of info would not be shared outside of the individuals with a need to know.
Any leak at all about this and the source would be lost.

I think this is one reason why President Bush did not go back to the FISA court to get intercept authorization within 72 hours. The requests might be automatically approved,but I imagine some details must be given to the judge to justify the intercept. Why jeopardize the intelligence source, which is vital to national security?
I would guess that much of this intercepted data is acquired in bulk,from multiple sources, and must be sorted for key words, names, etc. It is probably not read in real time.

The leakers should be prosecuted. If the NYT committed a felony by publishing the information, they should be prosecuted as well.


11 posted on 01/07/2006 11:17:47 AM PST by USN40VET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USN40VET

You make a lot of sense in your message, and demonstrate an understanding of the situation.

Congress is not secure. Not at all. Never has been.


12 posted on 01/07/2006 11:20:20 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ursus arctos horribilis
Right on, we need to let any and all terr perps come in unhindered to kill Americans as they please.

They come in through the borders. The patriot act does nothing to secure our borders much less our safety.

13 posted on 01/07/2006 11:23:39 AM PST by md2576 (Desensitize loss of freedom with fear of imminent attacks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Congress does not have a need to know.

Congress has a need to know.....they just can't be trusted.

Since they control the budget, they do get oversight......they also leak like crazy and do more damage to the security of this country then anything else.

However, your lefty idiots in congress are obsessed with the CIA, they'll get off the NSA with no problems.

14 posted on 01/07/2006 1:02:55 PM PST by Sonny M ("oderint dum metuant")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sonny M

"Since they control the budget, they do get oversight......"

Oversight does not mean that they get to know what's going on, except in very general terms.


15 posted on 01/07/2006 1:09:24 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
The very definition of oversight is regulatory supervision.

Which means they get the right to know nuts and bolts stuff.....especially since they can cut or slash the budget, they are supposed to (but fail to) make sure the money is spent appropriatly and that the agencies do not abuse their authority.

Congress though, in the real world, fails at any kind of oversight, and leaks like a bathtub thats been hit with a jackhammer, it engages in partisian warfare and is wholly imcompetant.

That said, don't be surprised to see one of 2 things happen with congress and the NSA, one is for them to move on and target the CIA again (since they are to stupid to realize the US has more then one intelligence agency) or 2, threaten to cut the budget and withold funding for the NSA unless they get answers they want (I don't mean the truth either, I mean they want to hear what they want to hear).

16 posted on 01/07/2006 2:29:53 PM PST by Sonny M ("oderint dum metuant")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson