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

To: butterdezillion

My desktop shut down and restarted just the internet while I was in the middle of posting so I’ll try again on my laptop.

It looks like they have 30 days to get approval once they’ve submitted a “certification” saying how they will use the data. The documentation for the previous certification was handled by NSA and FBI on April 11 and 13th, 2011. Two weeks later, in a sudden about-face, they decided to request sweeping changes, with the applications for that sweeping request submitted the same day as Obama requested his long-form BC and 2 days before that.

While the court is considering a certification the collections can occur as if approval was given, if the court approves, and the Obama regime argued that national security would be compromised if the collections were not allowed, in all the extensions they requested through at least September. The court approved the collections while they considered the certification. My computer wouldn’t let me scroll properly so I wasn’t able to see when the final decision was made by the court but it had to be October or later.

I haven’t read the decision all the way through, and skimmed parts of it, but part of the issue was how they could access data - particularly whether they could get access to records that weren’t specifically to or from a specific search term, but also get access to records that were simply ABOUT a search term. IIRC, that’s the difference between being able to see all the records to or from Osama Bin Laden, versus being able to see all records that MENTION Osama Bin Laden. And it involves whether they can look for senders or recipients with US names - which, IIRC, means they could look for all communications to or from Donald Trump, supposedly on the suspicion that he’s been conversing with foreign terrorists whose names they don’t yet know. Or they could look for all communications that I’ve made, or anybody else.

I’ve spent too much time looking at this already, but even from what little I’ve seen, this stinks to high heaven. I would dearly love to find out when the Orly judge overturned the FISA court denials, and how it connects to these dates and events. My mind is too full; I can’t remember the name of the Orly judge who overturned 2 previous judges’ denials of access for the Obama regime and later on claimed that his staff had “misfiled” the record so that nobody was able to find it in a search of PACER (the government’s listing of court records). Anybody remember that judge’s name, or have a handy link to the information about his involvement with the FISA court?


50 posted on 09/08/2013 3:55:26 PM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: paythefiddler; LucyT; null and void; rolling_stone; bitt; Nachum; Venturer; little jeremiah; ...

I remembered: Royce Lamberth. But it wasn’t about the FISA Court (although Lamberth did lead the FISA court right after 9-11). It was about Eric Holder getting a warrant to snoop in James Rosen’s emails and phone calls (as well as those of his family, if I understand correctly) in May of 2010. The previous judge had said Holder had to notify Rosen about the warrant but Lamberth said he didn’t have to. Lamberth sealed his decision/order until November of 2011 (which probably ends up about the time that the Obama regime got express permission to snoop in everybody’s communications so they didn’t need warrants any more, to have the same access). But a clerk “misfiled” the docket filings so that it couldn’t be found, until somebody looking for something else in PACER found it and reported it, shortly after the snooping on Rosen had been exposed to the public; Lamberth apologized for the “misfiling” in May of 2013.

According to Wikipedis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royce_C._Lamberth )the story Rosen was working on involved North Korea’s nuclear capabilities. According to http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/understanding-north-korea-and-iran , European intelligence sources in 2010 claimed that North Korea had tested nukes and by 2012 both South Korea and China were saying that North Korea had a nuke capable of an EMP attack. In hindsight this was a critical time for North Korea’s capabilities because in December of 2012 North Korea did a supposed test-fire of an ICBM that went over the South pole and then on up towards the US, putting into partial-orbit a 200-pound “package” - the right weight and altitude to be a nuke for an EMP attack. That possible EMP nuke is facing us from the south, where there is a large hole in our radar capabilities. If that is an EMP nuke, it means that North Korea has the capability - at any moment, with no advance notice - to create the cataclysmic EMP-type event that one dem Congresswoman has said is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PROBABLE to happen, and the “natural disaster” (cough) that Janet Napolitano has said is coming, that will dwarf anything that’s ever happened in this country. It would also explain why DHS and FEMA are collecting so many body bags, ammunition, and Humvees - as well as why there will be a drill in November simulating a total shutdown of all North American power grids.

IOW, in 2010 Rosen was working on a story that might have alerted the US public and Congress to North Korea’s EMP capabilities, which have since perhaps been put into place to make possible at a moment’s notice (and without advance warning, except to those who have planned it...) the attack on the US that Napolitano, the dem Congresswaoman, DHS, and FEMA have all been anticipating.

So why did Eric Holder want to stop Rosen from alerting the world to North Korea’s nuclear capabilities, at a time when the news companies were lulling the US into thinking North Korea had made no nuclear/delivery progress, instead of reporting the dire warnings of experts such as Peter Vincent Pry, the author of the above-linked article?

Call me crazy, but I REALLY think there is more to the Rosen story than just the general outrage of FBI snooping on news reporters. There were any number of reporters the FBI could have snooped on; this was a story that could have produced a Congressional response that could have truly kept the US safe from the kind of attack that a dem congresswoman now says is 100% likely to happen. And what potential crime did the FBI have probable cause for, that a judge would have granted that warrant for Rosen’s phone calls and emails? This wasn’t NSA; this was FBI. To get a warrant they have to have probable cause. Did Eric Holder claim that James Rosen was HELPING the North Koreans develop nukes and/or delivery systems?


55 posted on 09/08/2013 5:07:16 PM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

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