NSA Gave Other U.S. Agencies Information From Surveillance

The Washington Post ^ | Sunday, January 1, 2006 | Walter Pincus

[kristinn]

Information captured by the National Security Agency's secret eavesdropping on communications between the United States and overseas has been passed on to other government agencies, which cross-check the information with tips and information collected in other databases, current and former administration officials said.

The NSA has turned such information over to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and to other government entities, said three current and former senior administration officials, although it could not be determined which agencies received what types of information. Information from intercepts -- which typically includes records of telephone or e-mail communications -- would be made available by request to agencies that are allowed to have it, including the FBI, DIA, CIA and Department of Homeland Security, one former official said.

At least one of those organizations, the DIA, has used NSA information as the basis for carrying out surveillance of people in the country suspected of posing a threat, according to two sources. A DIA spokesman said the agency does not conduct such domestic surveillance but would not comment further. Spokesmen for the FBI, the CIA and the director of national intelligence, John D. Negroponte, declined to comment on the use of NSA data.

SNIP

Today's NSA intercepts yield two broad categories of information, said a former administration official familiar with the program: "content," which would include transcripts of a phone call or e-mail, and "non-content," which would be records showing, for example, who in the United States was called by, or was calling, a number in another country thought to have a connection to a terrorist group. At the same time, NSA tries to limit identifying the names of Americans involved.

SNIP

[zaggs]

Hmm what were some of the complaints after 9/11? Not enough data collection. Not enough sharing of relevant data. People who should not have been ignored were ignored. So now that we have a president who does all that the lefties have a problem.

[Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin]

Yeah. How long is it gonna take everybody to figure out that these newspapers are quite the traitors when they openly display U.S. plans to terrorists? Looks like the New York times is gonna be called on the carpet for their own treachery.

[nj26]

"My 1st prediction of 2006.... the MSM and democrats will find some new toy within the 1st week of this year and moveon (pun intended)"

You can bet that this issue is being polled and focus-group-tested by the DNC, as that is how Democrats determine their "principled" positions.

[montag813]

NSA Gave Other U.S. Agencies Information From Surveillance

GOOD!

They actually did their jobs, something they never did under Clinton. Can I assume a Congressional resolution praising the NSA for these activities is on the way?

[KCRW]

"Can I assume a Congressional resolution praising the NSA for these activities is on the way?"

Ha! Ha! I choked on my coffee with this one!

[Semper Paratus]

If Kerry (shudder) won in '04 he would have kept all this in place.

[angkor]

Does the Post realize that NSA and DIA are both military intelligence organizations?

Too bad they can't name one other "agency" in this story.

Another non-story.

[Steel Wolf]

Hey, I've got an idea! Maybe we should spend hundreds of millions/billions of dollars monitoring communications around the world and then not do anything with it.

Funny you should mention that, but that's exactly what we did prior to 9/11. Due to legal restrictions, it was easier for CIA guys to talk to Al Qaida agents than FBI agents.

[2nd Bn, 11th Mar]

Walter's pincus failed him.

[t2buckeye]

I believe that the 9/11 Commission showed that we did NOT connect the dots...we had intelligence, but didn't share the info. Michael Barone was on FOx News yesterday and made the point that NO terror attacks since 9/11 is not an accident....Bush has taken an agressive approach to gathering info ON TERRORISTS!!! and using that info to stop attacks. I think that this will backfire on the Dems!

[ASA Vet]

I don't want the government listening in on calls I or my family might make overseas.

You and your family making a lot of overseas calls to terrorists?

ACTION:REF/SRC:FR/CS:RACEHORSE/LIST:DOMCON/EOM

[zook]

The way I see it, this issue cuts based on whether one believes we are really at war. Those who believe we are tend to support some temporary limits on personal privacy, be it monitoring international communications or having to have your backpack checked to ride the NYC subway.

But those who do not believe this is really a war, or feel terrorism is not really a serious threat, or who want Americans to forget 9/11, they've decided to use this issue to basically "rip America out of its war footing," so to speak, or to simply damage President Bush.

For those who believe we are at war, but who also have some concerns about privacy and freedom issues, please note that during most of its wars Americans have experienced some limits on their freedom, but these have always been temporary--the "slipery slope" argument just doesn't hold up.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

NSA Gave Other U.S. Agencies Information From Surveillance

Damn, I'm glad I voted for W.

[WhiteGuy]

NSA Gave Other U.S. Agencies Information From Surveillance


yes............


and we thought the "fbi files" were dangerous in the "wrong" hands...........

[Racehorse]

You and your family making a lot of overseas calls to terrorists?

Silly boy.

The premise that if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to fear is . . . to be polite . . . foolish.

Unfortunately, shifting and modifying the paradigm of personal freedom with which many of us grew up and took as a presumption is now unavoidable.  Who, other than maybe the ACLU, still complains about the prevalence of surveillance cameras?

[ASA Vet]

Was that a "yes" or "no?"

ACTION:REF/SRC:FR/CS:RACEHORSE/LIST:DOMCON/EOM

[Racehorse]

Can't give a "yes" or a "no." Nor can you.

Unless of course you're the one listening in on those calls. Can you list the profile that triggers the surveillance?

You've gotten all the answer your silly question deserves.

[Matchett-PI]

"Yeah. How long is it gonna take everybody to figure out that these newspapers are quite the traitors when they openly display U.S. plans to terrorists? Looks like the New York times is gonna be called on the carpet for their own treachery."

And what is the underlying reason for why the DemocRATS and their MSM friends are traitors in the first place?

It's because they're cowards.

Cowards are much more horrified by "conflict" than they are by tyranny.

Unlike men who exhibit strong, masculine leadership qualities --(such as confidence, boldness, decisiveness, etc.)-- the more feminized the males in a society become, the less they have the stomach for conflict / confrontation and the more likely they are to exhibit other soft feminine traits such as a preference for "consensus".

Cowards can never stay free for long, and if they obtain power, they'll take the rest of us down with them.

So I view feminized males and other "conflict-averse" mentalities as a threat to freedom in America, and around the world. I make it my business to do what ever I can to prevent cowardly mentalities from obtaining power. Other "concerns" are secondary.

I say it this way:

"There will be peace on earth, but only among men of good will.", while thinking: "the rest had better be afraid - be VERY afraid."

Cowards, fearing to perpetuate what they call, "the cycle of violence", say it this way:

"Peace on earth and good will to _all_ men.", while thinking: "because I don't want to offend those who are justified in harboring ill will or hurt their feelings, it might only make them madder and they might come after me."

There will be a Happy New Year for all men and women of good will! Happy New Year, FReepers!

The phonies and cowards will lose again in 2006! This is America - and we don't identify with phonies and cowards.

(Any bumperstickers that reflect those sentiments will sell like hot cakes).

[Prost1]

1st off, I do not see anything revealing in the summary posted.

Intelligence DEVELOPED by the CIA would be immediatedly sent to the JUSTICE DEPT/FBI for domestice follow-up. The DIA and CIA would obviously be interested in foreign transactions and activity.

All in accordance with the rules and the Presidential Order as stated.

Nothing new here. Just more ink trying to fan flames.

[Racehorse]

. . . the "slipery slope" argument just doesn't hold up.

I pretty much agree with what you wrote.  But, sometimes things do get out of hand.

The World War I era provides an example. 

In January (1916), under authority of a special act of the 35th legislature, a Loyalty Ranger Force was authorized, to consist of approximately three picked men from each county in Texas. The duties of this force were to act as a secret service department for the State and work in conjunction with all Federal, State, county and municipal officers in the execution of all State laws, especially House Bill No. 15, better known as the "Hobby Loyalty Act." Through the assistance of the loyalty secret service department, the Adjutant General was kept advised as to the Mexican revolutionary activities carried on, principally outside of San Antonio and in the border counties in Mexico and Texas.

As you point out, our secret service was a temporary action.  But, during their short careers the Loyalty Rangers inflicted a lot of pain and some injustice.

I don't see the War on Terror being a temporary action.  In 1898 we started fighting a Muslim insurgency in the Philippines.  As allies with the present Philippine government, we're still fighting their descendents.  I don't think the threat from fundamental Muslim terrorists will be any less short lived.

If I'm right, and I hope I'm wrong, the temporary measures you describe may be extended a wee bit further into the future.