WAR: Bush Allowed NSA to Spy on U.S. International Calls

For anyone that's "not concerned" with this, you should read this article:
www.alternet.org...

Would you mind letting me know what the hell you're talking about here?

Originally posted by dgtempe
Jsobecky- The men in the black suits are looking for you. Something about another special assignment for you.
Do not tell anyone. You are to tell your wife you are going to Aruba. Your mission, should you chose to accept it, will be at your local post office box ####.

Good luck, and dont forget to post once in awhile.

We've been monitoring calls somewhat for a while now. I remember my dad told me that when he was working in the Brig that they had a young navy officer that phoned up the Russian Embassy and tried to sell them Nuke secrets etc. But now they are probably doing all the other countries instead of 1993 Russia

Like in any company there are good and bad workers. There are workers that kiss their bossed but and others that let their work speak for itself. I have seen too many former CIA and NSA operatives coming on CSpan pushing their book of course but to say the CIA and the NSA is not the same thing anymore. That the good ole boy network has gotten worse but the ability of effective investigation has not been upgraded to 21st century standards. This happens in any job where the paycheck does not condone the activities on the job. I’m sure someone leaked it to the press to let them know what is happening (do you really think the congress would do something?). Just like the MSNBC leak of the 400-page report on threat assessment of groups in America (including the Quakers in Florida).

If we are mad at the media the B Novak should be the first guy on the chopping block but during this entire V. P. situation he hasn’t had much as a scratch on him.

I am proud of those who risked their careers to let the US citizenry about the real cost of the Vietnam War. The pentagon papers are a very valuable to the struggle of freedom in this country.

I am convinced if you give Americans the truth and gave them a free choice they will do he right thing. I am tired of the lying for the propose of “spinning” the right response. We are not scared of war; we are not scared to tackle major projects. I am just tired of being talked to like a kid by this administration. Spying illegally is wrong…we are working in an area of presidential powers that are interpreted not written in books of law.

Sometimes the politicians cannot always get away with the line “I didn’t know” which some are saying as we speak. I still say what if it was you being targeted as the problem of a nation even thought you haven’t did anything wrong. Some of these musilm, Middle Eastern people are Americans also, You know some are even born here.


[edit on 12/09-2005 by BlackThought]

Originally posted by jsobecky

Would you mind letting me know what the hell you're talking about here?

Originally posted by dgtempe
Jsobecky- The men in the black suits are looking for you. Something about another special assignment for you.
Do not tell anyone. You are to tell your wife you are going to Aruba. Your mission, should you chose to accept it, will be at your local post office box ####.

Good luck, and dont forget to post once in awhile.

Hey, i was joking with you. Sorry if i rattled you for some reason.
you sound angry at me. So much for a sense of humor around here, i take whatever is dished out to me with a grain of salt. Go figure.

The BBC reports:

A new report commissioned by the European Parliament has officially confirmed the existence of what it says is a gigantic electronic spy network that monitors almost all phone, fax and other electronic communications in Europe. It says the network is co-ordinated by the United States National Security Agency in association with other security organizations. The report was commissioned by the European Parliament's committee on civil rights.

The mistake Bush made, I guess, is that he went public with the Phone surveilence, (and had bi-partisan support, since it has to renewed every three months). At least it only pertains to calls out of the country.

For those interested, Google "eschelon Bill Clinton." What he did concerned ALL calls, and especially those made by his political enemies.

And talk about flip-flopping on an issue...

What Bush in 2004 about wiretaps:

Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. 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. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.

The Patriot Act changed that. So with court order, law enforcement officials can now use what's called roving wiretaps, which will prevent a terrorist from switching cell phones in order to get a message out to one of his buddies.

(Source: www.whitehouse.gov...)

What Bush is saying in 2005 about wiretaps:

Bush said the Constitution and the congressional resolution passed after Sept. 11 authorizing "all necessary and appropriate force" allowed him to carry out the controversial eavesdropping.

"I swore to uphold the laws," Bush said from behind the lectern, raising his right hand just as he did when he took the oath of office. "Do I have the legal authority to do this? The answer is absolutely."

(Source: www.chicagotribune.com...)

Emphasis added.

I forgot as to who leaked about how President Clinton found out about the location of Osama bin Laden and fire a couple of missiles at that location and Osama bin laden heard about how he was located and abandon the use of satellite phones? Im certain the person who leaked it believed that it was violating a person's rights, maybe?

[edit on 20-12-2005 by deltaboy]

The "they" you mention are those ensconced in the CIA/FBI and other intelligence agencies, that don't like it that Bush/Rumsfeld shook up their little fiefdom, and will go to the extent of making these leaks in an effort to get back to "business as usual."

These are the same people who provided both Clintons with all those FBI documents (illegal) on their "political enemies."
It's time for heads to roll.....

If I may quote: "... Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent." So, now that precedence has been set (Plame), the Times just might have to give up their sources. Of course, that will only happen if the Republicans get some nuts and force the issue. Actually, it would be nice if BOTH sides forced the issue, because it's a matter of US intelligence, and the safety of American citizens.

Edit for spelling.

[edit on 20-12-2005 by zappafan1]

It seems to me that a great deal of the responses that are critical of the White House using these measures to gather much needed intelligence would be in favor of the adminstration that brought us Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elias Gonzales (to name a few). These things happened on American soil at a time when we wasn't attacked by foreign extremists.

The surveillance on American citizens is not something new. Has anyone heard of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg? Does anyone know who these scumbags are? They were supposedly Americans. What they did was unforgivable and deserved what they got in the end. Couldn't download a picture but you can view these traitor scumbags at the links given below.

Here's a site about them if anyone cares.

This is another one containing a chronology of their lives.

If you did take the time to read the above, you'll see how essential it is for the our government to keep check on it's own citizens, not for kicks but for our safety.

Click here to read the latest on the legalities of this administrations actions.

Here's a Q&A of what FISA is and outlines what is legal and illegal.

The bottom line is, the current administration in Washington D.C. is doing exactly what needs to be done to deter any future attacks on our citizens and/or soil.

[edit on 20/12/05 by Intelearthling]

I still have no idea what you meant. What's with "another special assignment"?

Originally posted by dgtempe

Originally posted by jsobecky

Would you mind letting me know what the hell you're talking about here?

Originally posted by dgtempe
Jsobecky- The men in the black suits are looking for you. Something about another special assignment for you.
Do not tell anyone. You are to tell your wife you are going to Aruba. Your mission, should you chose to accept it, will be at your local post office box ####.

Good luck, and dont forget to post once in awhile.

Hey, i was joking with you.

Sorry if i rattled you for some reason.
you sound angry at me. So much for a sense of humor around here, i take whatever is dished out to me with a grain of salt. Go figure.

Originally posted by jsobecky

I still have no idea what you meant. What's with "another special assignment"?

The implication was that you are a covert agent assigned to this board to spread misinformation on behalf of the government.

And with that being said can we get back to our regularily scheduled topic?

No matter how many arguments are going to find excuses to what the President has done.

It all goes back to the main issue. . . . He didn't have to go around the congress and the right sources to get approval for spying on American citizens.

If the spying was of extreme necessity for the safety of the nation, he would have given the OK to do so.

But for some reason the spying was a wild chase and with not bases but what now the President is using to defend his actions.

Beside the conspiracy that he has people Undermining our national security the fact is still the same.

The elected president of the United States of American consider himself above the law and about our individual rights.

He have grown into believing that the patriot act that he pushed in the congress was going to give him Absolute Power

Is not conspiracy here but the one that our government steping on the American citizens rights.

Now you see why the Patriot act is so important to President Bush.

Abuse of power from the top to the bottom.

You're assuming it's the Patriot Act that is the legal basis for Bush doing this. If that's so, what was the legal basis for Clinton doing something very similar? What about Bush Sr.? Reagan? Carter?

What about FDR authorizing the inspection of all international mail and actually censoring elements that could possibly give some kind of hint about anything the US was doing? Did he, too, use the patriot act?

You are missing the point perhaps because you want to still defend the Bush.

The point is Bush didn't have to go around to do what he did he would have gotten approval by congress that is also Republican majority if the need for spying on American citizens was so great and needed because it was a treat.

He wanted to exercise absolute power and cash on his Capital.

In other worlds he enjoys power as to be arrogant enough to by pass his own majority ruled congress.

If you still don't get the picture then I guess no even in black and white you are going to get it.

He had not need to do what he did, but he did it anyway, What a cowboy!!!!!!

Originally posted by marg6043
You are missing the point perhaps because you want to still defend the Bush.

And it sounds like you're missing the point that right or wrong on this issue (and I think wrong to not obtain warrants), Bush was hardly the first or only president to do these sorts of things. That's why it sounds wrong to a lot of people when you and others continue to single Bush out and attempt to beat every thing he says and every thing he does to death.

OK, OK, OK ....

Think all you've said has convinced even one person to change their mind about Bush? So, how's the weather where you live?


[edit on 12/20/2005 by centurion1211]

I think we need something else to talk about, huh?

Maybe alien landings...I can only hope

I'm trying to figure out why pointing out that more than one administration has done what they shouldn't do makes any of them right?

Am I missing something? What difference does that make other than to point out we're a bunch of ignorant morons that have looked the other way for far too long?

I'm going to have to just say I agree with the "if I'm not talking about illegal or illicit activities in my overseas calls then I have nothing to worry about" mantra.