It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: NSA whistleblower asks to testify

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Former National Security Agency official Russ Tice has offered to testify before Congress regarding intelligence programs (Special Access Programs) he claims were carried out illegally by the NSA and DIA.
 



www.washtimes.com
A former National Security Agency official wants to tell Congress about electronic intelligence programs that he asserts were carried out illegally by the NSA and the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Russ Tice, a whistleblower who was dismissed from the NSA last year, stated in letters to the House and Senate intelligence committees that he is prepared to testify about highly classified Special Access Programs, or SAPs, that were improperly carried out by both the NSA and the DIA.
"I intend to report to Congress probable unlawful and unconstitutional acts conducted while I was an intelligence officer with the National Security Agency and with the Defense Intelligence Agency," Mr. Tice stated in the Dec. 16 letters, copies of which were obtained by The Washington Times.
The letters were sent the same day that the New York Times revealed that the NSA was engaged in a clandestine eavesdropping program that bypassed the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. The FISA court issues orders for targeted electronic and other surveillance by the government.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Wow!! Maybe these Special Access Programs will shed some light on Echelon, Project Aquarius, and the many programs that are rumored to be carried out by the NSA and DIA. I would really like to see EXACTLY what has been going on in the back rooms of Fort Belvior, Meade, etc. Count me in!!!

[edit on 5-1-2006 by agwardlds]




posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 02:04 AM
link   

I would really like to see EXACTLY what has been going on in the back rooms of Fort Belvior, Meade, etc. Count me in!!!

Oh, brother!

I'm sure you would like to see that, wouldn't you. While we're at it, why don't we just give you the pass codes to get into the FBI's sensitive databases? Gimme just a minute and we'll print out the name of every covert CIA operative, and their current location for you. What else would you like? Today's football codes?




posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
See that's the problem when you start bypassing inbuilt safeguards, people get suspicious and demand full disclosure. Maybe the NSA and the DIA shouldn't of circumvented the FISA courts then there wouldn't be this problem. Hell they might of let Congress in on the little secret you'd of thought. Well if you're content to allow a run-away and illegal surveillance program spy on you, more power too you...or not what ever the case maybe. Ignorance is bliss.

[edit on 5/1/06 by subz]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 02:38 AM
link   
I couldn't agree more subz... It's depressing to see how much people are willing to give away in the name of protection.

Why don't some people seem to get that you might support the reason today for circumventing that which holds government accountable for its actions, but what about in the future when the same lack of accountability is applied or abused for some other purpose you do not support?

Restraint on government power *is* an American ideal. What has happened to that belief? Does history not provide enough examples concerning the perils of unrestrained power? :shk:

[edit on 5-1-2006 by loam]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Awesome news
I really hope to hear more about that. Maybe this will bring more people to testify.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   
loam,

You asked how many historical examples does it take? Apparently a bucket-load more than we've got for some people. Now, there has been a veritable chorus of calls to find and persecute through prosecution the "leak" and the same choral group has called the NYT treasonous for reporting it.

What shall we call this man? A man that is stepping forward because he is uncomfortable with things he knows happened. Shall we call him Benedict Arnold of the 21st Century? Rosenberg the Second? Is he treasonous for his concerns? or for his commitment to the principles he feels have been violated?

How will he be persecuted since there can be no prosecution? Will we dig up unsavory relics of his past and try to disembowel him with his personal flaws? or will we simply try to wave him off with claims of partisan motivations?

Stayed tuned...



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   

See that's the problem when you start bypassing inbuilt safeguards, people get suspicious and demand full disclosure.

He/she can demand all day long, if he/she wants to. That doesn't mean national security should be compromised because somebody demanded it, now does it?

Maybe the NSA and the DIA shouldn't of circumvented the FISA courts then there wouldn't be this problem.

Maybe it wasn't their job to interface with FISA. Maybe that was the job of those who wanted the wiretaps (for want of a better phrase here) to get the post-facto warrant from FISA.

Well if you're content to allow a run-away and illegal surveillance program spy on you, more power too you...or not what ever the case maybe. Ignorance is bliss.

Given that you pulled that assumption straight out of your butt, you must be as blissful as a new bride.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Why not do away with the whole checks and balances system. I hear that those activist judges and the partisanistic Congress are just getting in the way of pursuing those damn terr'st. Why not give the executive branch supreme powers, how about copy the tyrant model from Ancient Rome? Ave Caesar!

Actually while you're protecting your freedoms I hear that the place safest from a terr'st attack is in prison. You'd be completely secure in prison but your freedom would be gone but who cares! You'd be safe and sound from terrorists. Worth it, right?



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
He/she can demand all day long, if he/she wants to. That doesn't mean national security should be compromised because somebody demanded it, now does it?

Actually, break the law and no one needs demand anything you'll be arrested and brought to trial. National security is best served by following the nations laws and including the government in the process. There is a reason for this, its called a democratic system. Your views are more in line with those of a communist, totalitarian system.


Originally posted by jsobecky
Maybe it wasn't their job to interface with FISA. Maybe that was the job of those who wanted the wiretaps (for want of a better phrase here) to get the post-facto warrant from FISA.

Whats that got to do with anything? This article says that these electrionic survielances were "carried out illegally by the NSA and the Defense Intelligence Agency". Wouldn't that imply that it was actually the NSA and DIA that "wanted the wiretaps"? Regardless, they broke the law even if they carried out a request from some one else. Dont pass the buck.


Originally posted by jsobecky
Given that you pulled that assumption straight out of your butt, you must be as blissful as a new bride.

Show me that you dont think its ok for unadulterated, illegal and undisclosed spying on U.S citizens by the NSA and DIA and I'll retract my statement.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:03 AM
link   

from loam
I couldn't agree more subz... It's depressing to see how much people are willing to give away in the name pf protection.

Why don't some people seem to get that you might support the reason today for circumventing that which holds government accountable for its actions, but what about in the future when same lack of accountability is applied or abused for some other purpose you do not support?

It's no surprise that you wholeheartedly agree with subz. You should agree with subz. You should be beaten if you disagree with subz. Because you obviously got that conclusion the same place that subz got his, and that kind of familiarity demands a certain degree of agreement.

But if you truly think that the author of this thread is deserving, and sophisticated enough to be trusted with matters of national security and the goings-on in the back rooms of the NSA, then maybe we should just put all our secure information on a neon billboard, eh? Don't take that as a personal slam, author.

[edit on 5-1-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   
jsobecky

Thank you for your contributions to this thread. I think they serve amply as an example for why government power should be restrained and why there should be accountability for those who have it.

Well done.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   

from subz
Actually, break the law and no one needs demand anything you'll be arrested and brought to trial. National security is best served by following the nations laws and including the government in the process. There is a reason for this, its called a democratic system. Your views are more in line with those of a communist, totalitarian system.

subz, you obviously think it's ok for anyone, even a 16 year old, to be privy to national secrets. Yes you do, your entire posts, in which you say nothing substantive, but instead try to create straw men arguments, is proof.

You are saying that the author of this thread is entitled to know the inner secrets of our national security apparatus. I say you are a fool, and it is only because wiser men than you also see your notion as foolish that you are free to babble on with such inanities. Children must be allowed to remain children as long as possible; let them have their notions of fairy tales and ignorance.

Dream on.

And, btw, stop making assumptiions and putting words where I haven't said them. It's very tiresome.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:24 AM
link   
I have a few questions:

If this individual was accessed and aware of "illegal" intelligence operations, why did he not report these activities to the proper authorities at the time? Did he suddenly develop a moral compass overnight? Or his simply exploiting a political situation at the right time, knowing he is probably insulated politically, for his own personal gain?

Why does this individual feel it necessary to report these "illegal" programs directly to congress, and not the proper executive branch oversight organizations (Justice Department, Judge Advocate General's Office) as he is legally bound to do so? Is it because he feels that the Executive Branch organizations won't listen to him, or is it because with congress he knows there will be leaking of information and mass publicity? Did this individual even try to report these activities to the authorities, or is he just interested in a "Pearl Harbor" report against his ex-employers?

US persons who are accessed to these programs sign a legal document binding them to the secrecy of these programs, for better or for worse. Nobody makes you sign, and you are given the opportunity to reconsider and withdraw your application after having read and have explained to you the legal requirements. The secrecy document is called a DD Form 2836. Some extracts from this document include:

"I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SAPI (special access program information) by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge anything marked as SAPI or that I know to be SAPI to anyone who is not authorized to receive it without prior written authorization from the United States Government department or agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) that authorized my access(es) (identified on the reverse) to SAPI. I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department or Agency that last authorized my access to SAPI, whether or not I am still employed by or associated with that Department or Agency or a contractor thereof, in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SAPI, or related to or derived from SAPI, is considered by such Department or Agency to be SAPI. I further understand that I am also obligated by law and regulation not to disclose any classified information or material in an unauthorized fashion".

Also....

"These restrictions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by Executive Order 12958; Section 7211 of Title 5, United States Code (governing disclosures to Congress); Section 1034 of Title 10, United States Code, as amended by the Military Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to Congress by members of the Military); Section 2302 (b)(8) of Title 5, United States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public health or safety threats); the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 USC 421 et seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose confidential Government agents), and the statutes which protect against disclosure that may compromise the national security, including Section 641, 793, 794, 798, and 952 of Title 18, United States Code, and Section 783(a) of Title 50, United States Code. The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions and liabilities created by said Executive Order and listed statutes are incorporated into this Agreement and are controlling".

And finally.....

"I make this Agreement without any mental reservation, purpose of evasion, and in absence of duress".

I hope for this individual's sake he has a good team of lawyers and a few congressment from his state/district that will go to bat for him, because if he does open his mouth as he has claimed he will, the amount of liability he is about to absorb is tremendous.....nevermind the national security implications.



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:26 AM
link   
loam

Do you really believe that anybody should have access to any of our national security info that they want? A simple yes or no will do.

Because that is what I was responding to, the authors statement:

Wow!! Maybe these Special Access Programs will shed some light on Echelon, Project Aquarius, and the many programs that are rumored to be carried out by the NSA and DIA. I would really like to see EXACTLY what has been going on in the back rooms of Fort Belvior, Meade, etc. Count me in!!!


Nothing more, nothing less. Certainly not this bull-puckey that you and subz are attributing to me.

So, yes or no. Do you think it's the right thing to do to give that person access to any of the national security info that he wow! wants to see? Because I know that subz says he should have it, in the name of "full disclosure".

While you're at it, maybe you can tell me where Ft. Belvior is.

Oh, I get it, spelling doesn't matter.:shk: Just the desire to want something, like sensitive information; that's all that matters..

[edit on 5-1-2006 by jsobecky]

[edit on 5-1-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Before you all get your pants in a bundle here with this alleged NSA leaker coming forth, try checking out Russ Tice first. Timing will be of importance here, also. Google will suffice. Further, Mr. Tice was not purvey to the surveillance program that the NYTimes was reporting on.






seekerof

[edit on 5-1-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

loam

Do you really believe that anybody should have access to any of our national security info that they want? A simple yes or no will do.


No. Simple enough?

Do you really think that government action should have no accountability as long as such action is done under the guise of "national security"???

That is the point I made.


Originally posted by jsobecky
While you're at it, maybe you can tell me where Ft. Belvior is.

Oh, I get it, spelling doesn't matter. Just the desire to want something, like sensitive information; that's all that matters..


It is located in Northern Virginia.

Missions at Ft. Belvoir


[edit on 5-1-2006 by loam]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Hmmm.

Seems to me this story is very ATSNN - adventure, intrigue, conspiracy within conspiracy. Perhaps the author might include a scathing reference to Clinton with the obligatory sex angle, just to round out the offering?



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Oh please jsobecky, you're dancing round the issue. I never said that I agree that full disclosure is a good idea. Lets read what I actually wrote, eh?


Originally posted by subz
See that's the problem when you start bypassing inbuilt safeguards, people get suspicious and demand full disclosure.


"People get suspicious and demand full disclosure" - I don't see that statement as an endorsement, do you? Perhaps you might do so well to actually read what people write before ranting on about how I some how intimidated loam into agreeing with me.

You might also notice that what I wrote in no way conflicted what you wrote. If you read what is written you'll see that it was you who took umbrage with what I wrote, not the other way around. Since you took it upon yourself to tackle my post you should be the one who is providing reasons as to what you disagree on, not the other way around.

Talk about a storm in a teacup...



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Perhaps you might do so well to actually read what people write before ranting on about how I some how intimidated loam into agreeing with me.



But, subz, I was intimidated into agreeing with you... After all, according to jsobecky, I should have been "beaten" if I had done otherwise. And let's not forget the "familiarity" he asserts I have with your nether regions.

Clearly, jsobecky's arguments are persuasive enough for me to now realize that my position on this matter is in error.


Tempest in a teapot indeed...


[edit on 5-1-2006 by loam]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
How will he be persecuted since there can be no prosecution?

Interesting question. Hmm, I am not sure myself.
Is this an attempt to indicate that a 'leaker', who has knowingly broken disclosure of classified information laws, is a whistleblower, or is Mr. Tice an actual legitimate whistleblower?
Whistleblower Disclosures
He is a 'leaker' but not necessarily the leaker of the NYTimes NSA international intercept program article. I think he is a legit whistleblower, but was not satisfied with actions and results, so to speak, thus is taking this to a new level. Personally, I think Mr. Tice is simply attempting to stay ahead of the impending storm.

In all fairness to the topic, here is what the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition says concerning Mr.Russ Tice.
Former NSA Intelligence Analyst & Action Officer Urges To Be Heard By Congress Regarding Unlawful Conduct By NSA

In viewing the above link and Mr. Tice letter contained within it, bear in mind the date of that letter(s) and the date the NYTimes released their article on the NSA/Bush administration surveillance issue.

Furthermore, I would demand that this whistleblower testify, as he so seeks to do. Undoubtedly, his past and credibility will be revealed and used accordingly.
Security access denial at issue
Pentagon probes punishment of whistleblower
NSA fires whistleblower
Whistleblower to be fired, watchdogs say
Russ Tice
The Defense Department psychologist concluded that Tice suffered from psychotic paranoia
Blowing the whistle






seekerof

[edit on 5-1-2006 by Seekerof]



new topics




 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join