LIVE! C-SPAN and NSA Surveillance

& Presidential wartime powers

Alberto Gonzales , I can't believe this guy, has the nerve to smirk at senators while he is being asked about NSA abuses. The guy is obviously hiding information, heck the speaker of the house even granted the Cali senator 10 more minutes. Roosevelt was mentioned as requesting electroninc survellance, but needs to be verified. Yeah right.

Will post more when available.


[edit on 6-2-2006 by ADVISOR]

That little sleeze will do and say anything for money and power.



Let him smirk all he wants. Evil smirks.

Powers during wartime

This past Thursday, the New York Times exposed the most significant violation of federal surveillance law in the post-Watergate era. President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to engage in domestic spying, wiretapping thousands of Americans and bypassing the legal procedures regulating this activity.

The Security Threat of Unchecked Presidential Power

Wiretapping, FISA, and the NSA

Search source

Will post transcricpt when available.

Hearing still on going, waiting for transcript availability. Below are some more bits of info on issue.


NSA Watch

December 19, 2005
Transcript of briefing on NSA surveillance by Alberto Gonzales and Michael Hayden

The transcript from last nights live NSA hearing is still elusive as a windego in Jamaica. So while try to locate this seemingly unobtainable script I noticed It's all about the Dots , even if none of you find this interesting on it's own, and perhaps don't see the cons piracy behind it, I at least do. Ok, I know some of you do find it worth reading, and maybe waiting for more I do serously. But damn, don't post your thoughts or anything.

It's not even four paragraphs on the linked page, and it covers a good portion detailing the hours long hearing.

However let me just remind those of you who may not understand why this is important info, it goes over the failures to prevent 9/11 "."

Alright, I'm not upset with anyone, just leaking some frustration. This really concerns me, bear with me please;

I would argue that the failure to connect the dots prior to 9/11 was caused by massive incompetence on the part of the intelligence and law enforcement agencies, by excessive secrecy born of government power struggles and arrogance, and finally by a massive failure on the part of either the Clinton or Bush administrations to really make counter-terrorism a priority.

In the minds of the Bush administration, the law prevented the CIA from speaking to the FBI, the law stopped NSA from eavesdropping on targets that might have saved the day, the law created a wall between intelligence and law enforcement, laws made the CIA "risk averse," laws stood in the way of assassinations, renditions, interrogations, etc.

This is an elaborate self-justification that dis-obligates anyone in office on 9/11 from actually taking any responsibility for failure. Shackles on the government are blamed for the event; the poor CIA and FBI were prevented from doing their work. No wonder then that the President as commander-in-chief is made perfectly justified ordering the secret agencies to PROTECT AMERICA archaic laws and procedures be damned.

Just had to make sure that was pointed out, as it is key to this whole jacked up situation. Hope that clarifies the importance of the whole hearing, as it was meant to anwser questions, not CREATE MORE.

With that out, I can only naturaly add the following quote;

"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the
high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The
laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country
when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country
by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law
itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are
enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the
means." --Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810.

Let me just highlight something, "To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself".

Exactly what our government did, they lost it.

Thank you for reading this post, I very much appreciate your time, and leave off until next time with this;
If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?

[edit on 7-2-2006 by ADVISOR]

I think the fact that we have to depend on criminals to investigate the wrongdoing of their co-conspirators is what's hamstringing us. And of course having a sychophantic little rat-eyed liar in charge of Justice in this country, well that's just silly.

Maybe that's just commie speak or something, I don't know.

Does anyone trust the fat Kennedy is at all capable of putting the interests of the American people first? He's the grand inquisitor lately, it seems, and he's about as qualified to identify ethics breaches as the men being 'grilled.'

That's my favorite in a long line of media euphemisms that are designed to make the reader believe something resembling an investigation is actually taking place.

Maybe I'm just bitter, and the Democrats really are good guys. I just find it really implausible at this point, given their actions and demeanor. The hard questions have a way of not getting asked, and on the rare occasions they do get asked, they're never answered to my satisfaction.

The oversight/regulatory function of our elected government has been totally compromised, as far as I can see, making this hearing and all the others like it a farce for our consumption. Again, maybe I'm just bitter.

Thanks for keeping us up to date though, ADVISOR.

i commend you on posting this article .. it pretty much sums up what has been going post 9/11 in the 'law' (or lack there of) world.

it's funny how quickly they demonized anyone who even motioned to the thought of what the pres. and his admin were/are doing is illegal .. when objectively looking at it - it is.

they haven't accomplished anything so far with eavesdropping on american citizens to thwart terrorism but it's still a good idea to do so?

they tried to get google to give up their search records .. what's next? for those who believe their isn't a growing conspiracy to turn this country into a perverted governmentally monitored nation needs to rethink that.

the democrats don't seem to be putting up a strong fight because they appear disconnected as to what a normal person holds valuable and don't ask those questions all of us are yearning to ask and get a response to.

the table's fixed it seems.

Patience is a virtue, and patience I had in plenty while waiting for this to be released. The hearings are far from over, and because of such I have a nagging feeling that they are no more than the saddam trials, a long drawn out distraction from what should be done.

Which as I pointed out in an above post, clearly enough.

They have no intentions of the public knowing the answers, as is obvious from this quote;

The scope of this hearing is to examine the law on the subject. And the ground rules are that we will not inquire into the factual underpinnings of what is being undertaken here. That is for another committee and for another day. That is for the Intelligence Committee, and that is for a closed session.

So if the people really want to have the truth, they may just have to wait until it is leaked. As the trend seems to be these days.

NSA Part I of the sham

A clandestine subversive organization working within a country to further an invading enemy's military and political aims.
Source

And the administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue fifth column movements.

And let me tell folks who are watching what a fifth column movement is. It is a movement known to every war where American citizens will sympathize with the enemy and collaborate with the enemy. And it's happened in every war.

And President Roosevelt talked about, "We need to know about fifth column movements."

So my friends on the other side, I stand by this president's ability, inherent to being commander in chief, to find out about fifth column movements, and I don't think you need a warrant to do that.

GRAHAM: But here's my challenge to you, Mr. Attorney General. There will come a point in time where the information leads to us believe that citizen A may be involved in a fifth column movement. At that point in time where we will need to know more about citizen A's activity on an ongoing basis, here is where I part.

I think that's where the courts really come in. I would like you and the next attorney general and next president, if you have that serious information that you need to monitor this American's citizen's conduct in the future, that they may be part of a fifth column movement to collaborate with the enemy, I want a check and a balance.

...it would be very easy in this war for an American citizen to be called up by the enemy and labeled as something they are not. It would be very easy, in my opinion, if you're a business person dealing in the Mideast who happens to be an American citizen, the business deal goes bad, that bad things could happen to you.

And I would just like the administration to entertain the idea of sitting down with Senator DeWine and others to see if we can find a way at some point in the process of monitoring fifth column movements to have a check and balance system that not only would strengthen the commander in chief's role, it will give guidance to the people fighting the war. You'll have Congress on board. You'll be stronger in courts. And the enemy will be weaker.

How does that proposition sit with you?

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Holds a Hearing on Wartime Executive Power and the National Security Agency's Surveillance Authority
Part IV of sham

[edit on 12-2-2006 by ADVISOR]

It has been seven, 7 years and people are ignorant enough to believe this is new news...

Think again, old news, and it has been for some time.

Speaking of, it is beyond time to wake up the masses.

It is either your awake and aware of the issues or one is not, there is no other shade just one or the other.