Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 1 of 28 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 277
  1. #1
    IncGamers Member llad12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Sooner State
    Posts
    6,189

    Bush authorized NSA to spy on Americans -- seditious Quakers walk amongst us??

    President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night.

    The super-secretive NSA, which has generally been barred from domestic spying except in narrow circumstances involving foreign nationals, has monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program, the New York Times disclosed last night.

    The aim of the program was to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas, according to two former senior administration officials. Authorities, including a former NSA director, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, were worried that vital information could be lost in the time it took to secure a warrant from a special surveillance court, sources said.
    Washington Post

    So what you say?

    Read on:

    ... Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies at George Washington University, said the secret order may amount to the president authorizing criminal activity.

    The law governing clandestine surveillance in the United States, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, prohibits conducting electronic surveillance not authorized by statute. A government agent can try to avoid prosecution if he can show he was "engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction," according to the law.

    "This is as shocking a revelation as we have ever seen from the Bush administration," said Martin, who has been sharply critical of the administration's surveillance and detention policies. "It is, I believe, the first time a president has authorized government agencies to violate a specific criminal prohibition and eavesdrop on Americans."

    Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she is "dismayed" by the report.

    "It's clear that the administration has been very willing to sacrifice civil liberties in its effort to exercise its authority on terrorism, to the extent that it authorizes criminal activity," Fredrickson said ...

    Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos would not comment on the report last night.
    So .. said surveillance may be unlawful or even unconstitutional.


    Well, no doubt these are suspected terrorists ... right?

    WASHINGTON - A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military.

    A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a “threat” and one of more than 1,500 “suspicious incidents” across the country over a recent 10-month period.

    “This peaceful, educationally oriented group being a threat is incredible,” says Evy Grachow, a member of the Florida group called The Truth Project.
    MSNBC


    Pacifist Quakers??

    Better check your phones, people. Big Brother may be watching.




  2. #2
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    35
    This is indeed illegal. I remember reading about such practices a couple of years ago. It's unconstitutional and pretty crappy but not exactly new, just the practical aspects have changed:
    It used to be that America and England would each spy on the citizenry of the other and then share the information to get around these laws. So MI5 and MI6 would keep an eye on you yanks and send the info back to the NSA, who in turn were snooping around in the UK and sharing their info with our government.

    In this way neither country is actually spying on its' own citizens. Clever, eh?

    I'm also sure I remember hearing about those Quakers on the news. It's absurd...




  3. #3
    Banned Sir EvilFreeSmeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In Anakalaha's sock drawer
    Posts
    15,435
    Nice story. Too bad it's full of lies and conflicts of intrest.

    1. Pres. Bush didn't do it secretly. Sen. Rockerfeller in particular was informed. As well as the secret court that deals with terrorism. This was done openly. Not that facts matter.

    2. The author is releasing a book in 2 weeks about this very subject. Naturally he's going to release an article that supports his book.

    3. It's the New York Times. Anybody else remember Jason Blair?

    If this was so unconstitutional, why did Sen. Rockerfeller allow it? Why did the courts allow it to go forward? Why didn't anybody blow the whiste? You cannot expect anybody to believe that if Pres. Bush did something illegal that somebody like Sen. Rockerfeller wouldn't have gleefully blown Pres. Bush out of the water.

    So what is winds up being is just another book by just another Bush-hater. He'll make some money (which I fully support) and do harm to national security (which he should be shot for).




  4. #4
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    On the right
    Posts
    3,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Llad
    Pacifist Quakers??
    Department of Redundancy Department? Quakers are pacifist by definition.



    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Conservative Inc
    Nice story. Too bad it's full of lies and conflicts of intrest.

    1. Pres. Bush didn't do it secretly. Sen. Rockerfeller in particular was informed. As well as the secret court that deals with terrorism. This was done openly. Not that facts matter.
    First of all, it's Rockefeller. You can't even spell the names of people you're told to hate. Not that the facts matter.

    Secondly, you're wrong as usual; or at the very least misguided and misinformed. You may be referring to the Bolton nomination where Rockefeller claimed that Bolton may have mishandled classified data from the NSA. Not that the facts matter.

    Lastly, done openly in the secret court? Does that make any sense? Even to you? I'm well aware the government has a secret court to deal with national security matters, but here's the thing: it's secret. Nothing there is done in the open. Not that the facts matter.


    If this was so unconstitutional, why did Sen. Rockerfeller allow it? Why did the courts allow it to go forward? Why didn't anybody blow the whiste? You cannot expect anybody to believe that if Pres. Bush did something illegal that somebody like Sen. Rockerfeller wouldn't have gleefully blown Pres. Bush out of the water.
    Would you like to buy my rock, Smeg? It gives +5 to specious reasoning. Not that you need any help, but I think you could do a better job missing the point completely.




  5. #5
    Banned Sir EvilFreeSmeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In Anakalaha's sock drawer
    Posts
    15,435
    Quote Originally Posted by maccool
    Department of Redundancy Department? Quakers are pacifist by definition.
    That is until you threaten one of them. Then he ties you into unusual positions and get hauled off to the cops.

    First of all, it's Rockefeller. You can't even spell the names of people you're told to hate. Not that the facts matter.
    Ever heard of working and posting? It's pathetic and expected of you to comment on spelling. Unlike you, I don't have a bug up my butt about getting the names of scumbags right. So for your benefit I shall only refer to him as Sen. Blockhead.

    Secondly, you're wrong as usual; or at the very least misguided and misinformed. You may be referring to the Bolton nomination where Rockefeller claimed that Bolton may have mishandled classified data from the NSA. Not that the facts matter.
    What does Bolton have to do with anything? Sen. Blockhead is one of the people that has to be informed about intelligence matters. As for what you're trying to say, it'll help if you don't muffle yourself by having your head up your arse.

    Lastly, done openly in the secret court? Does that make any sense? Even to you? I'm well aware the government has a secret court to deal with national security matters, but here's the thing: it's secret. Nothing there is done in the open. Not that the facts matter.
    Amazing. What utter blindness. Has it ever occured to you that that court has congressional oversight? Senators get to read the proceedings. Which makes it open. And if anything was done illegally you should be able to comprehend that the Democrats would make political hay with it. I say should because you do work for a liberal college.

    Would you like to buy my rock, Smeg? It gives +5 to specious reasoning. Not that you need any help, but I think you could do a better job missing the point completely.
    I could miss the point if I wanted too. Good thing I have you to do that for me. Btw, how miserable are you going to be when this is also proven to be a load of manure?




  6. #6
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    399
    of course this is illegal and makes me vomit, however, because of people like Evil Conservative Inc, public outcry will be minimal (they are the majority now). i also heard the ACLU is having funding problems so good luck to them...

    basically i think bush is gonna get away with this one, like he's gotten away with everything else.




  7. #7
    IncGamers Member llad12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Sooner State
    Posts
    6,189
    Quote Originally Posted by maccool
    Department of Redundancy Department? Quakers are pacifist by definition.
    Quakers, by definition, are a Protestant Christian sect which emphasizes the spiritual aspect of Christian faith and experience. Although their beliefs include pacifism and the rejection of sworn oaths, not everyone on this board is necessarily acquainted with their sect ... hence the use of my adjective for clarification.

    Thanks for the memories anyway Professor ...

    Update:

    NEW YORK - President Bush refused to say whether the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States but leaders of Congress condemned the practice on Friday and promised to look into what the administration has done.

    “There is no doubt that this is inappropriate,” said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said there would be hearings early next year and that they would have “a very, very high priority.”

    He wasn’t alone in reacting harshly to the report. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the story, first reported in Friday’s New York Times, was troubling.
    MSNBC

    Yes sirrie Smeggy, it is so straightforward and upfront that Republicans have immediately condemned the actions and are calling for hearings.


    PS: Whacking on the NYT Smeg? I would imagine that you approved of the paper when Judy Miller was spitting out her WMD reports that were used as propaganda by Cheney et. al.

    By no means do I exonerate the NYT for withholding this information for over a year. They should have to answer to Congress for their deeds.




  8. #8
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,972
    I dont remember a guy in 2003 being arrested and convicted for plotting to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. Could look into it but it sounds like something that would strike my memory, a bit.




  9. #9
    IncGamers Member Dondrei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In my pants
    Posts
    36,857
    Here in Australia the local Tolkien fanclub used to be listed by the Australian Secret Police as an "organisation of interest". I think it was because they were called "the Fellowship of Middle Earth". Which they presumably had confused with the Middle East. I bet after 9/11 all those references to the "Two Towers" set off some red flags, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mana Solitaire
    It used to be that America and England would each spy on the citizenry of the other and then share the information to get around these laws. So MI5 and MI6 would keep an eye on you yanks and send the info back to the NSA, who in turn were snooping around in the UK and sharing their info with our government.
    That's so ****ing funny! By the way, what's the difference between MI5 and MI6? What does MI stand for? And what are MI1-4?

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Conservative Inc
    Amazing. What utter blindness. Has it ever occured to you that that court has congressional oversight? Senators get to read the proceedings. Which makes it open. And if anything was done illegally you should be able to comprehend that the Democrats would make political hay with it. I say should because you do work for a liberal college.
    You're right, Senators overseeing a secret court would never let anything unconstitutional happen.




  10. #10
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by dondrei
    That's so ****ing funny! By the way, what's the difference between MI5 and MI6? What does MI stand for? And what are MI1-4?
    MI5 is internal security and does mainland policing, MI6 is the Secret Intelligence Service and does things like overseas assassinations. MI stands for Military Intelligence and the four preceeding MI's were all disbanded after WWII.

    This makes me sound like a military geek. I'm really not. :/




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •