General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSome have mentioned: Why bring up NSA Spying now and not back in 2006?
Well, some on DU tried:
Know your BFEE: Like a NAZI
Did the NSA help Bush hack the vote?
Know your BFEE: Lies are the Currency of their Realm
Analysis from 2008:
Frank Church and the Abyss of Warrantless Wiretapping
News for too many from 2005:
Know your BFEE: The Secret Government
JFK Would NEVER Have Fallen for Phony INTEL!
I notice that many DUers at the time were labled "Conspiracy Theorists" for pointing it out.
librechik
(30,674 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)From a blog, ca. 2006:
New crime to report Bush violating FISA
Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, Daily kos
March 12, 2006
While a draft of the GOP proposed legislation sponsored by DeWine, Snowe, Graham and Hagel is not yet publicly available, some reporters have written about the substantive provisions after receiving a copy of the draft legislation. Not only does this legislation codify the existing illegal NSA program, but it creates new crimes to prevent the press from reporting on any FISA surveillance programs and Bush is the person who writes a list of the terrorists to be subjected to surveillance.
Some of the provisions of this new legislation include:
(1) The law will make it a crime for reporters and newspapers to publish stories that Bush violated the law or to simply report on the existence of the various FISA surveillance programs to the public. This handy provision protects Bush from any future leaks that he is violating the law governing surveillance of Americans. Criminal penalties would be applied to anyone who "intentionally discloses information identifying or describing" Bush's NSA program or any other surveillance of Americans under FISA. In addition, the scope of activities covered by criminal penalties is expanded by not including a requirement that the "information has to be harmful to national security or classified." Increased penalties of $1 million fines and/or 15 years in jail should be plenty deterrence for the media to not report on such surveillance in the future.
(2) The legislation codifies the primary components of Bush's existing illegal NSA surveillance of Americans. In other words, Bush may continue the surveillance program which violated American's rights, but now he may continue with the cover that Congress is making the program legal. The problem with Bush's NSA program was not just that it was illegal because it violated wiretapping laws and Congressional oversight laws, but also because it violated and lowered American civil right standards by permitting political appointees to make decisions that our system has wisely reserved to judges. These problems remain:
CONTINUED...
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21467&l=i&size=1&hd=0
I think he succeeded, seeing how he's not in jail.
Since time immemorial, war is money. Now it's against the law to point it out.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)waved a magic wand or something because he is infallibly awesome and that doesn't matter anymore. Because Obama.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)been much smarter. They got secret courts, whose rulings we can't challenge (or often even see), to declare the activities legal (as far as we know).
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Because, Obama.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Turning a 16-year-old American kid into "bug splat" without due process of any kind did something to my hope for change.
Perhaps he had too. Then again, perhaps he wanted to. Either way, it was not a power assigned to the President in the Constitution of the United States, a copy of which can still be downloaded here for free, although in PDF form.
PS: Thank you for standing up to the nonsense about secret government, secret laws, secret surveillance, secret state, secret privilege, secret benefit and all the rest of the secret stuff, Aerows. It's starting to feel a lot like Krystallnacht.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Perhaps if enough people learned about the true extent of the war profiteering, they'd be mad, especially considering how the NSA enables the war profiteering.
Know your BFEE: WikiLeaks Stratfor Dump Exposes Continued Secret Government Warmongering
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)War profiteering now, I almost think this is the Twilight Zone.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)While I can't read your mind, war profiteering is what Bush and his family are all about. The fact they are not in jail says a lot to me. What is says to you is your business, thankfully.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)it's about you understanding what you are talking about.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Uttered at a press conference in which not a single member of the callow, cowed press corpse saw fit to ask a follow-up. Don't know what you think about it, Progressive dog, but, to me, that is criminal.
I remember Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Which is what happened. Hence the difference between then and now and why it was so bad then and not now.
villager
(26,001 posts)...when you mentioned with a straight face that the rubber-stamping FISA "court" makes things "not so bad" now...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)A law that the ACLU lauded when Kennedy died.
dennis4868
(9,774 posts)EOTE
(13,409 posts)Are endless rubber stamps really much better than the warrantless wiretapping done under Bush? Especially considering that the scope and scale of this has most likely simply grown since the Bush administration. As a journalist, do these revelations not provide a chilling effect?
villager
(26,001 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Let your imagination wander why that might be. The word "funding" and "appearances" would be the first place my mind might go.
EOTE
(13,409 posts)I'd think that journalists would realize that they have the most to lose here. Yet so many are willing accomplices.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)right along with 4th Amendment search and seizure laws.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)This is a personal attack on stephenleser, the "particular person" referred to. It is openly suggesting he is paid to be here and is only appearing to be a Democrat/progressive.
> >
> > You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Aug 20, 2013, 01:32 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.
> >
> > Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I believe Aerows is referring to stevenleser's appearances on Fox News and such.
> > Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
> > Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Steven promotes himself openly as a party operative. It is not offensive to highlight that.
> > Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
> > Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Please. Grow a skin.
> > Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I can't read into that even though there has been some ridiculous claims of payments and "personas" recently it seems
> >
villager
(26,001 posts)On Edit:
You weren't citing Democratic Presidents in succession, but meant, I gather, Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter.
That's fine, but affixing Democratic names to what's become a rubber-stamping secret "court" stacked with John Roberts' appointees, isn't, for some of us, license to keep slumbering.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was introduced on May 18, 1977, by Senator Ted Kennedy and was signed into law by President Carter in 1978. The bill was cosponsored by nine Senators: Birch Bayh, James O. Eastland, Jake Garn, Walter Huddleston, Daniel Inouye, Charles Mathias, John L. McClellan, Gaylord Nelson, and Strom Thurmond.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've covered the history of FISA extensively so that people understand why it was enacted and the legal decisions around it, presidential powers, etc. http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2013/08/repost-transcript-of-nsa-surveillance.html and http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2013/08/full-transcript-for-my-segment-on.html
villager
(26,001 posts)...if you read my revised reply.
You meant Sen. Kennedy, and not JFK, which I realized.
Still has become a rubber-stamp, John Roberts-appointed court.
Wonder what Ted Kennedy would think of it now?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The only limits being what could be introduced into evidence in court. So for stuff that wasn't going to court, anything went.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)EXCERPT...
The Origins of FISA
As chief counsel of the Church Committee, Frederick Schwarz tells Bill Moyers that the most fundamental lessons learned from the Committee include that "when you start small, you go big...When you start in a way that seems legitimate, it inevitably goes too far."
In reaction to the Church Committee reports pushing for oversight, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, which established a secret FISA court responsible for issuing warrants for domestic wiretapping activity. The FISA court consists of seven judges appointed by the Chief Justice and who serve for seven years.
In December 2005, the NEW YORK TIMES reported that President Bush had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop on American phone calls and emails without obtaining a warrant from the FISA court. That revelation was met with consternation, and investigations, by many in and outside of the political realm.
In August 2007, a temporary amendment to FISA passed called the Protect America Act, which as President Bush explains, modernizes FISA by "accounting for changes in technology and restoring the statute to its original focus on appropriate protections for the rights of persons in the United States - and not foreign targets located in foreign lands." But the battle's not over yet civil libertarians on both the left and right accused the Democratic Congress of giving in easily on wiretapping and several Members of Congress have vowed to readdress the issue.
Project Shamrock
One important program brought to light by the Committee was Project Shamrock domestic surveilliance that was subsequently prohibited by FISA. Shamrock was a NSA surveillance program stretching from 1947 to the mid-70's that involved the copying of telegrams sent by American citizens to international organizations. L. Britt Snider, former CIA Inspector General and council on the Church Committee, describes the project he was tasked to investigate:
Every day, a courier went up to New York on the train and returned to Fort Meade with large reels of magnetic tape, which were copies of the international telegrams sent from New York the preceding day using the facilities of three telegraph companies. The tapes would then be electronically processed for items of foreign intelligence interest, typically telegrams sent by foreign establishments in the United States or telegrams that appeared to be encrypted.
Shamrock actually predated the NSA, which was created by President Truman in 1952, and began as a continuation of censorship efforts conducted by the the Army Security Agency during WWII. As Fritz Schwarz explains to Bill Moyers, the program began with benign intentions, yet, "if you have secrecy and lack of oversight, you're going to get abuse." By the time the hearings began, many estimate the NSA was analyzing 150,000 messages a month.
When Snider submitted his report to chief counsel Schwarz, he initially recommended leaving out the names of the three telegram companies since they could be subject to litigation and that "the companies had cooperated purely out of patriotic motives." Schwarz decided to leave the names in the report, even after repeated pressing by the Ford Administration that such disclosure would damage national security.
CONTINUED w/links, videos, stuff that gets forgotten by most everybody else...
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10262007/profile2.html
I haven't had a chance to explore all the info there, but it's something that may come in useful.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)lark
(23,083 posts)I don't think so. Remember, this administration had a re-interpretation done that they have refused to share with even the Intelligence Committee.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)its always interesting when you have to deal with someone trying to prove a negative. Good smack down stevenleser.
uponit7771
(90,329 posts)MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)The FISA court is a rubber stamp.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)AND has become a fig leaf.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)The fact that you assert what you have just asserted makes it clear that you don't understand this issue at all.
I've covered this.
http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2013/08/repost-transcript-of-nsa-surveillance.html
Response to stevenleser (Reply #87)
Post removed
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)there are no tool sheds in Manhattan.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Shows the vacuousness of their argument. I'm glad at least that post was hidden.
Please keep posting on DU. I hope this sort of crap does not drive you out of here, like it has other rational progressives. We desperately need more people like you.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Ranting with an anonymous account on the internet at someone who is perceived to have a following or celebrity is the only thing that makes some folks feel like they are doing something.
People who disagree with me who feel empowered to act on their beliefs in constructive ways don't get nearly as upset.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)I wouldn't have put it so charitably.
East Coast Pirate
(775 posts)I feel much better now.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Scary, isn't it?
villager
(26,001 posts)Some now exploited, misbegotten law had some Democratic names affixed to it once upon a time, so all subsequent critical thinking is therefore banned, no new questions ever need be asked, etc...
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)but let it be critical thinking and not overblown hyperbole.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)That was January 2006. So, sorry, not exactly certain what you mean.
uponit7771
(90,329 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)but I have to wonder, do you actually *READ* the posts you reply to, or do you just randomly go into a thread and shout NEENER-NEENER regardless of what the actual discussion is?
uponit7771
(90,329 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I think it should be repealed. But then I am an anti-authoritarian.
pansypoo53219
(20,968 posts)where were the paranoid then?
The issues of Domestic Spying and the collection of Metadata was ALSO big in 2006.
Here, I'll let Joe explain it to you:
Just because some people don't remember
is no reason to start rewriting History.
dawg
(10,622 posts)I wonder if he still feels that way? There isn't much he could do about it from his current position (other than complain from behind the scenes).
dennis4868
(9,774 posts)Republicans are "great" on national security issues so they know what they're doing. Media therefore cannot question them.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Wilms
(26,795 posts)Ya mean people who consider the possibility that two or more individuals planned and executed a crime, and even stranger, that aspects of the crime were covered up??
Where do people get such silly ideas? It couldn't possibly ever happen. Why are people so paranoid and, well, nutty?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Conspiracies abound especially in politics. Those that deny that have their heads in the sand.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)but I can't be certain.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)cents about CT. And I assure it's worth every cent.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Wilms
(26,795 posts)That post of mine could have used it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)From Christopher Simpson, info on how Poppy started the big ball of wax when he pried control out of the bed-ridden Pruneface:
George Bush Takes Charge: The Uses of "Counter-Terrorism"
By Christopher Simpson
Covert Action Quarterly 58
A paper trail of declassified documents from the Reagan-Bush era yields valuable information on how counter-terrorism provided a powerful mechanism for solidifying Bush's power base and launching a broad range of national security initiatives.
During the Reagan years, George Bush used "crisis management" and "counter-terrorism" as vehicles for running key parts of the clandestine side of the US government.
Bush proved especially adept at plausible denial. Some measure of his skill in avoiding responsibility can be taken from the fact that even after the Iran-Contra affair blew the Reagan administration apart, Bush went on to become the "foreign policy president," while CIA Director William Casey, by then conveniently dead, took most of the blame for a number of covert foreign policy debacles that Bush had set in motion.
The trail of National Security Decision Directives (NSDDS) left by the Reagan administration begins to tell the story. True, much remains classified, and still more was never committed to paper in the first place. Even so, the main picture is clear: As vice president, George Bush was at the center of secret wars, political murders, and America's convoluted oil politics in the Middle East.
SNIP...
Reagan and the NSC also used NSDDs to settle conflicts among security agencies over bureaucratic turf and lines of command. It is through that prism that we see the first glimmers of Vice President Bush's role in clandestine operations during the 1980s.
CONTINUED...
http://books.google.com/books?id=YZqRyj_QXf8C&pg=PA75&lpg=PA75&dq=christopher+simpson+The+Uses+of+%E2%80%98Counter-Terrorism%E2%80%99&source=bl&ots=8klB0PzATX&sig=hi9DpE3qF43Oefh7iGn79W4jXQs&hl=en&ei=zAFQTeriBsr2gAfu1Mgc&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=christopher%20simpson%20The%20Uses%20of%20%E2%80%98Counter-Terrorism%E2%80%99&f=false
Of course, those like you, Wilms, who pay attention know the unofficial secret state story goes back 18 years before then.
chimpymustgo
(12,774 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)Unfortunately, all of Greenwald's 'bombshells' have 'exposed' massive oversight and monitoring within the NSA. Would have been much
easier back in '06, before Obama took office and tripled the amount of oversight.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)Where is your evidence for that? Or is this an evidence-free all-speculation-all-the-time zone?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There are three levels of checks to keep US citizens out of PRISM, as opposed to 1 under Bush.
We know that because Snowden leaked the documents describing them.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)So is "sanction".
"Because of the regulators' oversight, the company's actions were sanctioned" can mean two completely opposite things...
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)God alone knows how many there actually were, I think we can say that oversight hasn't really tripled. I'm going to say that without proof, that is conspiracy theory.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)uponit7771
(90,329 posts)...folk
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Looking at everything but actual terrorism, or does the Boston Marathon escape you? They knew these assholes were terrorists and dangerous, but did absolutely nothing.
You don't think people have the right to rage over that shit?
railsback
(1,881 posts)THAT is an 'abuse' that gets logged. Maybe go back and read that part.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Russia: "This man is a terrorist
Chechnya: Man visited area.
International: "This man is a terrorist"
Boston: Man kills a 9 year old and blows the legs off of a person, and kills over 30 people.
US Statement: How could we have ever known this was going to happen.
railsback
(1,881 posts)Illegally, without warrants, too.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)He quintupled the oversight!
It's led by Professor Droney.
?1360594247
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)For later "correction" of the situation down there. The first correction sometime involves more correction a short time later.
See how clean multiple murders can be?
How many meanings can "He quintupled the oversight" have?
Sorry, the graphic set me off.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Gen Clapper and Gen Alexander have "interpreted" to allow massive surveillance without warrants. Who specifically is overseeing those interpretations? And are those interpretations of the law and subsequent oversight available to the public?
Congress is supposed to have "oversight" but as you can clearly see from Sen Wyden's and Sen Udall's frustrations, that mode of oversight has failed.
The FISA courts are supposed to provide oversight. The judges are hand picked hard line Republicans not at all interested in the Constitution. They act as a rubber stamp for the hard line conservative run NSA. And they have admitted that they do not verify that the conditions of the warrants are met by the NSA. No one ensures that the warrants are enforced. And in at least one case, a warrant was issued that said the NSA could surveil anyone, anywhere, any time. One doesnt have to be a constitutional lawyer to recognize that warrant violates the Constitution.
It's ironic that some here that are so adamantly against the REpublican Party would embrace surveillance programs built, run, and overseen by hard line Republicans.
When it comes to believing Democrats Sen Wyden and Sen Udall, or Republican hard-line authoritarians like Gen Clapper and Gen Alexander, I choose the Democrats.
railsback
(1,881 posts)because of all the wasted energy. I understand.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)"massive oversight and monitoring within the NSA"
That is a good one...
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)which will end up on the shelf next to Atlas Shrugged.
Cerridwen
(13,252 posts)and/or run by a Democrat might, at the very least, trim-back the excesses of all the alphabet soup of police agencies.
As many of us tried to point out at the time, a D behind a candidate's name does not denote concern for human rights. That of course, brought the "Democrats are NOT just like republicans" Abortion! Gay rights! Civil Ri....er, uhm....
Detention for guilt-by-association, it's "only meta-data," Greenwald's a poo-poo head, and other fun and exciting phrases are entering the New Democrat's vocabulary.
Oh, and did you hear? The ACLU has had 2 cases in almost 100 years of advocating for civil rights that can be completely misunderstood and selectively quoted and used to prove it is not a "liberal bastion" fighting for "liberals everywhere," and with massive amounts of links to fives of r/wers who agree with me. Well, of course it's about civil liberties and that used to mean it dove-tailed nicely with liberal policies and positions. But, I guess those were those old, "far-left" liberals of myth, and song, and r/w nightmares.
Meanwhile, aei and american conservative are being posted as reliable sources of factual information and educated opinion.
I can't decide if I'm sitting under the bus or down the freaking rabbit-hole. Hmm, maybe the bus is in the rabbit-hole?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.
That's what his son and daughter, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rory Kennedy, reported in an interview with Charlie Rose last weekend in Dallas.
It's also what author and Salon founder David Talbot reported, when he called Robert F. Kennedy the "first conspiracy theorist" in 2007.
Here's why the news from Robert and Rory is so important:
RFK called the Warren Commission report "shoddy workmanship."
Attorney General Kennedy knew about the Ruby-Mafia connections immediately, which is vital when considering the Mafia were hired by Allen Dulles and the CIA during Eisenhower's administration to murder Fidel Castro -- an operation which the CIA failed to inform the president and attorney general.
The interview with Charlie Rose marked the first time members of the immediate Kennedy family have voiced the attorney general's doubts about the Warren Commission and its lone gunman theory.
Those are the facts we learned Friday, Jan. 11, 2013. It's called history.
As far as I know, that Charlie Rose interview has never aired.
PS: The hatred some expressed reminded me of a conditioned reflex I have often heard when bringing up the subject of liberal politics in general, the Kennedys in particular, with very conservative individuals and groups over the last 40 years. To see it on DU has been saddening, if not eye-opening.
PPS: It's like a garage, there's so much room and everything. Not much in the First-Aid kit, unfortunately, besides an IOU from some guy named Milo Minderbinder made out to Kid Snowden.
PPPS: Very much appreciate that you remember those kind of Democrats, Cerridwen, the ones that cared about democracy, justice, peace, prosperity, equal rights, and a better tomorrow for all.
Cerridwen
(13,252 posts)I was too young to be a hippy but I was plenty old enough to see the world wasn't what I was being told it was. My elders said one thing yet did another. I heard them complain about politicians over and over and over again then do nothing about them. My family is mostly apolitical. Except for various union memberships and union positions over the years. When it came to electoral politics they complained but were absent.
I was just about 5 when JFK was assassinated. My mother explained it as 2 children, mine and my brother's age, had just lost their father. I remember we went straight to her parent's house when she heard. I didn't quite get the words but the emotions were obvious. She needed to be with her parents. She was about 25. It was horrible.
Most of what followed was kept from me as I was "too sensitive" to the emotions around the unmatching words.
Back then, school reform was teaching to the child; unions provided the best jobs, pay, and benefits; poverty was to be addressed rather than those in poverty to be jailed; addictions to various substances was just hitting the criminalize or treat as medical conditions controversy; there was debate about incarcerating to punish or to rehabilitate (a re-tread debate from the late 19th century, I think); conservationism was a conservative concept; and that old Eisenhower had just warned people my parents and grandparents age about the MIC.
Then came...well, you know the history. The establishment Dems started more noticeably taking over the party. 1968 DNC. Some non-conformists started to conform because it was easier to go along to get along. Other non-conformists just faded away and stayed away from the party machinery and the electoral process. So much changed; so fast.
It reverted to the power-mongering status quo of the newly branded robber barons and the idle rich were described as hard workers.
The anita bryant promoted "moral majority" that was neither, morphed into the pat robertson "christian right" and was spewed all over the 700 club and it was neither Christian nor right though it was most definitely right-wing. The vast right-wing conspiracy was launched with full force and with talking points faxed each day or phoned in each evening. They started small; on the school boards and planning commissions and the gablers destroyed the textbooks. But, of course they never, ever, and don't you say they did, enter the Democratic Party as "Democrats" to undermine any and all progress the people had made in the arena of people's rights.
And history was gradually re-written to hide the multi-party system of the US; the early corruption and racism of the old Democratic Party was momentarily replaced by a Party for the People to shut-up the complaints; and on, and on.
Yossarian: What difference does that make? He's dead.
1st Lt. Milo Minderbinder: Then his family will get it.
Yossarian: He didn't have time to have a family.
1st Lt. Milo Minderbinder: Then his parents will get it.
Yossarian: They don't need it, they're rich.
1st Lt. Milo Minderbinder: Then they'll understand.
By the way, I think we're at the corner of Parallel Hell Hole and Underthebus Rabbit Hole at Bus Stop No. 9.
Next stop...The Twilight Zone.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)Go figure.
JEB
(4,748 posts)The truth will out thanks to people like Octafish.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Not to mention: Are ALL COMMUNICATIONS routed overseas to circumvent US law and the Constitution?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2245762
A question that should still be asked today!
Triana
(22,666 posts).... I was here on DU when all this was exposed. No one listened. NOW they're listening.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)I was here.
I remember.
The posts are in the archives.
Governmental Spying, the "Unitary Executive, dragnet monitoring by the Telecoms, 1st Amendment Zones, The AUMF, The Patriot Act, and Governmental Over Reach have been BIG issues at DU since 9-11 among those of us who were paying attention.
Those pushing the meme that "nobody cared in 2006"
are full of revisionist BS.
Even Joe Biden was on our side in 2006:
The above is about the danger of trusting the government with collecting "metadata"
....back in 2006???!!!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Then we had a Republican President with Republican run intelligence agencies.
Now we have a Democratic President with Republican run intelligence agencies. The same programs and the same people.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)....into Teabaggers?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)A lot of long-missed colorful names in those threads....
meegbear
(25,438 posts)Before it was cool to like him (you were supposed to hate him here because he called out Keith Olbermann).
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)his right hand.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)bigtree
(85,986 posts)from Ron Fullwood (bigtree), 7/29/2007
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023367076
Relying on 'Reasonable' Beliefs of Bush and Hayden
from Ron Fullwood (bigtree) 5/9/2006
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Remember when?
U.S mercenary running torture chamber in Kabul "worked for Rumsfeld"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2037032&mesg_id=2037032
Chertoff's client Dr. Elamir - brother Mohamed has ties with bin Laden
http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3031371
Lots more...and lots more to come!
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)extensive capability back in 2006. But I vaguely remember a program that was shut down a few years ago because of public outcry, called TIA, Total Information Awareness. It sounds like one of the precursor to current systems.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)That OP is by one of the greats of all the Internet.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)For those interested in learning about it:
Know your BFEE: Nazis couldn t win WWII, so they backed Bushes
George II
(67,782 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)By Timothy B. Lee
Washington Post, Published: August 2 at 12:31 pm
In recent months, Barack Obama has forcefully defended the use of the Patriot Act to gather the phone records of every American. But before he was elected president, he had a very different perspective on the issue.
In December 2005, Congress was debating the first re-authorization of the Patriot Act, a controversial 2001 law that gave the federal government expanded power to spy on Americans. And Barack Obama was one of nine senators who signed a letter criticizing the then-current version of the legislation for providing insufficient protections for civil liberties.
The senators focused on Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which allows the government to obtain business records that are relevant to a terrorism investigation. Sen. Obama and eight of his colleagues worried that the provision would allow government fishing expeditions targeting innocent Americans. We believe the government should be required to convince a judge that the records they are seeking have some connection to a suspected terrorist or spy.
Congress eventually re-authorized the Patriot Act, including Section 215. A few years later, Obama was elected president of the United States. And under President Obamas watch, the NSA engaged in surveillance suspiciously similar to the broad fishing expeditions Sen. Obama warned about.
The government has argued that records of every phone call made in the United States are relevant to counter-terrorism investigations generally, allowing them to obtain information about the private phone calls of millions of Americans exactly the kind of argument Sen. Obama warned the government would make if the language of Section 215 wasnt tightened.
Sen. Obama and his colleagues also objected to the lack of transparency and due process in Section 215. The target of a Section 215 order never receives notice that the government has obtained his sensitive personal information and never has an opportunity to challenge the use of this information in a trial or other proceeding, they wrote.
CONTINUED...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/02/sen-obama-warned-about-patriot-act-abuses-president-obama-proved-him-right/
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)The past is water under the bridge, nothing whatever can be done about that.
It strikes me as a pretext for a finger-pointing exercise while Rome burns.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And I remember you back then...
K&R and thank you for what you have done in the past and now.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)were voting for these Bush policies.
Imagine if Democrats all voted against Bush policies how different things might be. But after a while it was obvious that that was not going to happen, and when we would be angry at Democrats for their pro-Bush votes, the next time, THAT group would get to vote 'no' while another group took over the pro-Bush vote. Always with enough to make him successful.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The Professional Paranoid
Why NSA whistle-blower Russ Tice may be right.
By Patrick Radden Keefe|Posted Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006, at 5:15 PM
If the congressional hearings on domestic spying have anything like a star witness when they get under way next month, it will probably be a 43-year-old intelligence officer named Russ Tice. Until last May, Tice worked at the National Security Agency, on what are known as Special Access Programsthe umbrella designation for "black world" operations that includes the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping. In December, Tice said he was willing to testify about "probable unlawful and unconstitutional acts" by the NSA, and he has since acknowledged that he was one of the sources for James Risen's original scoop in the New YorkTimes.
This appears to be great news for Congress: Because current NSA officials are likely to stonewall when asked about "sources and methods," arguing that even closed-session testimony could jeopardize national security, a chatty insider like Tice might save the investigation. But there's a catch. Shrill, twitchy, and Manichaean, your average whistle-blower often comes off as more crazy than confidence-inspiring. And when the whistle-blower happens also to be a professional eavesdropperwhich is effectively to say, a professional paranoidthe weird factor can be especially pronounced. It may be tempting to write Tice off. But that would be a mistake. His intimate knowledge of America's surveillance apparatus might make him a little paranoid. In this case, however, it might also make him right.
Advertisement
Whenever a whistle-blower parts rank with a government agency or a major corporation, it's in the interests of the betrayed employer to depict the whistle-blower as unhinged. This skillfully plays on the public's preconceptions. If there's one naysayer in an institution of thousands, we're more apt to believe that she's nuts than that she's the only one who hasn't drunk the Kool-Aid. So far, the NSA hasn't responded to Tice. But if he holds forth before Congress about spying abuses, the agency will reply that he was dismissed last year after a pair of psychiatric evaluations deemed him "mentally unbalanced." In 2001, while he was working for the Defense Intelligence Agency, Tice became convinced that an Asian-American woman he was working with was a Chinese spy. He reported his suspicions and was told they were unfounded. When he transferred to NSA the following year, he continued to report his concerns to DIA. Learning of his persistence, NSA administered the psychiatric evaluations, which led to what is known as "red badge" status, or suspension of security clearance, a stigma that in Tice's secretive business can be professionally debilitating.
So, Tice's departure from the agency had nothing to do with the misgivings about domestic eavesdropping that he now professes. This isn't unusual. In the eavesdropping business, which relies for its survival on a code of silence more entrenched than anything the Mafia ever came up with, defectors seem to simmer in silence for years and then suddenlyand perhaps opportunisticallyto blow their tops, detailing every infraction and violation they observed throughout their careers.
Tice's bid for credibility isn't helped by some whistle-blowers who have come before him. In 1988 a recently fired NSA contractor, Margaret Newsham, went public with an alarming story. Newsham had worked at Menwith Hill, the biggest eavesdropping base on the planet, located in England's Yorkshire moors but home to 1,400 American spies. One day, she said, a colleague handed her a pair of headphones and let her listen to a conversation in Washington. One voice sounded familiar and when Newsham asked who it was, her colleague told her the speaker was Sen. Strom Thurmond. But Newsham did not protest this violation of protocol at the time. She waited until she'd been fired and was embroiled in a wrongful termination suit. Then she blew the whistle with such promiscuityalleging not only privacy violations, but also over-charging by contractors and sexual harassmentthat she accomplished little. It didn't help that Newsham seemed like a textbook paranoid: She lived alone with a 120-pound guard dog named Mr. Gunther and once told a reporter she sleeps with a gun under her pillow for fear of government reprisals.
Another recent eavesdropper-turned-whistle-blower was Canadian spy Mike Frost, who was featured on 60 Minutes II in 2000. He made news by claiming that the United States and Canada were working together to wiretap civilians as part of the Echelon eavesdropping network. Frost related an alarming story about a soccer mom who ended up on a terrorist watch-list because she telephoned a friend to describe how her son had "bombed" in the elementary school play. But experts soon poked holes in this story. Frost tended to describe surveillance systems as all-powerful and omniscient; like Newsham, he sounded a little paranoid. And also like Newsham, he had held his tongue about his reservations until he parted ways with his agency for an unrelated reason. (In this case the reason was alcoholismFrost's tell-all book reveals that he and his ghostwriter first met in AA.)
CONTINUED...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2006/01/the_professional_paranoid.html
PS: Thank you, sabrina1. You have carried a lot of the load over the years, alone, on DU, and with our fellow Democrats. Words can't adequately express what your presence and friendship have meant to me. So, I haul out Jethro, my Doppelgänger.
Response to Octafish (Original post)
Post removed
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)I have yet to figure out why people think it's okay now just because someone has decided that it's all "legal."
ileus
(15,396 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Going back and looking at DU1 and DU2...we actually had intelligent and meaningful conversations back then...certainly worth noting the tone here on DU3 is somewhat more hostile to the truth.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Thanks for pointing that out, Rex. And no matter what side of an issue DUers were on, there was a respect for one another that comes from "knowing" that other person as a human being and not as a virtual opponent or stranger.
What gets me in looking back at the old threads is how they represent a virtual storehouse of information. Even if the links are dead, the names and dates are there with which to launch a search for more information. Using GOOGLE now turns up all sorts of important stuff that never gets mentioned on television, let alone in the classroom or at most American dinner tables. DU helps change that.
Something else: DU3 is noteworthy for the Time Wasters and the absence of many a good DUer. Glad to know you are not one of them, my Friend.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Somehow we are still here. I guess we never let the CT haters chase us off the site.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)Neoma
(10,039 posts)New people are old enough to vote. They couldn't do much then, now they can do things.
That's just one point out of a bundle, but it's worth noting.
robertpaulsen
(8,632 posts)EXPOSING Bush's Spying:Salon Uncovers New Evidence Spying On Americans That Could Rival WATERGATE
Breaking: Massive Domestic Spying Uncovered-TPM: Here's The Way The Whole Thing Works
Court Papers: NSA Warrantless wiretapping, "The Program", started pre-9/11.
Sibel Edmonds, NSA Spying, State Secrets and Kafka
READ!! -- NSA doc proves "Bush Authorized Domestic Spying BEFORE 9/11"
These links are all just from a brief perusal of my bookmarks from 2006-2008, prior to President Obama's inauguration. I haven't even looked at my 2005 bookmarks when the Risen story broke, nor have I looked at my journal, where I was yelling holy hell on multiple occasions.
On a side note, I noticed there were a number of links in my bookmarks on Wikileaks revelations regarding US government malfeasance from 2007-2009 that received pretty much unanimous praise. Isn't it interesting how the praise for Julian Assange's efforts to expose the truth were not so unanimous on this site after January 20, 2009? Some people here seem more interested in prioritizing party over justice.
Response to Octafish (Original post)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)quarbis
(314 posts)1971 when I was in the Army. I knew it back then. I'll explain one of these days.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)...and we are again.
But many people didn't want to know then, and many don't want to know now.
Not knowing or acknowledging the TRUTH is denial of the first order and an indication of the level of FEAR that people live under.
And they've accepted this FEAR as ''normal.''
So they turn themselves into compliant sheeple.
- But they -- and ALL OF US -- will soon have to decide if we want to continue to live in FEAR or in TRUTH.
K&R