Bush reportedly OK'd NSA spying on Americans

[MaxFly]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10488458/

NEW YORK - A key Republican committee chairman put the Bush administration on notice Friday that his panel would hold hearings into a report that the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he would make oversight hearings by his panel next year “a very, very high priority.”

“There is no doubt that this is inappropriate,” said Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Other key bipartisan members of Congress also called on the administration to explain and said a congressional investigation may be necessary.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., appeared annoyed that the first he had heard of such a program was through a New York Times story published Friday. He said the report was troubling.

Asked about the story earlier Friday, neither Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice nor White House press secretary Scott McClellan would confirm or deny that the super-secret NSA had spied on as many as 500 people at any given time since 2002.

The Times reported Friday that following the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, President Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States.

Before the program began, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations. Overseas, 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time.

Government officials credited the new program with uncovering several terrorist plots, including one by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting al-Qaida by planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, the report said.

But Faris’ lawyer, David B. Smith, said on Friday the news puzzled him because none of the evidence against Faris appeared to have come from surveillance, other than officials eavesdropping on his cell phone calls while he was in FBI custody.

“We need to look into that,” McCain told reporters at the White House after a meeting on Iraq with Bush. “Theoretically, I obviously wouldn’t like it. But I don’t know the extent of it and I don’t know enough about it to really make an informed comment. Ask me again in about a week.”

McCain said it’s not clear whether a congressional probe is warranted. He said the topic had not come up in the meeting with Bush.

“We should be informed as to exactly what is going on and then find out whether an investigation is called for,” he said.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., also said he needed more information.

“Of course I was concerned about the story,” said Lieberman, who also attended the White House Iraq meeting. “I’m going to go back to the office and see if I can find out more about it.”

Other Democrats were more harsh.

“This is Big Brother run amok,” declared Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. “We cannot protect our borders if we cannot protect our ideals.” Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., called it a “shocking revelation” that he said “ought to send a chill down the spine of every senator and every American.”

NBC report on domestic surveillance

The Times report came two days after NBC News reported on the existence of a secret Defense Department database of information about suspicious people and activity inside the United States, including anti-war groups.

The Times said reporters interviewed nearly a dozen current and former administration officials about the program and granted them anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.

It also said in its story that editors at the newspaper had delayed publication of the report for a year because the White House said it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. The Times said it omitted information from the story that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists.

McClellan would not directly discuss specifics of the article at a briefing for reporters, but said that “there is congressional and oversight of intelligence activities and there are a lot of safeguards in place.”

He continued, “Soon after 9/11 the president made a commitment to do two things: Everything lawfully within his power to protect the American people and save lives ... and (to) remain fully committed to uphold the Constitution and protect the civil liberties of the American people. He has done both.”

Rice used similar words when asked about the program on NBC “Today” show.

“I’m not going to comment on intelligence matters,” she said. But Rice did say that President Bush “has always said he would do everything he can to protect the American people, but within the law, and with due regard for civil liberties because he takes seriously his responsibility.”

“The president acted lawfully in every step that he has taken,” Rice said, “to defend the American people and to defend the people within his constitutional responsibility.”

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the group’s initial reaction to the NSA disclosure was “shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law.”

Asked about the administration’s contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn’t comment until it sees some evidence. “They’ve veiled these powers in secrecy so there’s no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight.”

The Times quoted officials familiar with the NSA operation as saying that Bush’s executive order allowing warrantless eavesdropping on those inside the United States was based on classified legal opinions stating that the president has broad powers to order such measures, based in part on a September 2001 congressional resolution authorizing him to wage war on al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

But some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said. Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions.

NBC report on Pentagon database

Earlier this week, the Pentagon said it was reviewing its use of a classified database of information about suspicious people and activity inside the United States after the report by NBC News said the database listed activities of anti-war groups that were not a security threat to Pentagon property or personnel.

Pentagon spokesmen declined to discuss the matter on the record but issued a written statement Wednesday evening that implied — but did not explicitly acknowledge — that some information had been handled improperly.

The Bush administration had briefed congressional leaders about the NSA program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.

Aides to National Intelligence Director John Negroponte and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to comment Thursday night.

[sonic1988]

jesus, orwell was right.......... USA is becoming like Big Brother in 1984

[Chief]

see..these ****ers just need to do it and not leave any tracks....dumbasses

[MaxFly]

US President George W Bush has again defended his decision to allow eavesdropping on Americans in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks.

Speaking at a press conference, Mr Bush also repeated that he would continue to authorise the secret monitoring.

He also urged Congress to renew the Patriot Act, the top US anti-terror law, saying it provided officials with the tools to protect Americans.

"We cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment," he said.

It was not in the best interests of the country for people to "play politics" with the Patriot Act, he said, while answering reporters' questions.

The legislation has cleared the House of Representatives, but the Senate has rejected an attempt to reauthorize several sections of the bill. The legislation is due to expire at the end of the month.

'Helping the enemy'

Mr Bush also said he expected a "full investigation" into who leaked information about the wiretap programme.

"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important programme in a time of war," he said.

"The fact that we're discussing this programme is helping the enemy," he added.

The New York Times reported last Friday that Mr Bush had signed a secret presidential order following the 11 September 2001 attacks, allowing the National Security Agency to track the international telephone calls and e-mails of hundreds of people without referral to the courts.

Previously, surveillance on American soil was generally limited to foreign embassies.

Mr Bush emphasised that only international calls were monitored without a court order - those originating in the US, or those placed from overseas to individuals living in the US.

He reminded reporters that calls placed and received within the US could be monitored under orders granted by a secret court under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The president, struggling with low approval ratings and public discontent with the US death toll in Iraq, also defended his decision to invade the country, saying "it wasn't a mistake" and that "history will judge".

On Sunday, in his fifth speech on Iraq in the past few weeks, Mr Bush appealed to Americans not to give in to despair over the war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4542880.stm

I can't come up with a single good reason to go about spying this way. There are retroactive warrants, special secret courts... and he feigns anger and calls out Hilary Clinton. Big mistake.

[Cozmo D]

US President George W Bush has again defended his decision to allow eavesdropping on Americans in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks.

Speaking at a press conference, Mr Bush also repeated that he would continue to authorise the secret monitoring.

He also urged Congress to renew the Patriot Act, the top US anti-terror law, saying it provided officials with the tools to protect Americans.

"We cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment," he said.

It was not in the best interests of the country for people to "play politics" with the Patriot Act, he said, while answering reporters' questions.

The legislation has cleared the House of Representatives, but the Senate has rejected an attempt to reauthorize several sections of the bill. The legislation is due to expire at the end of the month.

'Helping the enemy'

Mr Bush also said he expected a "full investigation" into who leaked information about the wiretap programme.

"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important programme in a time of war," he said.

"The fact that we're discussing this programme is helping the enemy," he added.

The New York Times reported last Friday that Mr Bush had signed a secret presidential order following the 11 September 2001 attacks, allowing the National Security Agency to track the international telephone calls and e-mails of hundreds of people without referral to the courts.

Previously, surveillance on American soil was generally limited to foreign embassies.

Mr Bush emphasised that only international calls were monitored without a court order - those originating in the US, or those placed from overseas to individuals living in the US.

He reminded reporters that calls placed and received within the US could be monitored under orders granted by a secret court under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The president, struggling with low approval ratings and public discontent with the US death toll in Iraq, also defended his decision to invade the country, saying "it wasn't a mistake" and that "history will judge".

On Sunday, in his fifth speech on Iraq in the past few weeks, Mr Bush appealed to Americans not to give in to despair over the war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4542880.stm

I can't come up with a single good reason to go about spying this way. There are retroactive warrants, special secret courts... and he feigns anger and calls out Hilary Clinton. Big mistake.

Believe it or not, there are actually people backing up his right to do this. I've said it often lately, if you've wondered how a free people would willingly turn that freedom over to a dictator, just sit back and watch.

Chief is right though, it's not like this is anything new. But the gall of this guy when caught red-handed to actually say to the nation that not only has he the authority, but that the WHISTLE BLOWERS are the problem? Frightening!

[MaxFly]

What's worse is that while he maintains his right to do this and says that he will continue, neither his White House counsel nor the Attorney General have cited what statute or constitutional authority he's based this on. These are lawyers... they should be quick with their facts to smack this down if it weren't illegal. The political ramifications are going to be crazy... and I thought Christmas break was going to be boring.

[Cozmo D]

What's worse is that while he maintains his right to do this and says that he will continue, neither his White House counsel nor the Attorney General have cited what statute or constitutional authority he's based this on. These are lawyers... they should be quick with their facts to smack this down if it weren't illegal. The political ramifications are going to be crazy... and I thought Christmas break was going to be boring.

Yeah, the reason that they haven't is the obscure loophole they're using allows him to do this in a state of declared war...but only during the first 15 days.

:wtf:

[Schnazz]

Could someone explain to me why Bush is continued to be allowed to do this nasty stuff, but Clinton lied about a sexual escapade and he gets impeached? Why aren't the dems, and the reasonable republicans (all three of them), trying to impeach this guy?

[Cozmo D]

Could someone explain to me why Bush is continued to be allowed to do this nasty stuff, but Clinton lied about a sexual escapade and he gets impeached? Why aren't the dems, and the reasonable republicans (all three of them), trying to impeach this guy?

Because the Republicans control both houses of Congress. W's startin' to get sloppy though.

[MaxFly]

Could someone explain to me why Bush is continued to be allowed to do this nasty stuff, but Clinton lied about a sexual escapade and he gets impeached? Why aren't the dems, and the reasonable republicans (all three of them), trying to impeach this guy?

Because the Republicans control both houses of Congress. W's startin' to get sloppy though.

Yup, and this makes the 2006 elections even more interesting.. Also, the Dems are a little concerned that this might backfire on them in case something happens and the republicans are able to credit this program with stopping a terrorist act or something of that nature.. perhaps an attack does take place with the republicans saying that if this program would have been used, the attack could have been prevented. Now these things don't have to have a smidget of truth, but republicans are good with talking point and the Dems just don't seem to know what they're doing half of the time. They don't want public opinion to turn on them, so they're going to play the "lets get all the facts" card. It's probably the best move. The more they seem to want to temper their judgement until all the information is available, the less partisan they seem, the more likely they can get republicans on their side and the better they are in the eyes of the public.

If I'm going to watch this play out, I'll have to go buy some popcorn...