Jump to content
The Education Forum

The NSA Scandal got bigger today. Why?

Recommended Posts

As you read of the latest developments I am wondering if anyone sees parallels with 1) the way leaks were used in Watergate and 2) the role that intelligence rivalries may have played in Watergate. Also do you see this as part of the same phenomenon that ousted Goss and might be orchestraed by the same group that has been pushing the same Plame blame gang within the CIA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I have some real reservations about any program that tramples the Fourth Amendment freedoms, I will assure you that despite all the problems, George W. Bush isn't leaving office before noon on January 20, 2009 as long as he stays healthy. I base this conclusion on the distaste Americans have for impeachment--a result of the Nixon and Clinton impeachments--and the apparent fact that Mr. Bush's immense ego won't allow him to resign, no matter what transpires.

I realize that Nixon resigned rather than face the articles of impeachment that were drawn up, and I realize that Clinton was impeached but not removed. I know the history. But I really don't think that Americans want to become any further polarized than they currently are, and an impeachment proceeding will surely bring about further polarization.

But I think Porter Goss' shove out the door at the CIA indicates that the administration feels Goss is of no further use to them. Whether the NSA phone log information is a retaliatory strike by the CIA is conjecture at best...but is totally in character with past CIA actions. Whether such a pre-emptive strike will derail the new director-designate's confirmation is yet to be seen. But the NSA can play hardball, too...so if the leak is a move by the CIA, look for an NSA counterpunch soon. I predict this battle, if it IS what it appears, could get awfully ugly before it's over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

Having went to such lengths to get him elected in the first place, I doubt very much whether the higher powers will allow him to be used as a sacrificial lamb. Nixon was different, having served his purpose he was becoming increasingly unstable, Something thats unlikely to happen to Bush, given his limited mental horizons. Unless he hooks back up with the bottle of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Goss may have been installed merely as a figurehead/caretaker, allowing others to do the serious restructuring, while he, as a good soldier, would make no squeak or squawk - permitting everything to flow smoothly - then, departing when the changes were completed. It was said that his management style was staying in his office all of the time. Being a Bush lapdog - he wouldn't defend long-standing policies of the agency the way a deeply-invested "long-timer" might. Many of the experienced, veteran agents apparently left during the transition - and referred to the agents making up the influx of new replacements as the "Hitler Youth"...

Edited by JL Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you read of the latest developments I am wondering if anyone sees parallels with 1) the way leaks were used in Watergate and 2) the role that intelligence rivalries may have played in Watergate. Also do you see this as part of the same phenomenon that ousted Goss and might be orchestraed by the same group that has been pushing the same Plame blame gang within the CIA?

I posted this on 6th May.

Bush's decision to appoint Porter Goss as director of the CIA in 2004 is very interesting. Goss joined the CIA in 1962 and over the next few years was based at the JM/WAVE, the CIA station in Miami where he worked with people such as Ted Shackley, David Sanchez Morales, Tom Clines, David Phillips, William Harvey and Tracy Barnes. Goss is probably the last surviving officer based at JM/WAVE in 1963. Is this a coincidence or did George Walker Bush ask his son to make this appointment?

Good article by Walter Shapiro in Salon Magazine on Porter Goss:


There is a story in the UK that might be linked to Goss going. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, lost his job yesterday. Rumour has it that Straw was sacked by Blair because he opposed military action in Iran. Maybe Goss took a similar line and that action is imminent.

Two years before the Iraq War in 2003, Tony Blair moved the then foreign secretary, Robin Cook, to the post of leader of the commons. Cook was known to be against US expansionism (he claimed he wanted to follow an ethical foreign policy). History has been repeated by Blair’s decision to move the foreign secretary Jack Straw to the post of the leader of the commons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


* What is EFF's Lawsuit Against AT&T About?

* What is the Lawsuit Seeking?

* If the NSA Did The Illegal Wiretapping And Data-Mining, Why Are You Suing AT&T?

* Why has EFF brought a class action?

* Is the fight against warrantless spying on ordinary Americans a partisan issue?

* What is the NSA Domestic Spying Program?

* What is the National Security Agency?

* Is Secretly Wiretapping U.S. Citizens Without Legal Process Prohibited by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act?

* What is the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)?

* What Standard Must Be Met Under the Domestic Spying Program?

* Does the domestic spying program produce better results than FISA?

* Who Decides Whether the "Reasonable Basis" Test is Met to Conduct Domestic Spying?

* What's AT&T's Role in the Program?

* Is the Domestic Spying Program Larger than Described?

* Are Ordinary American's Communications Exposed by AT&T Collaboration?

* Who exactly is the case against?

* Why is the Case Against Both AT&Ts?

* If the lawsuit succeeds will the government still be able to surveil terrorists?

* What is Daytona?

* What is Hawkeye?

* What is Aurora?

* How Many Calls Go Through AT&T?

* How Many Customers Did AT&T Have?

* How Big is the New AT&T Inc.?

* Why Are the First and Fourth Amendments at Issue for AT&T?

* What Can I do To Help?

What is EFF's Lawsuit Against AT&T About?

EFF filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T, accusing the telecom giant of violating the law and the privacy of its customers by collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in its massive and illegal domestic spying program to wiretap and data-mine Americans' communications.

What is the Lawsuit Seeking?

EFF, on behalf of a nationwide class of AT&T customers, is suing to stop this illegal conduct and hold AT&T responsible for its illegal collaboration in the government's domestic spying program, which has violated the law and damaged the fundamental freedoms of the American public. The lawsuit request an injunction and damages under the statute. The laws provide that the victims can receive damages of at least $21,000 for each affected person.

If the NSA Did The Illegal Wiretapping And Data-Mining, Why Are You Suing AT&T?

Because AT&T violated the law, and the rights of its customers, by allowing and assisting with the illegal wiretapping and data-mining. The government's spying program on ordinary Americans would not be possible without AT&T collaborating in violating your privacy. AT&T should have been standing up for you and your privacy. In this country we follow the law, we don't just follow orders.

Why has EFF brought a class action?

We believe that all AT&T customers have had their privacy violated by AT&T's actions. And importantly, bringing the case as a class action the only sure way to make sure AT&T is prohibited from continuing these illegal actions. A class action ensures that an injunction against AT&T would apply throughout the country, not simply in the district in which the lawsuit was filed. Finally, we hope that the risk of serious statutory damages ($1,000 per subscriber under the ECPA and up to $10,000 per subscriber under the Telecom Act) will provide sufficient incentives for AT&T and the other telcos to push back on the feds with respect to this illegal program and in the future.

Is the fight against warrantless spying on ordinary Americans a partisan issue?

No. EFF is a non-partisan organization and has consistently opposed illegal surveillance efforts regardless of which party held the presidency. Indeed, the opposition to the domestic surveillance program has come from not just Democrats, but also leading conservatives. As David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union said, "This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Americans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in ways that pose constitutional concerns."

Other leading conservatives who have spoken out on the domestic surveillance include:

* Former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr;

* Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform;

* Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation; and

* Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.

What is the NSA Domestic Spying Program?

Sometime in 2001, the president authorized the NSA to intercept telephone and Internet communications of Americans inside the United States, without the authorization of any law or court. Under the program, the NSA is intercepting and analyzing millions of ordinary Americans' communications, with the help of the country's largest phone and Internet companies. The president has stated that he authorized the domestic spying in 2001, that he has reauthorized the program more than 30 times since its inception, and intends to continue doing so.

What is the National Security Agency?

The National Security Agency is a United States government intelligence agency that is responsible for the collection and analysis of foreign communications. According to the NSA site, it "coordinates, directs, and performs highly specialized activities to protect U.S. government information systems and produce foreign signals intelligence information."

* Official NSA website

* The National Security Archive's "The National Security Agency Declassified"

* Wikipedia entry on the NSA

Is Secretly Wiretapping U.S. Citizens Without Legal Process Prohibited by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act?

Yes. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq., (FISA) provides the exclusive statutory framework for the use of electronic surveillance in the context of foreign intelligence gathering. It prohibits surveillance in the United States of communications to or from a person in the United States, unless authorized by statute. With limited exceptions, this means that the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) must authorize such surveillance.

What is the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)?

The FISC is a special court set up by FISA that meets in secret to decide whether to authorize electronic surveillance in the context of foreign intelligence gathering. Only the government is allowed to appear before this court.

What Standard Must Be Met Under the Domestic Spying Program?

"Reasonable basis." According to U.S. Attorney General Gonzales, the standard is "a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, or a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda." This is a lower standard that the "probable cause" required under FISA.

Does the domestic spying program produce better results than FISA?

No. Recent reports have shown that the data from this wholesale surveillance did little more than commit FBI resources to follow up leads, "virtually all of [which], current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans."

"We'd chase a number, find it's a school teacher with no indication they've ever been involved in international terrorism - case closed," said one former FBI official, who was aware of the program and the data it generated for the bureau. "After you get a thousand numbers and not one is turning up anything, you get some frustration."

Lowell Bergman, et al, Spy Agency Data After Sept. 11 Led F.B.I. to Dead Ends, NY Times, Jan. 17, 2005.

Wasting counter-terrorism resources on innocent school teachers makes America no safer and less free.

Who Decides Whether the "Reasonable Basis" Test is Met to Conduct Domestic Spying?

NSA shift supervisors. According to U.S. Attorney General Gonzales, the "judgment is made by the operational work force at the National Security Agency using the information available to them at the time, and the standard that they apply -- and it's a two-person standard that must be signed off by a shift supervisor..." Under FISA, the federal FISC judges decide if the standard is met. Only five times out of over 19,000 applications have the FISC judges refused to allow the surveillance under the higher "probable cause" standard required by FISA.

What's AT&T's Role in the Program?

EFF alleges that under the NSA domestic spying program, major telecommunications companies-and AT&T specifically-gave the NSA direct access to their vast databases of communications records, including information about whom their customers have phoned or emailed with in the past. EFF alleges that AT&T, in addition to allowing the NSA direct access to the phone and Internet communications passing over its network, and gave the government unfettered access to its over 300 terabyte "Daytona" database of caller information -- one of the largest databases in the world.

Is the Domestic Spying Program Larger than Described?

Yes. When the government attempts to describe limits to the domestic spying program, note how carefully those comments are limited to "the NSA activities described by the President." This does not foreclose the possibility that there are more activities than described by the President, and numerous news reports have described a far wider program, which surveils the communications of ordinary Americans. This case is about AT&T's collaboration with the entire domestic spying program.

Are Ordinary American's Communications Exposed by AT&T Collaboration?

Yes. The lawsuit alleges that AT&T's has provided the government with unfettered access to the communications records of ordinary Americans whose communications go through the AT&T network. Some individuals may be singled out for further investigation and more extensive wiretapping, but this case is not about specific targeted information that a court has ordered AT&T to produce, but rather wholesale access all communications records in the AT&T database and the information transiting AT&T's compromised switches.

Who exactly is the case against?

Both AT&T Inc. and AT&T Corp. AT&T Inc. is the new name of SBC Communications, which acquired AT&T Corp. in November 2005. At closing, a wholly owned subsidiary of SBC merged with and into AT&T Corp., and thus AT&T Corp. became a wholly owned subsidiary of SBC. SBC adopted AT&T, Inc. as its name following completion of its acquisition of AT&T Corp.

Why is the Case Against Both AT&Ts?

While the case focuses on the acts of AT&T Corp. (pre-merger), AT&T Inc. has begun a transition process designed to integrate the former SBC's telecommunications network with AT&T Corp.'s network, ultimately leading into unified networks. The lawsuit alleges that the facilities and technologies of the former SBC are being or will imminently be used to transmit the communications of AT&T Corp. customers, and will continue the violation of the privacy of its customers.

If the lawsuit succeeds will the government still be able to surveil terrorists?

Yes. Wiretaps on terrorists are allowed under the law, and this lawsuit is not challenging the wiretap laws.

We have sued AT&T for breaking those laws—the telecommunications giant gave the government access to its communications switches and its huge databases of information on millions of ordinary Americans.

These are AT&T customers who have not even been accused of affiliations with terrorists.

Americans can be both safe and free: if the government truly believes it has cause to wiretap a suspect, it can order AT&T to provide information under FISA—for up to 72 hours before going to the court. But AT&T has no business providing direct access to the communications of millions of ordinary Americans, without the checks and balances of Congress or the courts.

What is Daytona?

Daytona is a database management technology originally developed and maintained by the AT&T Laboratories division of AT&T, and is used by AT&T to manage multiple databases. Daytona was designed to handle very large databases and is used to manage "Hawkeye," AT&T's call detail record (CDR) database. Daytona is also used to manage AT&T's huge network-security database, known as "Aurora." As of September 2005, all of the CDR data managed by Daytona, when uncompressed, totaled more than 312 terabytes.

What is Hawkeye?

Hawkeye is AT&T's call detail record (CDR) database, which contains records of nearly every telephone communication carried over its domestic network since approximately 2001, records that include the originating and terminating phone numbers and the time and length for each call.

What is Aurora?

Aurora is a network-security database that had been used to store Internet traffic data since approximately 2003. The Aurora database contains huge amounts of data acquired by firewalls, routers, honeypots and other devices on AT&T's global IP (Internet Protocol) network and other networks connected to AT&T's network.

How Many Calls Go Through AT&T?

By the end of 2004, on an average business day, AT&T Corp.'s network handled over 300 million voice calls as well as over 4,000 terabytes (million megabytes) of data. To understand the scale of this flow of information, it is approximately 200 times the amount of data contained in all the books in the Library of Congress.

How Many Customers Did AT&T Have?

By the end of 2004, AT&T Corp. provided long distance service (including both stand-alone and bundled) to approximately 24.6 million residential customers, dropping from approximately 34.4 million customers at the end of 2003. Before the acquisition, AT&T Corp.'s bundled local and long distance service was available in 46 states, covering more than 73 million households.

How Big is the New AT&T Inc.?

The new AT&T Inc. constitutes the largest telecommunications provider in the United States and one of the largest in the world. AT&T Inc. is the largest U.S. provider of both local and long distance services, serving millions of customers nationwide. AT&T Inc.'s international voice service carries more than 18 billion minutes per year, reaching 240 countries, linking 400 carriers and offering remote access via 19,500 points of presence in 149 countries around the globe. A point of presence is a facility where a long-distance carrier connects to a local telephone network.

Why Are the First and Fourth Amendments at Issue for AT&T?

Because AT&T is acting as the government's agent in the government's violation of the Bill of Rights. Accordingly, the lawsuit makes Constitutional claims in addition to alleging that AT&T violated the wiretap and telecommunications laws.

What Can I do To Help?

Lawsuits take a tremendous amount of time, energy, and financial resources. The only way non-profits such as EFF can afford to pursue them are through the kind and generous donations of individuals such as you. If you believe in what we are fighting for, please consider donating to support our efforts.


A graphic illustration of our civil rights under the current administration:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will tell you one damn thing, none of this carefully scripted crap would work if the media in this country hadn't been compromised. It's nauseating if you really feel disgusted with Der Media, try watching C-SPAN or C-SPAN2 at least you get to hear 'real people' talking about 'real issue's' as opposed to Keith falling out of a frigging tree, or the latest American Idol blab. The mentality of a nation that put's up with the media garbage in this country gives 'Valley Girls (see California - 1980's) a bad name. There's youre quote of the day, When you think of the utter crap that you see on half of the TV' shows, it can make you think harder about the Media/Government Nexus.

Ever wondered why Walter Cronkite the ostensible epitome of goodness itself, always takes the Party Line when talking about Dallas and JFK in the same sentence. I used to think it was the 'it's for the good of the country we don't go into those areas.'

Although that kind of thinking probably has everything to do with today's headline's, but.

Cronkite doesent seem so trustworthy in his role as the Man America Trust's notwithstanding his character in in 'getting off the bandwagon after Tet,' which was a noble gesture, something that was in short supply back then or today, for that matter.

But think about Cronkite's endorsement of 'that crazy communist Lee Harvey Oswald did it nonsense,' and then factor in, that he was more than casually familiar with the World Federalist's and it doesent seem so

touchy, feeley.

By the way, Forum Members would be well advised to purchase the newest issue of Consumer Reports to read the article entitled 'The End of Privacy? It makes a great companion piece to go with the 'scandal of the week' which is making the rounds today.

Impeachment seems like a great idea, until you remember who the Vice-President is.

2006 is starting to seem like 1963 in reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mubarak's Son Met Secretly With Cheney


Associated Press Writer

The son of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who is widely seen as his father's heir-apparent, met secretly last week with top White House officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Al-Jazeera reported Monday.

The talks came amid increasing criticism from the Bush administration of the Mubarak government for its crackdown on the political opposition, and Mubarak's comments that he does not take orders from Washington.

Egypt did not report Gamal Mubarak's trip to Washington, and its disclosure by the Arab satellite channel came as Cairo's state-owned newspapers criticized the Bush administration for interfering in Egypt's internal affairs.

Neither Egyptian authorities nor the White House responded to requests for comment.

A reporter for the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera said she saw Gamal Mubarak entering into the White House on Friday with Nabil Fahmi, Egypt's ambassador. She said both men refused to respond to her questions.

A day earlier, the State Department said it was deeply concerned about reports that Egyptian authorities arrested and repressed demonstrators protesting alleged election fraud.

The Bush administration has said reform in the Mideast is a top policy concern and has focused on Egypt, a key ally. But many in the region have speculated Washington is backing off pressure on Cairo and other government, after the big election gain by the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the overwhelming Hamas victory in the Palestinian territories.

On Monday the state-owned Rose El Youssef newspaper quoted Mubarak as saying that his government is being criticized because he does not accept direction from Washington.

That is 'because we don't listen (to them) and do not bow to anything which does not match with our interests' he said.

Since he assumed power in 1981, Mubarak had made annual trips to Washington in the spring for talks with government and congressional leaders, but he has not done so for the past two years.

Al-Jazeera said Gamal Mubarak also met during his visit to Washington last week with National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Gamal Mubarak's last visit to the White House was shortly before the United States launched its 2003 war on Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. Arab media suggested at the time that Cheney convinced him to persuade his father to mute his opposition to the war.

Many believe Mubarak has been grooming his 42-year-old son as his heir, a prospect sharply denounced by opposition parties. Both Mubarak and Gamal have denied such intentions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Lisa Pease's Real History Blog RE: NSA SPYING

1. I hope Ms. Pease doesn't take offense but the exposure of the issues is too important to miss and she writes better than I.

2. I endorse every part of this post.

3. I have more to say personally a little later.


Why illegal NSA taps on Americans must be opposed

I'm shocked to hear that 2/3 of Americans don't mind if their phones are tapped illegally in the fight against terrorism. Let me give you some reasons why you should absolutely care.

1. Any time we say the law doesn't matter, we slide towards dictatorship.

2. There are legal ways for the government to obtain permission to tap anyone's phone. That legal method, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). FISA came about in the wake of the Church and Pike Committee investigations of the intelligence agencies in the 1970s, where the CIA and FBI were found to be spying on Americans because they represented a political threat to their interests, not a physical threat to Americans. We can't go back to the pre-FISA lack of oversight, as that led to egregious abuses to people's privacy.

3. Your phone calls can and will be used against you. If you think that, just because you are a law-abiding citizen you have nothing to fear, think again. If your politics don't exactly match those of the president, you could be targeted for harassment, or have your vote selectively erased, or have your taxes selectively audited because when you allow unmonitored, unpermissioned surveillance, you're basically unlocking the door to the henhouse in front of the fox.

4. What would you say if you found out the White House had monitored Kerry's phone conversations in order to best defeat him in the last election? That's what this is about. I don't know if that happened. I simply know it could have happened. No one would have given Bush the legal authority to tap a political opponent. But since the Bush administration claims the law doesn't apply to them, what's to stop them? Absolutely power corrupts absolutely.

5. See the film V for Vendetta to understand the type of society we are becoming when we allow the party in power to break the law in the name of protecting our security.

6. The parallels between the acts of the Bush administration and Nazi Germany are frightening. People there were persuaded to give up their freedoms for security, protection against their version of the war on terror, which became a war on Communism. When more and more labor was needed to support the machine of perpetual war, the Jews became the sacrifice that Germany was willing to pay to support its empire. Jews were imprisoned and used as slave labor in concentration camps. In V for Vendetta, homosexuals and Muslims were the sacrificial lambs. What would it be in America? Aren't liberals the most undersirable people to the ruling elite? You have more to fear from your own government than you have to fear from terrorists when the government is given unaccountable power. In the film, V takes over the emergency broadcast system to invite the people of London to wake up:

...the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance, and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, think, and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillence coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the [ruling leader]. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent.

We don't have a V. But we have a nearly parallel society to the one that created him (see the film for the reference.)

That's what Bush wants of you now. Your silent consent. In return, he offers you peace. But what kind of peace? A prison cell offers peace, safety, and security. But is that where you'd want to live?

Wake up, people.

As the wise Benjamin Franklin warned us, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."


Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don’t need your freaking tea either.

When in the passage of time and American Political lassitude it becomes clear that the various faces of the US Government know little of the current securing of meaningful life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; When repeated demonstrations of the values of BOTH political parties show a complete lack of understanding of the impact of the last five-years on the quality of life for the American People, moreover the politicos show only a concern for the “corpocracy” and media “presentations” always paramount over the needs of we-the-people. When no one seems to even momentarily consider the ever mounting debt that will be used to secure “wage-slavedom” for not only we-the-people but also the children and grandchildren of same, it is clearly time for a change.

Look it, more than enough proof of altered evidence exists in a non-corrupted system to open the John Kennedy MURDER case. This state of affairs has existed since 1979 AT LEAST. This perverted law condition has existed since the House Select Committee on Assassinations requested formally for the US Justice Department to develop the unanswered questions in the case. That request went ignored. Few clearer examples exist of proof of a dysfunctional governance than this inexcusable history. Examples are many though. The HSCA’s desire for the “IN-Justice department” to investigate deeper was aborted by the 1980 October Surprise that empowered RReagan/EMeese/WCasey et. al and the ever familiar “back to the past” political/economic philosophy. Sure all this is only a radical socialist’s view of the last half of the 20th Century. Altered evidence is nothing new, witness the junk attending the CE 399 Magic CIA Bullet and the CE 139 Carbine and the Z film as depiction of reality all compliments of the US Government's supposed investigation version 1.0.

Ample cases exist but the trend culminated in the DOD overseen “911 Commission Report”, the Department of IN-Justice promoted and USG endorsed empire building “Patriot Act” and the NSA abrogation of OUR CONSTITUTION and organic law.

The most up-front of all has been the NSA whistle blower coming forward with the revelations of the NSA and the major Telecos jumping in bed with each other to keep records of ALL telephonic communications of American Citizens. Echelon coronated with the full power and authority of a stolen executive office. There are no limits to the imperial desire for Americanized Fascism of the US Government. That was 6 years ago and only now is coming out of cover. However that exposure culminated in my personal decision to halt the participation in any telephonic over-sight in my home.

The evidence exists to prove all these abortions of the American Political process, though one must bother to find out for one’s self. Katie Couric and CBS are NEVER going to tell you.

Few educational institutions of “higher learning” will touch the issues either. Witness the Jack Kennedy, Martin King, Robert Kennedy lies taught as truth. As for public schools? Public money is used to dictate policy as “taught” in this country. It is a rare teacher in a public school that can or will teach history as reality.

“Education” can do better and is honor bound in my opinion to educate. Disseminate knowledge – ALL Knowledge. The weaponry used in Fallujah should not be ABLE to be kept unmentioned by the US Unfree Press. The reality of both WTC towers falling into their own footprints and at the speed of free-fall should not be excluded from the TV pabulum too many take as reality. Operation Mockingbird is alive and well in the US and globally also.

In short We The People don’t need and cannot afford the tea being peddled and taxed by our own Government and the MICComplex and the Media. The tax on freedom is the toll I have in mind. Fiduciary issues are not excluded In that the money of our children, grand children and etc. is put up as collateral for war. The freedom and liberty has already been stolen for that war. A war based on lies as usual in my own lifetime, witness the “Ed Lansdale and Lou Conien Show” of pre 1965 “south” Vietnam games to secure war in asia. Lies for war and empire are not new experiences. Seeking answers and seeking exposure of crimes should never have interested the NSA. In a non-corrupted government it would NOT.

I would offer compliment and encouragement to the serious researchers here and elsewhere, but I for one have had enough. Until the people decide they don’t need the USG’s tea either I am done. Decide and take meaningful action to voice objection and I do not mean a further decline of poll numbers for W Bu$h nor his replacement by another face of corpocracy.

More than enough “evidence” has been developed to long ago have empanelled a grand jury in the Jack Kennedy case ALONE. The exposure of the FABRCIATED X-Rays should, in any NOT corrupted system, have secured a judicial opening of the cases. Absent agenda it would have. I would emphasize my use of the word “OPEN” not “REOPEN” the case. Absent agenda and cult of personality it would have opened the case just once.

As Fletcher Prouty said long ago the NSA does whatever it wants worrying only about legalities later if forced to do so and NOW finally the tip of the iceberg is being exposed and American “freedom” is exposed as a sham, at long last admitting that American Freedom is only a perception of Liberty.

I am sending encouragement to all that have advanced what we all know about the murder of the 35th President. If I had but one wish for the community it would be victory, victory in exposing the “china-hands” and what the OSS hands evolved into that culminated its empire power in November 1963. It is my hope that that exposure would result in a total overhaul of the American Political Empire in its own domestic policies and in its global policies outside the US.

After all only a complete idiot would cavalierly discard the good will of the world after 9-11 to pursue empire and money. W qualifies as a moron but has done idiotic things in abundance. All these things are not done in my name with my consent, i.e. my own Consent of the Governed.

We-The-People are a better people than evidence by the government. We-The-People are beginning to pay the price for not giving a damn. Giving a damn about LIES for cover up of the Jack Kennedy murder and LIES for empire. Giving a damn and making the conscious decision to think for one’s self.

We can feed and clothe and educate our people IF WE GIVE UP THE AGENDA OF EMPIRE AND CORPOCRACY.

I will never give up the political research – NEVER – and I’ll be back in the cyber-world after the shakedown of the NSA scandal.

I am so very tired of hearing from the denial crowd when I bring up domestic ILLEGAL spying “I have nothing to hide”. That is not the point, I too have nothing to hide but liberty has a flavor to those that defended it that those that never defended can NEVER EVER know.

It is mine – what is left of it, and I guard it more than any material possession can ever be secured. Liberty is not something that can be locked in a safety deposit box. It must be defended personally and often and further often with legal counsel.

I’ll be back when I find a smaller ISP that is not willing to jump into bed with the NSA as “SBC-ATT” did in 2001. I am party to the class action suit brought by the EFF not for monetary gain but to set precedent for all American’s freedom, SBC was my ISP. I suppose I can go buy a dial-up modem if I must. We-The-People may owe the EFF again.

Qwest Co. refused the NSA so there have to be more even in the land of RCA/NBC red and blue radio and Uncle Eli Lilly – Indiana. All played a role in the birthing of the entity that became the NSA – but that is another post for another day.

Keep my own “account” open John please, but I have “had enough” long ago. Too damned long ago. However I'll be back when I find an ISP that is willing OBEY THE LAW as I do, as well as to provide real security from criminals on line.

Law as in:

"Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

That is the law of the land but IS only selectively applied. That is aborted and corrupted LAW.

LAW does apply to the Government and the 4th amendment was specifically written TO the Government to protect WE-THE-PEOPLE from abuse of power by a government.

Always the radical socialist that cannot tolerate the abuse of citizens and residents without knowing we-the-people deserve better. Always refusing to give away liberty for Empire without knowing we-the-people deserve better.

People should NOT fear their Goverments, Governments should fear their people.

Amen and

God Bless


Edited by Jim Hackett II
Link to comment
Share on other sites

May 17, 2006

U.S. Opens Assault on Wiretap Suit

By Bob Egelko

San Francisco Chronicle

The Bush administration has launched a multi-pronged attack on a lawsuit that accuses AT&T of collaborating with the U.S. government in illegal electronic surveillance, arguing that customers can't prove their phones were tapped or that the company or the government broke the law -- and that, in any event, the entire case endangers national security.

Those assertions in a move for dismissal were based on arguments and evidence that the government submitted to a federal judge under seal, keeping them secret from the public and from the privacy-rights group that filed the suit on behalf of AT&T customers.

The sealed documents and a heavily edited public version were submitted in federal court in San Francisco early Saturday along with declarations from John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, and Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Agency. Both officials attest to the need for secrecy as a reason to keep the lawsuit, filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, from going forward.

"Any attempt to proceed in this case will substantially risk disclosure of ... privileged information and will cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States," Alexander said in a public filing accompanying his sealed statement.

The foundation filed suit in January accusing AT&T of illegally giving the NSA access to its voice and data network and its customer databases to help the agency's surveillance program.

The suit was accompanied by documents obtained by a former AT&T technician describing equipment installed in the company's San Francisco office that allegedly would enable the federal agency to sweep up huge amounts of data that it could screen for targeted information. AT&T plans to ask a federal judge Wednesday, May 17, 2006 to declare the documents, which have been sealed, to be trade secrets and order them returned.

The former employee, Mark Klein, handled problems on Internet fiber optic circuits and said in a statement that the equipment was being attached to the circuits in San Francisco and other AT&T offices. The equipment allowed the National Security Agency to conduct "vacuum-cleaner surveillance of all the data crossing the Internet," he said.

His lawyers said in a court filing that the government had never classified as a secret anything that Klein saw.

In Saturday's filing, government lawyers wrote that "the lawfulness of the alleged activities cannot be determined without a full factual record, and that record cannot be made without seriously compromising U.S. national security interests."

Without evidence of how the program operated and whom it targeted -- evidence that the Justice Department argued can't be made public -- the plaintiffs have no chance of proving the essential elements of their case, the government said.

Those elements are:

-- That President Bush exceeded his legal authority by authorizing wiretaps and e-mail interception without a warrant;

-- That innocent Americans not in contact with al Qaeda or affiliated groups had their calls or messages intercepted;

-- That AT&T participated in the program;

-- And that any participation by AT&T lacked authorization from the government. The Justice Department endorsed AT&T's argument that the plaintiffs must prove that the company failed to obtain written approval from top federal officials.

The administration asked Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to hear its dismissal motion June 21, the day Walker is scheduled to consider the Electronic Frontier Foundation's request for an injunction that would prohibit AT&T from any further cooperation in the surveillance program. Bush acknowledged in December that he had authorized the National Security Agency to intercept phone calls and e-mails between U.S. residents and terror suspects abroad without the court approval required by a 1978 federal law.

The alleged role of telecommunications companies gained new prominence last week when USA Today reported that the National Security Agency had paid AT&T, Verizon and Bell South for the telephone records of tens of millions of Americans. The government's goal reportedly was to find calling patterns that could indicate communications with terrorists. (BellSouth later said a "thorough review" had found no indication that it had given such records to the NSA.)

The government's dismissal motion in the San Francisco case against AT&T relies on the "state secrets" privilege that the Supreme Court recognized in a 1953 ruling allowing the government to keep military secrets out of court. Lower courts, including the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, have ruled that a lawsuit must be dismissed if it can't be litigated without the risk of exposing military secrets.

A court's consideration of the Electronic Frontier Foundation suit "would require confirmation or denial of the existence, scope and potential targets of alleged intelligence activities, as well as AT&T's alleged involvement," information that cannot be revealed "without causing exceptionally grave danger to the national security," government lawyers said.

Their brief repeatedly referred to arguments that were filed under seal, along with the sealed declarations of Negroponte and Alexander.

Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the foundation, said Monday that it would be difficult for its attorneys to contest government arguments they hadn't been allowed to see. But he said the factual claims in the lawsuit have already been widely reported in the press, and to some extent conceded by the government, without harming national security.

"We're seeking to protect national security by protecting millions of Americans from a government that is colluding with telecommunications companies in spying on their phone and Internet communications," Bankston said.

He also said the plaintiffs were not arguing that the government had monitored particular calls or messages, only that their phone and Internet records had been turned over to the government illegally, without a warrant or suspicion of wrongdoing. That should be enough to allow them to sue, Bankston said, unless AT&T produces evidence of valid authorization by the government.

The plaintiffs are four AT&T customers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is proposing that the case become a class action on behalf of all affected customers.

Ann Beeson, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said she anticipates a similar government dismissal motion Friday in the ACLU's suit on behalf of private citizens who say they have reason to believe their calls and messages have been or will be monitored. That suit, filed in a Michigan federal court, seeks to halt the federal surveillance program.

"There are no secrets here," Beeson said. "All the facts that are needed to decide the case are known and conceded: that the government wiretapped without a warrant and that it did so on U.S. soil."

Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.shns.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May 17, 2006

EFF Can Use Critical AT&T Documents in Surveillance Lawsuit

Evidence For Illegal Spying Case Will Remain Under Seal for Now

San Francisco - A federal judge in San Francisco ruled today that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) can use critical evidence in its class-action lawsuit against AT&T. However, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said the evidence -- three documents that AT&T alleges are proprietary and contain the company's trade secrets -- will be kept under seal for now.

EFF's suit accuses AT&T of illegally handing over its customers' telephone and Internet records and communications to the National Security Agency (NSA). The evidence at issue was filed as support for EFF's motion for a preliminary injunction against AT&T, seeking to stop the company's ongoing violations of the law and the privacy of its customers.

AT&T had requested that the evidence be returned to AT&T, and not used in the case. Wednesday, Judge Walker denied that request. Although the allegedly proprietary documents will remain under seal, Judge Walker instructed AT&T to work with EFF to narrowly redact any confidential material from EFF's brief and supporting declarations so that they can be made public as soon as possible.

"We're very pleased that the court refused AT&T's unreasonable demand that this critical evidence be returned to AT&T and struck from the record. And, although the evidence itself will stay under seal, the court has asked AT&T to work with us in providing public versions of our legal papers," said EFF Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Taken together with the court's refusal to close the courtroom as AT&T had requested, we think today was a real victory for the public's right to know, and for our ability to litigate this case."

The next hearing in this case -- about AT&T and the U.S. government's motions to dismiss the lawsuit -- is set for June 23.

For more on the AT&T lawsuit:



Rebecca Jeschke

Media Coordinator

Electronic Frontier Foundation


Posted at 03:56 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LCPL Chad Codwell, from Baltimore, Maryland,

with Charlie Company 1st Battalion 5th Marines,

carries an experimental urban combat skateboard

which is being used for maneuvering inside buildings

in order to detect tripwires and sniper fire.

This mission is in direct support of Urban Warrior '99.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...