Powered by TypePad

« Ned Lamont - "Why Do I Have To Say Anything?" | Main | On Vacation! »

August 11, 2006

Comments

windansea

NSA intercepts, SWIFT wire transfers

Our trolls all seem armed with their new talking points, "look...law enforcement is the way to handle terror"

but of course they are all on record whining about NSA & SWIFT and BUSH?HITLER stealing their freedoms

Semanticleo

Human intel. Duh.

The cell was infiltrated. Hello....

Semanticleo

my error. 'infiltrated' should have been
'whistleblown".

But whistleblowers are bad, right guys?

My guess is Al Q feels the same as you guys do about that subject.

Other Tom

Cleo, you're experiencing your coherence difficulties again. Infiltrating and intercepting phone calls are not mutually exclusive activities; they complement one another. As to whether "whistleblowers" are good guys or bad guys, most of us tend to answer the question based on whether the whistleblower is helping the murderers or hurting them. We think the former are bad guys and the latter are good guys. Is that too difficult for you?

Other Tom

Cleo, you're experiencing your coherence difficulties again. Infiltrating and intercepting phone calls are not mutually exclusive activities; they complement one another. As to whether "whistleblowers" are good guys or bad guys, most of us tend to answer the question based on whether the whistleblower is helping the murderers or hurting them. We think the former are bad guys and the latter are good guys. Is that too difficult for you?

SteveMG

whistleblowers are bad, right guys?

'Tis the greatest of all treason,
To do the right deed for the wrong reason

SMG

vnjagvet

OT:

Apparently our trolls have not noticed our consistency.

The Semantic one doesn't worry about such trivia. So long as he can undermine any Bush Administration policy, he is happy.

Pofarmer

Is anybody asking why some one "two or three generations removed" would still be influenced by "war torn Kashmir?

I wonder what the common thread of all these folks is, hmmmm?

Pofarmer

It should also probably be pointed out that without electronic intercepts, it's kind of hard to find the groups to infiltrate.

Pete

Leo has it right. Here is what CNN is reporting:

The original information about the plan came from the Muslim community in Britain, according to a British intelligence official.

Sue

I heard today that when they say infiltrated, they mean surveilled, to cover for an actual plant, and when they say infiltrated, they mean surveillance, to cover for the surveillance. For what it's worth...

Other Tom

"...while a knowledgeable American official says U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group's communications."

There you have it. The left may not like it, but there it is.

topsecretk9

Of course they won't like it, they've gone to such great lengths to protect terrorists right to plot privately - their way too invested.

boris

The original information ...

Such pathetic denial. A tip leads to an investigation and surveillance which uncovers the plan. Many participants are apprehended and presumably interrogated. There may be some discomfort involved.

Oh ,none of that stuff counts? Only the tip.

LOL what a maroon.

Cecil Turner

Best roundup I've seen is this WaPo article:

It all began with a tip: In the aftermath of the July 7, 2005, suicide bombings on London's transit system, British authorities received a call from a worried member of the Muslim community, reporting general suspicions about an acquaintance. [. . .]

By late 2005, the probe had expanded to involve several hundred investigators on three continents. They kept dozens of suspects under close surveillance for months, even as some of the plotters traveled between Britain and Pakistan to raise money, find recruits and refine their scheme, according to interviews with U.S. and European counterterrorism officials

Semanticleo

"Tis the greatest of all treason,
To do the right deed for the wrong reason"

The Agony and the Irony

windansea

Duh.

Posted by: Semanticleo

fixed :)

Other Tom

"The Agony and the Irony"

My Dear Cleo:

We're really going to have to work on that coherence problem, old girl. In the meantime, I've prepared a little tutorial that I think will be of assistance to you. You are to type the following legend out on a piece of paper, and carry it around in your purse for reference when difficult issues arise. It goes like this:

HELPS TERRORISTS=BAD GUYS
HURTS TERRORISTS=GOOD GUYS

I think the best way to ensure that you are able to assimilate this bit of news is by springing random pop tests on you. When you fail, you will be required to make a modest contribution to our favorite charity, the Admiral Roy L. Hoffman Foundation.

(I realize that the very mention of that august foundation gives you a sinking feeling in the pit of your stomach, a sensation of looseness in your bowels. But such measures are needed here).

SunnyDay

Oh please, not another day of trolls. sigh.

Semanticleo

HELPS TERRORISTS=BAD GUYS

Tommy Boy;

Did you ever get those brake pads sold to
save your dad's floundering company?

Good job. Now let's see if you can
comprehend your facilitation of the funding, inspiration and support of an
emerging bumper-crop of youtful recruits to the terrorist ranks by your continuing support for the insanely stupid invasion, and subsequent clusterfuck, Iraq?

Does that make most of the locals here, bad guys? Or could it be your illustration, like your critical thinking, is a bit simplistic?

PeterUK

Septic,
You really are going to have to come to terms with your negative attitude,this has probably prevented several thousand innocent people from being killed,and no dear,it isn't only Republicans who fly.
Keep thsi up and you are going to end up on a watch list somewhere,you wouldn't want to have a full cavity search every time you flew,now would you...would you?

topsecretk9

Via the corner

Re: Intelligence Leakers [Michael Rubin]
But Kathryn, intelligence leakers have a higher purpose than fighting terror. Note this excerpt from the American Prospect:

The fact that the agency was leaking isn’t denied by some. “Of course they were leaking,” says Pat Lang. “They [CIA officers] told me about it at the time. They thought it was funny. They’d say things like, ‘This last thing that came out, surely people will pay attention to that. They won’t re-elect this man.’”

Some of the intelligence leakers’ greatest defenders are so-called intelligence and national security correspondents. If they treat the intelligence leakers too skeptically, they risk having their sources dry up. Employees of intelligence agencies, of course, know they can use such overly ambitious reporters. Whether authorized by higher-ups or unauthorized, such "leaks" also constitute information ops on U.S. soil.

What I’ve always found amusing is that some of these beat reporters come to rely on sources who stopped working in the community years before. Two possibilities exist here: (1) The intelligence community is a sieve; or (2) the former intelligence analysts are lying about their contacts.
------------------------------------------------

Pat Lang is part of the brain-trust at Larry Johnson's blog. I had not seen that quote, the arrogance is stunning...They thought it was funny. They’d say things like, ‘This last thing that came out, surely people will pay attention to that. They won’t re-elect this man.’”...funny! And of course their arrogant belief that one more leak will do the job


Of course Rubin makes the point that these retired Intel heros of the left could just be totally full of puss with regards to their inside contacts, just lying through their teeth to please their dopey followers...but if not, remember NSA's listening program "Echelon" started under Clinton, and when it aired on 60 minutes who came out and openly defended the program under Clinton?, Republican congressman Porter Goss. and no cries of despair at the loss of civil rights by the left.

Not a shock, but still sick to think that the leaking of programs that work, were in existence under Clinton - so-to-speak - are being leaked as knee slapping "this is gonna get Bush" antics. Sigh.

PeterUK

"emerging bumper-crop of youtful recruits to the terrorist ranks by your continuing support for the insanely stupid invasion, and subsequent clusterfuck, Iraq?"

Here we come to the nub Septicleo,these young men were born in Britain of Pakistani-Kashmiri extraction,they are not Arabs,they are not of the same race,the language is different and Iraq and Pakistan are very far apart.
So come along little Septic,tell us why they are recruits for terror.

Semanticleo

you are going to end up on a watch list somewhere,you wouldn't want to have a full cavity search every time you flew,now would you...would you?

I'll take that as a threat since your identity is unknown to me (as you have taken steps to
hide your identity)and will take the steps which seem necessary at this point.

verner

Be glad Sunny Day. Cleo gives us an inside look into the nutcase 30% of our population that makes up the Democrat base. Not a pretty sight is it? Rather empty, childish and inane--and totally without a sense of history.

Cleo thinks that if we tax the holy sht out of the >$100K a year rich (as it 50-75% isn't enough already!), nationalize health care and the oil companies, slash the military, give America's poor 30K a year to squander in any way they please, take away everybody's SUVs and make them take the bus--hey, we'll have world peace! It's all our fault anyway--we're so greeeedy. The UN can handle the islamic extremists.

Yeah, uh huh.


I'm glad to get my daily dose, because, since I'm blessed to live in the heartland, I don't even know anyone who will admit to being a democrat anymore. It makes me remember that we're in actuality fighting a two front war.

Now Cleo's panties are in a knot because we have 100% proof that the NSA programs work, as is evidenced by the fact that 3,000 of our fellow citizens and UK friends will not be fish food on the bottom of the Atlantic on August 16. It's a day for rejoicing! Unless you're a democrat. They are only happy when the price of oil shoots up and American soldiers are killed in Iraq.

PeterUK

Septic,
Everybody is being watched,there are nut cases using the same rhetoric as you,of course you are drawing attention to yourself.Not a threat dear,just a fact of life,a word to the wise,don't you know there is a war on?

PeterUK

Anyway Septic,
You seemed to have dodged my question

Pete

Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance?

The debate on NSA was not about whether surveillance is a useful tool (it is). The debate was whether the courts should be part of the process and provide some checks and balances to unchecked power.

SteveMG

Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance

And if a warrant was turned down?

Nice to play "what if" games from the comfort of one's office or home.

Unfortunately, in a war one doesn't have that luxury.

But, of course, we wouldn't be in this mess if it weren't for Bush and the neocons. And anyway, if the plot had succeeded, Bush would be to blame.

Nice little game you folks on the Left have rigged up. You never lose.

SMG

BlaBlaBla

"I'm glad to get my daily dose, because, since I'm blessed to live in the heartland, I don't even know anyone who will admit to being a democrat anymore."

Must be paradise, this heartland that you speak of... :)

PeterUK

SteveMG,
Do you know what is missing from the LL posters here,common humanity,ordinary human decency, any moral compass,everything is a catch Bush game.
No rejoicing that several thousand lives have been saved,I can't really find any difference between the mindset of these fools and those who would have perpetarted this hideous crime,it is only one of degree.
Political theatre for the morally retarded.

boris

The debate was whether the courts should be part of the process and provide some checks and balances to unchecked power

What unchecked power is that? Wire tapping any old international communication they want? Oh the humanity !!!

The NSA program wasn't a story because "it could have been done another way". What riles up the left is "evil Republicans are listening to our phone calls".

verner

"Must be paradise, this heartland that you speak of... :)"

Well, I watched two deer and a fawn in my back yard this AM. Lovely, as long as they don't eat my flowers.

It gets a little too quite at times, but considering all the idiots running around in America's major urban centers--that's not such a bad thing. Besides, that's what cheap SW airlines tickets are for.

SteveMG

common humanity,ordinary human decency, any moral compass,everything is a catch Bush game.

And ideas. Especially ideas.

I don't mind too much the hatred of and attacks on Bush. Hell, the Right went after Clinton in much the same way. Anyway, America has a deep history of attacking her presidents anyway (Lincoln and Jefferson would likely welcome the attacks that Bush has received).

It's just the incessant complaints and finger-pointing with no alternatives.

Okay, if they want to say Bush is a monkey chimp Hitler Nazi idiot. Fine.

You want to fix the problems. What will you do?

My guess is that they are convinced that if we just replace Bush, most of these problems will just vanish. Our allies will come aboard, the UN will agree to send in forces, radical Islam will wither away and we'll all have free healthcare, free housing and free chocolate cake.

Nice little world they've created. But it's distinctly at odds with the real one.

SMG

Pofarmer

"Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance?"

How do you it wasn't? But, anyway, who has jurisdiction over terrorist calls to and from Pakistan?

lurker

"

Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance?

The debate on NSA was not about whether surveillance is a useful tool (it is). The debate was whether the courts should be part of the process and provide some checks and balances to unchecked power."

What unchecked power? The NSA terrorist surveillance program, as currently defined, has been that way since 1952. Nothing's changed since then. There are NO unchecked power. You don't understand the subtle differences.

lurker

Britain plot connected with AQ

verner

I disagree with your assesment a bit SMG. People hated Clinton because they could not believe that a a)rapist b) liar c) sociopath who got a blowjob from a twentysomething intern in OUR oval office should remain president. As far as his politics goes, though he was a complete idiot on foreign policy and allowed everything to go to pieces, he did very little to upset conservatives on the domestic side (case in point, welfare reform.) He was a poll driven animal who would do anything to remain popular. He never took any tough positions.

The hatred for Bush is something deeper. They not only hate Bush, they hate the people who voted for him, what they believe in, and what they stand for.

PeterUK

Steve,
"Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance?

The debate on NSA was not about whether surveillance is a useful tool (it is). The debate was whether the courts should be part of the process and provide some checks and balances to unchecked power".

So judges are to have the power to say who lives and who dies? As long as the law is obeyed,that is some unfettered power.

Laddy

Is it just me or is anyone else pissed off that so much information is forthcoming about how these dickweeds were taken down? Why is it, we give away every single tactical advantage we have in this war?

PeterUK

Laddy,
"After the two people returned to Britain, they received a wire transfer of money from Pakistan, the officials said."

The New York Times blew this one.

lurker

UN Draft Resolution

I doubt that the Hezzies will agree to it.

boris

Hell, the Right went after Clinton in much the same way.

With verner on this. Most of what happened to BJ he brought on himself. Most of the outrage was transferred to Repubs because it was the left's own malarky that brought him down. They set it all up to bring down Packwood, Clarence Thomas and others on the right but BJ got tangled in THEIR trap.

So rather than blame their own and themselves, they conjured up the vast right wing conspiracy.

BJ was despicable as a president, but would have been a fairly typical sax player for a jazz band. Nobody "hated" him for what he was.

Imagine instead of BJ, Dan Quayle had been prez after GHW and was caught having an affair with an intern, sued for harassing Paula, known to have mashed Kathleen and had her cat disappeared, (not to mention Juanita). Impeached and removed by a Democrat congress? Ya think?

Cecil Turner

Does anyone think that in the presence of a tip a court would not have approved surveillance?

Well, "general suspicions about an acquaintance" certainly wouldn't appear to qualify as the FISA requirement for a court order, which is:

    probable cause to believe that—
  • (A) the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power

boris

Impeached and removed by a Democrat congress? Ya Think?

Point is ...

The left hated Quayle MORE than the right hated BJ.

And how much more do they hate GW than DQ ???

lurker

UN Human Rights Panel slams Israel but ignores Hezbollah.

NSA has never been required to submit a warrant to FISA because as AJStrata says NSA is a military intelligence program. Military intelligence program is NOT part of FISA. One FISA judge said that she would never approve any warrants submitted by NSA. At least four FISA judges reviewed the NSA surveillance program and deemed it to be very legal and successful.

Funny how quiet Arlen Specter has been on this topic plus his second bill to slam Bush over his signatory process, which had absolutely nothing to do with 750 bills but certain parts of them.

lurker

Glenn Reynolds' thoughts on NYT leakers.

lurker

Hizbullah and Hizb-ut-Tahrir Meet, Discuss Alliance

lurker

Medved Sure sounds alot like cleown, repete-neg pete, Lamont, Hamsher, and the leftwingers.

So this is exactly what Conyers wants to impeach Bush for? For preventing the mass murder on those planes from happening?

SteveMG

Verner:
People hated Clinton because they could not believe that a a)rapist b) liar c) s

I agree that the hatred of Clinton was a hatred of Clinton qua Clinton while the hatred of Bush is both a dislike of him as a person but also extends to what he personifies or represents to his opponents (e.g., "Bushco" or "Bush and the neocons" or "Bush and the fundamentalists").

But we'd have to acknowledge that some on the Right went way over the top with their promotion of crazy conspiracies involving all types of nefarious activities. Drug running, murders, et cetera.

But your main point applies: there's a qualitatively different type of dislike of Bush over that of Clinton.

SMG

lurker

Rick Lowry's article:

One percent world has come in spite of what cleown, repete-neg pete says.

lurker

Actually, it was more of my lack of trust in Clinton - over my hatred over him, if I had any hatred over him. I never trusted Clinton since day 1. I can't stand the thought of watching him flying Air Force 1 from WDC to NYC and walk off that plane for his final speech on his final day.

What a waste of money.

maryrose

People hated Clinton because not only was he morally bankrupt but he was a proven liar as well. In addition he ruined other people's lives; Paula jones, Monica Lewinsky, Juannita Brodderick, Kathleen Willey Jennifer Flowers by lying about his activities. The ultimate scumbag. Happy to say I never voted for him. His wife is more of the same and lacks his ability to charm.

maryrose

Lurker:
After I saw bill and Hil on 60 minutes that first time I never trusted the gutless cheat.

SunnyDay

verner,

I stopped reading for a while. ;)

I understand them, hear from them all day long. I run a message board about consumer issues, and have members there who insist on trying to do their political "recuiting" on my board. We made a rule that the board would be neutral on politics, since it was causing really serious hijacking of threads about totally unrelated subjects.

So, since I enforce the rules, both sides accuse me of bias. :(

To divert the over enthusiastic politics fans, I created a board strictly for discussing politics. I got my fill of repeating the same arguments over and over as if the leftistas thought I had never heard their POV. It's impossible to have a debate. It's the same thing over and over. If it doesn't fit they must omit. The intellectual dishonesty is astounding, but mainly, after weeks of it, it just got boring.

When I found this site, I thoroughly enjoyed reading the in depth debates, discussions, analysis, and related reading. Everyone here is smarter than me, really. But - I enjoy it so much I sometimes neglect my own site, haha.

Then the trolls show up and I am reliving my nightmare.

I try to stay up on other points of view, I read the blogs and discussions - I even drop into DU and KOS to see what they're saying. I just can't take it in heavy doses. Lately, here, it has taken over. The fascinating analysis and discussion has stopped and everyone is arguing with the trolls who are presenting the same TP's they were presenting 6 months ago.

Sooooo tedious, except for the occasional hilarious poke in the eye.

So, maybe if y'all could be funnier?

My analysis - they come here because they need an audience. ;) Can't get their own, so they take over a site that has lots of traffic.

Sara (The Squiggler)

The head of British homeland security said that the group had on the ground surviellance incuding a mole AND that over the course of months their financial records were tracked and traced a la Swift. How hard is that to understand.

lurker

Not hard to understand, sara.

Rick Ballard

"Can't get their own, so they take over a site that has lots of traffic."

Yep. Thread lice. It's hard to keep from scratching, though. They also drive out the rational opposition who do not care to be associated with them (as well as the occasional person who brings in an oblique view).

Thread lice outbreaks are particularly severe in the run up to an election so we'll be seeing more of them until Nov. 8. After that it will just be spotty pop ups of the "stole all those elections" type for a while.

Election season does bring out the lower quality thread lice, as you've noted. The nice part is that they are much easier to mock.

SunnyDay

Rick - now that's funny!!

If I have to put up with them, please keep up the witticisms!!

Other Tom

Cleo old girl--

Don't think we've seen you quite this drunk this early; I assume the stress is getting to you.

"...facilitation of the funding, inspiration and support of an
emerging bumper-crop of youtful recruits to the terrorist ranks..."

To the extent anyone can untangle your painfully awkward syntax (you'll be embarrassed about it when you sober up), it appears that you are saying something like this: In a democratic society, when the elected government embarks on a foreign policy with which some citizens disagree, we must expect that those citizens will express their disagreement through mass murder. And when they do so, we must conclude that it is we, not they, who are in the wrong.

Riddle me this, sweetheart: before Iraq, what was it that "facilitated the funding, education and support" of the "bumper crop" of murderers who seized the US embassy in Tehran; bombed the US embassy in Beirut; bombed the US Marine contingent of a UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon; blew up two US embassies in Africa; blew up the Khobar Towers; attacked USS Cole; attempted to assassinate a former US president; bombed hundreds of innocent civilians in Bali; bombed Philippine Airlines flight 434; plotted to bomb a series of trans-Pacific flights originating in the Philippines; plotted the bombing of targets in Jordan at the milennium; hijacked India Airlines flight 814; and etc.? What did you blame before Iraq? Whom did you blame before George Bush?

SunnyDay

I cannot stand Kofi Annan!!!!!!!!!

lurker

I can't stand Kofi either. Damn him til his term is up.

He says help Lebanon but notta thing about helping Israel.

PeterUK

Sunny Day,
Kofi Annan,is that some new kind of Starbucks beverage?

lurker

A new Starbucks beverage that's doomed to bottom out? I, for one, won't order it.

"Welcoming the efforts of the Lebanese Prime Minister and the commitment of the government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a UN force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from Southern Lebanon,"

This is part of the UNSCR that raised one flag...

At the consent of the government of Lebanon.

Oh, heck, Saniora approved the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers!

So; therefore, Lebanon will consent to Hezbollah in having its arms.

cnj

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_go_ot/terror_explosives_detection_4>Bush staff wanted bomb-detect cash moved

A neutral headline should have started with "HS staff" instead of Bush.

Yet another example of AP's BDS.

Other Tom

Sorry, Cleo--I left out the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, and of course September 11, 2001. There being no Iraq war at the time, surely we must have committed some other sin, right? What was it?

PeterUK

You might all like to read a refutation of the fallacy that we are responsible for the attacks upon us.
As Oliver Kamm says,we will get attacked no matter what we do,so we may as well do the right thing.

Tollhouse

I'm pretty sure FISA has absolutely nothing to do with collecting intel on entirely foreign nationals. It's a been a while though since.

Tollhouse

A while since I was in the military doing SIGINT work.

I don't claim to be any sort of intel expert, I was simply a grunt collecting raw SIGINT.

Syl

Seems to me that Kofi and the U.N. just gave permission to Iran to hijack lebanon.

SteveMG

FISA has absolutely nothing to do with collecting intel on entirely foreign nationals.

The Washington Post today (Link):

"The probe was so large that it resulted in a notable surge in warrants for searches and surveillance from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret panel that oversees most clandestine surveillance, officials said.

The warrants included monitoring telephone calls that some of the London suspects made into the United States, two sources said."

SunnyDay

PUK -
we will get attacked no matter what we do,so we may as well do the right thing.
*******

That's it.

They want to kill us, and they want to die. There is no middle ground, no negotiating point, nothing. They want us all dead. Those who think otherwise are fooling themselves.

Call it "fostering fear" if you want to, it's the way it is. Lefties are not going to convince many ordinary citizens differently. Apparently their new TP is that Bush is using this to create more fear.

Whatever. They still want to kill us.


I don't do Starbucks. haha!! Really they should name on of their specials Kofi.

I'm a conniseur of coffee. I grind my own, brew it myself. No one else can make it to suit me. :)

This new resolution is a joke. It must be just a line we put there so that when the hezzies cross it, nobody has any excuse for stopping Israel again. I did notice it seemed to leave room for Israel to defend. Maybe it gives us a way to help them - like some new tanks that can stand up to those anti-tank missiles.


Syl

re the NSA intercepts. There is NO permission necessary and the courts DO NOT get involved when the intercepts are between foreign nationals. The Executive branch has ABSOLUTE authority over that.

Now if one of those foreign nationals calls someone inside the U.S. the NSA grabs the information immediately, without court order, and THAT is what the left is screaming about.

And that screaming is what makes them idiots.

Rick Ballard

"The warrants included monitoring telephone calls that some of the London suspects made into the United States, two sources said."

Dearborn, MI or someplace in NJ would be my bet. There are small sects of fanatical Quaker fanatics in both places. That, and large populations of muslims. It's propably one or the other.

Syl

And if the NSA is going to CONTINUE to surveill those called inside the U.S. THEN they get a court order.

It's just that initial intercept that is so hairy for the Left.

But we need that initial intercept in order to KNOW who to get a court order for.

Other Tom

I went to the piece to which PeterUK referred, and enjoyed it so much I thought an excerpt was called for, as follows:

"As a rule, there is no purpose in gratuitous provocation in foreign policy, but the provocation offered to Islamist extremism is inevitable whatever we do, and something of which we should be proud. Why deny that the West’s role in allowing an independent Timor (which bin Laden counts as part of the Islamic world) to emerge from Indonesian tutelage has inflamed Islamist terror? Or that our enemies are incensed by our promotion of women’s emancipation and legal rights for homosexuals?

"Even a purely isolationist policy such as that favoured by obscurantist conservatives such as Pat Buchanan or the Little Englander tendency in British politics (on the Left as much as the anti-European and anti-American Right) would provide no escape. The negligence and amorality of European governments in failing to counter Serb aggression against Bosnia in the early 1990s was not lost on bin Laden, who took this episode as one further instance of the West’s criminal and bellicose anti-Muslim policies. Whatever we do, or fail to do, we will be a target, and so will others for whom – if liberal or socialist internationalism is to mean anything – we have a responsibility. We might as well, therefore, do the right thing."

Tollhouse

"The warrants included monitoring telephone calls that some of the London suspects made into the United States, two sources said."

Thanks, I haven't gotten around to reading that yet.

PeterUK

SunnyDay,
I too like a brew in the morning,mix until the spoon stands up in it,when the spoon disolves it is ready.

Extraneus

Whew! At least they got warrants. I was really worried about that.

lurker

They or FBI? Isn't it FBI's responsibility to monitor those domestic calls?

Tollhouse

The FBI has zero capability to do that.

sbw

syl: Seems to me that Kofi and the U.N. just gave permission to Iran to hijack lebanon.

Captain's Quarters disagrees. Calls it mixed and points to the positives.

In fact, the resolution requires Hezbollah to cease all hostilities, while it only requires Israel to cease offensive operations. Until Hezbollah stops launching rockets at Israel, the IDF has a free hand to take responsive action to stop them and take out their launch capabilities. In effect, it says that Israel can continue the fight until Hezbollah stops attacking them.

lurker

I meant does FBI have the responsibility to submit warrants to FISA once NSA turns over the warrants to FBI?

Other Tom

I'm already getting troubled by US guys indulging their irrestible impulse to tell the press about how they went about the operation following a success. In this they would be well advised to emulate their Brit counterparts, who not only do not leak (Offical Secrets Act, don't you know), but they don't feel compelled to boast about what they've done and how they've done it.

PeterUK

Other Tom,
We also do not have the equivalent of the New York Times,the Home Office calls editors in and tells them it is not in the national interest to publish.The editors being thoughtful chaps,mindful of their OBEs and Knighthoods, even elevation to the Peerage,tend to see the sense of this.

topsecretk9

--They or FBI? Isn't it FBI's responsibility to monitor those domestic calls?--

AJ wrote something that suggested NSA initially turned them over to CIA -- and the new program was instituted to bypass that -- because maybe they weren't then sharing with the FBI (wall like)...or some such. Every off here, but I'll see if I can find the link if you are interested or if I missed the point tell me.

topsecretk9

oops...I could be very off here (is what I meant)

Specter

But wait....didn't one of our top law enforcement prosecutors - what was his name? - He was given the same powers as the AG without Senate "advice and consent" - oh yea - Fitzy (LOL - what ever happened to him?) - didn't he say that we supervise government doings by reading the papers? To heck with oversight when you've got the NYT, LAT, and WaPo. LOL

lurker

TSK9, thought the Gorelick Wall prevented NSA from turning over their findings to whomever - CIA or FBI.

And either or both CIA and FBI were complaining that they're getting far more of those turned-over findings from NSA to handle now that the Gorelick Wall was torn down. Increased workload.

Hence, the NYT leaks.

Pete

There was a surge of warrants in the FISA court. You would have thought from some of the earlier discussion (and even the discussion here where someone said that the court could deny the warrant) that this would make impossible a bust like this. This was not the case. A court should be an essential part of the process.

This is increasingly looking like the result of good old fashioned intelligence gathering, and not the result of "data mining" hundreds of billions of telephone records on which NSA has spent billions of dollars.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/05/telephone_records_are_just_the.html

Remember when Bush said that democracy was the solution to terrorism. And yet the suspects are citizens of a democratic country.

lurker

It was FBI that was doing the complaining...

Syl

sbw

All Hezbollah has to do is stop firing rockets. Then Israel can do no more and Hezbollah rearms to fight another day.

No teeth to the forces going in to south Lebanon. Embargo against re-arming Hezbollah, but nothing to enforce that embargo.

Sounds just like the status quo ante to me.

Soylent Red

TS9:

Could it be that the new program turns information over to the FBI rather than the CIA because there was already awareness of CIA leakiness when it was instituted?

Just a guess on my part though...

I'm just laying low here after the horror I inadvertantly wrought on the last thread...

lurker

Only for domestic surveillance, repete-neg pete, that NSA hands over to FBI. Then FBI investigates and submits any warrants that they think necessary to FISA.

Now AJStrata begins to wonder if CIA played an interference by preventing NSA from handing over to FBI:

Did The CIA Block NSA Leads To FISA?

But he hasn't talked about it since.

lurker

More Being caught in a legal surveillance doesn’t require a warTerrorist Surveillance Exposure By USA Today

"It seems our defunct news media cannot resist the need to go blabbing to everyone and anyone details about the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program which the NY Times/Risen inaccurately exposed last December. Recall they originally claimed the NSA was bypassing FISA and spying on Americans, when it turns out the NSA was not bypassing FISA nor spying on Americans. The NSA was monitoring terrorists overseas and they were passing leads they detected concerning possible terrorist cells here in the US who were (at that time) naive enough to contact their overseas masters for direction (and probably money transfers). Being caught in a legal surveillance doesn’t require a warrant for those communications to the target of the surveillance.

The other item the NY Times and Risen screwed up was the idea that the FISA court was being bypassed. It turns out from statements we have seen by FISA Court Judges that just the opposite happened, FISA was getting these leads from the FBI who had been alerted by the NSA from their overseas surveillance that people in the US were in contact with known terrorists overseas. The FISA Court judges complained this ‘tainted’ their process because convention was, prior to 9-11, not to use military leads as part of case for probable cause. Quaint, but stupid. This is why the 9-11 highjackers were safe once they reached our shores. No matter what intel had been gathered when the highjackers were in Germany and at the final planning meeting in Indonesia, once they hit San Diego all of that intel became invisible to the eyes of the court. The FBI had to rebuild any surveillance case from scratch, starting with their actions here in the US. That is why we couldn’t use our leads to stop 9-11."

Specter

Nice try Pete. Two different programs you are speaking of - but I know - everything gets so confusing for you huh? The references in this thread were NOT about the data-mining operation - (BTW - remember that USA Today who broke that story had to correct it because they had t he facts wrong) - but about TSP. What don't you get about that? Not rocket science here. Gonzalez has said all along that NSA uses both FISC warrants and also has situations where they do not use FISC. Please stop trying to conflate the two programs together.....

BTW - Echelon as expanded by the Clinton Admin was the biggest data mining program ever....

lurker

US law (I think Cecil Turner provided the link) clearly defines what is a foreigner and his or her contact, that NSA may monitor. This contact can be inside USA, which falls under the responsibility of NSA military intelligence. This has absolutely nothing to do with our US citizen civil rights.

Soylent Red

And yet the suspects are citizens of a democratic country.

So were Johnny Jihad Lindh and all those Canadians.

So I guess what we can learn is:

a. Nuts come in all nationalities

b. Nuts who want to kill people all have a specific commonality...

lurker

Didn't someone write that McVeigh's friend (what was his name?) made a trip to meet with one of the Al Qaeda operatives before the OKC bombing?

Other Tom

Pete--It's pretty clear to me, if not to you, that what Bush has been saying is that democratic reform is the key to ending state sponsorship of terrorism. No one would contend that people living in democracies will not resort to terrorism; look at Timothy McVeigh. The great difference is that in the UK and in the US, as opposed to Syria, Iran and formerly Afghanistan, the democratic governments tracked down and nabbed the terrorists, rather than funding and training them.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame