Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » "Bush-Cheney began illegal NSA spying before 9/11, says telcom CEO"

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: "Bush-Cheney began illegal NSA spying before 9/11, says telcom CEO"
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Whoa, wait, what?!?

I thought that we only started this in reaction to 9/11. Don't let a good crisis go to waste or something I guess.

digitaljournal.com

quote:
+
Contradicting a statement by ex-vice president Dick Cheney on Sunday that warrantless domestic surveillance might have prevented 9/11, 2007 court records indicate that the Bush-Cheney administration began such surveillance at least 7 months prior to 9/11.
The Bush administration bypassed the law requiring such actions to be authorized by FISA court warrants, the body set up in the Seventies to oversee Executive Branch spying powers after abuses by Richard Nixon. Former QWest CEO John Nacchios said that at a meeting with the NSA on February 27, 2001, he and other QWest officials declined to participate. AT&T, Verizon and Bellsouth all agreed to shunt customer communications records to an NSA database.

quote:
Other sources corroborate the former CEO's allegations, which were made in the course of his legal defense against insider trading charges. Both Slate.com and National Journal have published reports in which sources are quoted which support the former CEO's claims.


Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's behind the times. This thing is OK now and will be as long as a Democrat is in the white house. It'll be a problem again should a Republican take the presidency and become illegal only should a conservative actually do it.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
This thing is OK now and will be as long as a Democrat is in the white house.
Is it okay with you, G3?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"That's behind the times. This thing is OK now and will be as long as a Democrat is in the white house. It'll be a problem again should a Republican take the presidency and become illegal only should a conservative actually do it."

Remarkable post.

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is there anyone outside of the government who's actually arguing this is okay?

The most positive reaction I'm seeing from civilians is resigned acceptance.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NobleHunter:
Is there anyone outside of the government who's actually arguing this is okay?

The most positive reaction I'm seeing from civilians is resigned acceptance.

I see a lot of BOHICA from people, however that usually coincides with liberals who don't want to admit they are hypocrites because they only care when their political opponents are doing this.

Then again, there may be some people who legitimately believe this kind of thing is inevitable, however they'd be wrong. It's very easy to fix, just cut off the government's funding. It's hard to build giant data centers and employ hundreds of thousands of contractors and software engineers when you have no money.

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
It's very easy to fix, just cut off the government's funding.
I submit that if you start to cut funding to the government, black ops programs, NSA programs, and military programs will be among the last things cut. If your goal is to reduce the amount of spying done by the government through funding reductions, you'll need to cut a lot of environmental regulations and education funding to get there first.

A better way would be to get rid of the Homeland Security Department, slash our Defense budget in half, and completely defund the NSA specifically.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NobleHunter:
Is there anyone outside of the government who's actually arguing this is okay?

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says it's ok - but that's the state. Looking at the article, it looks like we're talking about the fact that a call was made, the phone number calling and being called and duration. Just the phone call meta-data. I think, not 100% sure though, that this has actually been considered legal for quite some time since that information is collected, with your knowledge, by a third party (the phone company). They can do whatever they want with it - including selling it or giving it to the government. Similar to credit card purchases being sold to marketing companies - government can buy those too, and they do. Since it's transmitted to a 3rd party, there is no expectation of privacy and it has been that was for as long as I can remember IIRC.

quote:
Originally posted by NobleHunter:
The most positive reaction I'm seeing from civilians is resigned acceptance.

What other choice is there?
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
What other choice is there?
Well, I'm told that the whole reason the Second Amendment exists is so we can start shooting mailmen in this situation. [Wink]
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TomD,

I'm pretty sure folks that think the 2A is for overthrowing tyranny will be a bit more strategic than any random governmental employee, and instead will likely target those in leadership/decision roles.

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah. The impression I get is that using arms against the government would involve shooting at government agents who also had guns and had been shown to be willing to use them to support a tyrannical government.

The joke about shooting the mailman was chuckleworthy the first time, if in poor taste. The twentieth time through, it just makes me roll my eyes.

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DarkJello
Member
Member # 6828

 - posted      Profile for DarkJello   Email DarkJello       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
The joke about shooting the mailman was chuckleworthy the first time, if in poor taste. The twentieth time through, it just makes me roll my eyes.

I did not realize it was a joke. Very poor taste. And repeating said statement compounds the matter.

I strongly disagree with any government official that believes these measure are needed/good/cool/wise. Smaller government FTW.

Posts: 520 | Registered: Jun 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grant
Member
Member # 1925

 - posted      Profile for Grant   Email Grant       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Well, I'm told that the whole reason the Second Amendment exists is so we can start shooting mailmen in this situation. [Wink]

Ehhh. I thought it was okay. Not hilarious but alright. What's not funny about shooting mailmen/women? But it was the first time I've heard it.
Posts: 3264 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good for you if you dislike all jokes about violence. Get over yourself if you just dislike violent jokes which are at the expense of your chosen politics.
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Given our modern society with the absurd "zero tolerance" situation and LEOs watching social media more, this is not funny. It's actually very offensive, and in full context the comment was obviously aimed at me who said poster has specifically accused of wanting to do this several times before. I am not amused.

[ July 16, 2013, 10:07 AM: Message edited by: Seneca ]

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1