On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:49:17 +0000, mukyuk wrote:
It bothers me so much that people are being misled by these things. If
businesses can have secure networks, so can terrorists. It's not that hard
to set up a secure network. If terrorists were that determined, they would
certainly go through the trouble. It's kind of rediculous actually.
Terrorist would not be chatting over the phone or sending e-mails. This is
just a ploy to spy on **YOU****.
Of course it's all about spying on us. It was reported years ago, before
the broader spying powers were even considered, that al qaeda was no
longer using phones in their communications.
===============================
WASHINGTON - National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell pulled the
curtain back on previously classified details of government surveillance and
of a secretive court whose recent rulings created new hurdles for the Bush
administration as it tries to prevent terrorism.
McConnell's comments were made in an interview with the El Paso Times last
week and posted as a transcript on the newspaper's web site Wednesday.
The revelations raised eyebrows for their frank discussion of previously
classified eavesdropping work conducted under the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act, known as FISA.
a.. McConnell confirmed for the first time that the private sector
assisted with President Bush's warrantless surveillance program. AT&T,
Verizon and other telecommunications companies are being sued for their
cooperation. "Now if you play out the suits at the value they're claimed, it
would bankrupt these companies," McConnell said, arguing that they deserve
immunity for their help.
No, they deserve to go belly up. They were in breach of contract with
their customers. Surely, a capitalist would understand about breach of
contract? (A very interesting area of law, I might add).
b.. He provided new details on court rulings handed down by the
11-member
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approves classified
eavesdropping operations and whose proceedings are almost always
entirely secret. McConnell said a ruling that went into effect May 31
required the government to get court warrants to monitor communications
between two foreigners if the conversation travels on a wire in the U.S.
network. Millions of calls each day do, because of the robust nature of
the U.S. systems.
Interesting. I wonder if other countries also have phone calls going
"through" them as conveniently? Which also begs the question - would
other such countries share any info gleaned from phone calls that pass
through their wires with, say, another country in which both parties live?
(I'm sure a few people know where I'm headed with this ...)
c.. McConnell said it takes 200 hours to assemble a FISA warrant on a
single telephone number. "We're going backwards," he said. "We couldn't
keep up."
They must be incompetent. It should not take that long to get a warrant,
period.
d.. Offering never-disclosed figures, McConnell also revealed that
fewer
than 100 people inside the United States are monitored under FISA
warrants. However, he said, thousands of people overseas are monitored.
Even as he shed new light on the classified operations, McConnell
asserted that the current debate in Congress about whether to update the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act will cost American lives because
of all the information it revealed to terrorists.
All those contractors working for the U.S. government, and this guy thinks
they don't already know everything they'd want to know? Wow, he's
delusional! I think the only people who are in the dark are We The People.
"Part of this is a classified world. The fact that we're doing it this
way means that some Americans are going to die," he said.
As opposed to, say, invading countries that don't pose any threat?
Official: FISA is a necessary tool
So ... why was Bush circumventing it?
McConnell was in El Paso, Texas, last week for a conference on border
security hosted by House Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas.
The spy chief joined Reyes for an interview with his local paper.
At the end of the interview, McConnell cautioned reporter Chris Roberts
that he should consider whether enemies of the U.S. could gain from the
information he just shared in the interview, Roberts said. McConnell
left it to the paper to decide what to publish.
Let's get this straight - the National Intelligence Director thinks anyone
is going to beleive he'd actually give information to a reporter and then
leave it up to the reporter to figure out if "enemies" could gain from the
information? Riiiiight.
Seriously, just more dark PR to keep Americans in fear. I should think
everyone not on life support would have caught on to this admin by now.
Woods
McConnell appeared days after Congress passed a temporary law to expand
the government's ability to monitor suspects in national security
investigations - terrorists, spies and others - without first seeking
court approval in certain cases. The highly contentious measure expires
in six months.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20396282/
.
