"Is the NSA spying on political opponents of the Bush Administration?"

[kentuck]

."...You did not answer the question."

A question asked of General Hayden as he left his press conference. Still no answer. Hmmm-mmm. What the hell is going on here??

[C_U_L8R]

1. Of course they are...

and since they are breaking the law by
conducting these illegal wiretaps... I put
the burden on them to demonstrate exactly
how they are NOT spying on Bush's enemies.

[natrat]

18. of course they are and somehow amurika will embrace this as patriotic

[Brundle_Fly]

34. yup

they are spying on pretty much everybody, and with the plausible deniability of homeland security, we'll never know.

it would be briiliant, if it wasnt so damned evil.

[shanti]

55. you can't prove a negative, it's impossible

n/t

[savemefromdumbya]

2. yes the junta is spying on us

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/politics/23spy.html?ei=5065&en=b8a73e937d46e97f&ex=1138597200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

[EVDebs]

26. All offshore now and 'sanitized'; use IRS and background 'checks'

Combine the IRS and background check abuse and you have TERROR

Total Surveillance
http://www.motherjones.com/interview/2005/12/albrecht.h ...

Couple this insidious RFID spychip technology with purposely erroneous background checks

Who is checking the background checkers?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p13s02-wmgn.html

They've offshored, outsourced, and privatized TIA to the Bahamas, via Ben H. Bell, IIIrd's company Global Information Group Ltd.

Now all they have to do is fire you for being 'of the wrong political party' and put false information in your background data...and voila ! You've just created the most insidious terror project in the US ever.

The Quaker group in FL with testimony the other day before Rep Conyers inquest is more than enough proof. Follow that up with the Raging Grannies being spied upon in CA awhile back...all the while a 6' tall Saudi with kidney problems requiring dialysis and meds can't have those products traced to his lair, while the underwear I buy from Wal-Mart is readily trackable along with my credit cards and post '96 automobile if enabled with GPS tracking !

The only logical conclusions are that the American public was the REAL target of all this Military Industrial Complex fearmongering, since it is very lucrative in the total picture. Besides, read this

""...Alan Paller, director of research at the Bethesda, Md.-based SANS Institute, said the California law is probably necessary because of the kinds of crime that are occurring. A group in Russia and Ukraine has been acquiring customer data, extorting money to prevent its release and then selling it anyway. Paller believes some companies are paying off the extortionists in an attempt to contain the damage.""

http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/privacy/story/0,10801,76721,00.html

The government actively encourages YOUR information to be outsourced overseas for the very reason it wants to access it. It needs 'plausible deniability' in order to gain access and it gets it readily.

[savemefromdumbya]

45. We our information returned to us!

it's been stolen

[in_cog_ni_to]

3. I say...EVERYONE in Congress has been wiretapped and blackmailed.

Everyone of them. ANYONE against them has been spied on.

[Lin]

7. yup & suddenly many unexplained things become clear (eom)

[madokie]

14. I think so too, the blackmail misadministration

:hi:

[Kansas Wyatt]

4. That is the question that needs to be repeated over and over again

Until they answer it. When they answer it, the press should demand proof to verify their claims. After all, that's what the FISA court was for, before they removed it.

[Ready4Change]

5. Either with them or against them. n/t

[kentuck]

6. The question was asked twice and no answer....

They have to keep asking until they lie again.

[speedoo]

8. Hayden's presentation was very disturbing.

In addition to ignoring the question referenced by the OP, this guy was clearly on a mission to advance the bu$h agenda. Just like the Joint Chief's Chairman, these guys have been ordered to work for the buSh political agenda.

His comments as to why the FISA court was sidestepped basically were "the AG said it was lawful".

[ROakes1019]

13. political campaign

Hayden is just part of catapulting the propoganda to justify Bush's illegal wire-tapping. They've called out all their minions to get as much TV coverage as they can on this. I thought Hayden was pathetic. He's sent out to justify the program but he can't answer legal questions because, as he says, he's not a lawyer. Then he says the NSA has no control over the legality of the situtation; that's the AG's job. So what does he have to contribute to the debate except propoganda?

[Marie26]

17. Isn't Bartlett out today doing the same thing?

Sounds like the WHIG propaganda machine is back in operation.

[Supersedeas]

30. the Justice Dept. has decided to have a Constitutional Monarchy

[EVDebs]

33. Rex 84, and the Executive Orders allowing for it, are all ready to go

[EVDebs]

35. The Executive Orders allowing for suspension of the Constutution

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2056463&mesg_id=2057986

all rubberstamped by Roberts and Alito while in the Reagan administration, either in house as with Roberts or in DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel to WH as with Alito.

Constitutionally 'suspending the Constitution', as with Ollie North's Rex 84, Operations Garden Plot and Cable Splicer, allows for arrest and detention of dissenters to unpopular wars domestically. Neat and clean work. Just too many people to arrest and detain, that's all. Over half the country....

[EVDebs]

36. Is Gen Hayden a member of the Knights of Malta by any chance ?

The original CIA cadre of Wm Donovan, Angleton, Colby, Casey, Dulles, and many more at the top of the agency food chain, were all Knights of Malta...with a specific agenda geared to the aristocracy and all with a supreme loyalty to the Catholic church's own agenda.

""Hayden told us that his family and his Catholic upbringing had instilled in him a strong sense of right and wrong. I came away from that briefing with my faith restored in Air Force flag officers, and a firm belief that here was a man with the innate courage to do the right thing...

Apparently, the White House over a year ago asked the New York Times not to publish the facts of NSA eavesdropping on American citizens. True to character, the Times complied and cooperated. But now that we know about it, the media, every member of Congress and every concerned American, should be asking "Is this Constitutional?" and "Is this legal?" The executive branch itself should be asking these questions as well. Further, the executive branch would do well to ask, in a business sense, "Is this worthwhile?" and "Is it cost effective?" and "Does it work to improve national security?" I'd like to think that, in addition to these questions, my old boss Michael Hayden is asking the very simple, straightforward, and ultimately the most courageous question. "Is it right?""
""

Violating the Constitution
by Karen Kwiatkowski
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Sunday 18 December 2005

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/121805X.shtml

[speedoo]

9. K&R n/t

[Marie26]

10. Does anyone think it's possible

that they're monitoring all domestic calls as well? It really wouldn't be that hard. They've already practically admitted that the NSA is monitoring all international calls & feeding them through its data-mining program. What's to prevent them from doing the same for domestic calls?

[Warren Stupidity]

27. That is my assumption.

They didn't need to break the law for anything else. They already had their NSA system snarfing all (and I mean all) international communications.

[shanti]

57. i know someone who is ex-military

and he SWEARS that his phone is being tapped. he had TS clearance too.

[sybylla]

59. I have a peace activist friend

who was a lead organizer in the chimps visit to her fair city in 2004 who was wiretapped. She went to the police and they confirmed it. When they pursued it through the Sheriffs department and sought to know who was doing it, it stopped and the investigation died a quick death.

Still don't know who it was, but now that this story has come out you can bet the chimps administration has moved to the top of her suspects.

[killbotfactory]

11. What's stopping them? nothing

So it's pretty safe to assume they are.

[Marie26]

16. Yep.

Especially since they created this as a secret program w/o letting any other branches of government know. So they truly was nothing stopping them. Sometimes I think people don't understand how broad this program is - they weren't "wiretapping" international calls from Al-Queda contacts, but monitoring all international calls. Similarly, if they have extended this to domestic calls, it wouldn't be just monitoring specific Congressmen or peace activists, but all of us.

[Glimmer of Hope]

12. Has a transcript been released?

[Marie26]

69. See Post #68. nt

[Ootah]

15. Even if they are not spying on political enemies

the idea that they might has a chilling effect. For example, I checked out Beliosi's book on how Bush and the supreme court stole the 2000 election. Does that trigger a response by a domestic spy watchdog and then is there a wiretap or intrusion into my email to look for dirt on me? I think it unlikely, but still, it is possible.... which in turn inhibits one from checking out books like that. Are we all being spied on here? Not likely.....but possible.....which has a chilling, inhibiting effect

[natrat]

20. bubba the love sponge went head to head with the FCC

and was given a full IRS audit the next year-these people are playing for keeps and have no respect for anything we hold dear,-our freedoms our public lands, our future---no this is very sophisticated organized crime

[Hugin]

19. Oh, but, according to Cokie Roberts on NPR this morning...

According to some *unnamed* polls... SPYING IS PRETTY MUCH OKAY WITH US!

Really.

Then I :rofl: when her title of "Senior News Analyst" was read.

Honestly, is there *anyone* who's sucked off of the government teat
more who holds the average American in as much contempt as Cokie?

She makes Rush look good.

[speedoo]

21. Cokie is a disgusting traitor.

I actually despise her, Matthews, and other self-identified "objective journalists" more than the RWers' like Rush. At least Rush and others like him don't pretend to be objective, IMO.

[Hugin]

24. I agree... I prefer my "objective" news to be "objective".

I'm of the opinion after hearing the spin spewed this morning
maybe a better title would be, "Senior Right-Wing Propagandist".

[EVDebs]

38. Let's ask her to report on Rex 84 and detention camps in America

and who would go to said camps if the Executive Orders allowing for rounding up dissenters in wartime are signed off on...Shall we ?

[Hubert Flottz]

23. I'm glad I don't have to spy on that sweat-hog!

You'd need a cast iron stomach to peek at that geek! Any fed who'd spy on her, would deserve to win the CGM.

[Hubert Flottz]

22. "Is the NSA spying on political opponents "

If they weren't, they could have gone the legal route and gotten warrents.

[EVDebs]

39. Or used the usual 'training op' loophole !

Or had the other US/UK intel treaty countries do it for us and slip info over the transom. wink wink nod nod.

[Joanne98]

25. of course they are

[Just Me]

28. If he answered, he'd be guilty of conspiring to commit a crime.

Of course, he's still guilty of obstructing justice 'cause he's concealing facts associated with that crime.

Where's the FBI? :shrug: Why aren't these criminals under arrest? :shrug: This is insane.

[EVDebs]

42. 'Future charges dems warn WH' posted the other day....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2056463

[Just Me]

51. If we had a solid FBI and upstanding AGs, arrests would have already,...

,...been underway. This is just so freakin' insane, ya' know? How can a confession to blantant violation of federal law (and violation of our Constitution), AFTER numerous abuses of power and the commission of fraud against this nation, be ignored,...be allowed,...be appeased? It's mind-boggling,...that such egregious federal crimes and crimes against the people of this nation are met with silence and inaction by those whose oathes are to protect us against such atrocious violations.

Incredible. This country has hit bottom.

[EVDebs]

52. Those agencies already infiltrated with ultraconservatives

Time Magazine Aug 4, 1997, shows in an article 'Kingdom Come' by D. Van Biema, page 52, that the FBI and CIA have Mormon recruitment programs; the agencies are already top heavy with Knights of Malta. The original CIA leadership of Donovan, Casey, Colby, Angleton, Dulles, etc etc , were all Knights of Malta, a very conservative Catholic organization biased to aristocracy.

The Little Guy doesn't stand a chance.

[Cats Against Frist]

65. I have always said to watch out for the Catholics

Some of the most patriarchal, fascist, anti-modern political philosophy that I've ever read comes from the Catholic right. Scary shit.

[Cats Against Frist]

64. I agree -- it's terrifying, isn't it?

I was just thinking how horrible it is to stand in front of all of this with open eyes, and attempt to complete the tasks of "normal living," knowing not just the crimes committed, but the philosophies and ideologies behind the Bush admin, the neocons, and their cronies. Surveillance doesn't just stop real crime, but is an effective tool for "keeping the people in line," -- it matches up perfectly with their groundless postmodern ideology of "we create reality," and their fascist roots. An important part of fascism is supremacy -- in the case of the Nazis, it was racial supremacy, in this case, it's cultural supremacy. It is not far-fetched, or tinfoil to believe that they will stop at nothing to create their ideal society.

[leveymg]

29. That the question is finally being asked is extraordinary

Two or three years ago, people would have looked at the questioner as some kind of paranoid Left-wing conspiracy theorist.

America has come a long way in a short time, and accelerating fast toward a general breakdown in presidential authority. We're almost at critical velocity where we break free of BushCo and the Repugs.

[donkeyotay]

31. Yes, and it's easy to overlook the fact that N SA is the DoD, which means

our military is spying on political opposition, but cwhorporate news says we don't care.

[EVDebs]

32. Operation Mockingbird, Talon News, the paid-for propaganda

hurlers. CNN and PsyOps. When will it all come out ?

[Starkers]

37. So What?

So, Clinton used the FBI files and the IRS to go after his opponents. A pox on both parties.

[kentuck]

40. No. Just a pox on your Party....

You have no proof of what you say. The FBI files appeared to be a plant, at least some people thought. Whose IRS files did CLinton use to go after them??

[Marr]

41. Just because Rush says something, doesn't make it true.

[New Earth]

49. LOL

[Marie26]

43. Does it disturb you that Bush has refused

to release IRS audit reports since his re-election, in violation of a court order?

[EVDebs]

46. No, the Army set up a list after a plane crashed into the WhiteHouse

What was the Army staffer doing inside the WH with that info ? Besides that, wasn't Linda Tripp a DeltaForce secretary who used to work with Richard Secord ? Hmmmm.

Holdovers and spiking the punch so to speak.

Radar Detected Airplane before White House Crash
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V114/N40/crash.40w.html

I note that James Carville's name is on the list, see
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/stonewall_filegate.html

along with article:

""from TPDL 2000-Jul-29, from Capitol Hill Blue, by James Vicini:

Independent Counsel Blames Filegate on a Mistake, Not Political Retribution

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A White House aide obtained confidential FBI background files on Republicans from past administrations by mistake, not to collect derogatory information on political opponents, according to an independent counsel report released on Friday. The report by independent counsel Robert Ray said the low-level aide, Anthony Marceca, requested the background reports in the erroneous belief that the individuals still were employed at the White House and needed access. Marceca, who worked for the White House Office of Personnel Security, gathered about 900 FBI files of Republicans and others in late 1993 and early 1994. Marceca's boss, White House security director Craig Livingstone, resigned under fire....
The report concluded there was no substantial and credible evidence that first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton or any senior White House official was involved in seeking the reports of former White House employees under Republican presidents George Bush and Ronald Reagan.""

Perhaps Freepers know more about Mr. Marceca than they are willing to divulge.

But have no fear, Ms. Tripp in a report immediately below the article above is mentioned...

""First, Donaldson asked if it was true, as Judicial Watch had disclosed, that Ray has not spoken with Linda Tripp about her sworn testimony that she observed FBI files being loaded onto White House computers, and overheard conversations linking this to Hillary Clinton. Ray refused to answer the question by giving a non-response""

Further Army connections

""White House officials have said an Army detailee, Anthony Marceca, made a bureaucratic blunder in collecting the FBI files on the basis of an outdated Secret Service list of White House passholders." from a Mar. 17 newspaper article posted at the site above...

Hmmm. Marceca = military; Tripp = military. Both working in the WH.

Reliable sources and media MSM, all sanitized for someone's protection. Clearly not Clinton's !

It seems that either a rogue unit of intelligence was set up inside the White House to spy on the Clintons, and to sandbag their administration from within -- note Linda Tripp's ubiquitous presence almost Forrest Gump-like ! At every major 'scandal'.

This appears to be more evidence for LIBERALS and DEMOCRATS since if Ms. Tripp was reporting to superiors, who could those superiors be ? Again, certainly not the Clinton administration.

[leftchick]

47. do you have any links for that in formation?

other than say, Newsmax?

[New Earth]

48. that doesn't make it right

I have also read that the law did not effect what the Clinton admin did, making quite a difference.

I think I'll blame my being late to work this morning on Clinton.

[Ikonoklast]

66. Proof?

Puke talking heads spewing sewage and fantasies is not proof.



Have a nice stay.

[Marr]

44. They were spying pre-911, when they wouldn't even meet with Richard Clark.

I'd say it's natural to assume they've been spying on political and- very likely- business opponents.

[deacon]

50. Thats what it's all about- why he broke the law and went around the courts

He broke the law. He broke the law and says it okay. He is not the law. He is not above the law. Will congress approve a dictatorship is the question.

[Generator]

53. Yah know a six year old can figure this thing out

You give absolute power to someone over something. That someone promises, really, really, double promises to only do that thing if it's really really important. But then: you want that ice cream you want it bad. You have given a six year old a hundred dollar bill in an ice cream shop and told them only a vanilla cone, no sprinkles, and you are expecting to get $199.50 back.

You are expecting greatness from a willful, oridinary child. You are expecting change back. Even if it was Ghandi, I wouldn't expect all my change back. But Bush? Oh man..if they can they will. That is the nature of humanity.

[RedOnce]

54. Political opponents and much more...Industrial Espionage!

would be my guess.

[Deja Q]

56. Naturally. Hell, even the UK would spy on Russia.

:crazy:

[Gingergal]

58. Did you hear Isikoff on Hardball tonight/?

He says govt/military is monitoring liberal websites. That is how they learned of the anti-Halliburton protest in Houston which they spied on. Will be in Isikoff's article. Here is the link I posted earlier tonight.


<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x220832>

[Marie26]

60. I guess Big Brother is watching. nt

[mattclearing]

61. Duh. n/t

[sendero]

62. I believe...

... and have from day one, that this is the ONLY reason not to get the incredibly easy and convenient FISA warrants.

[yourout]

63. But Dems are terrarists........right?

This BS about not being able to respond fast enough with FISA makes my blood boil.
The lying sacks of shit!

"What if a terrorist calls a US citizen and we would have to drop the tap.."
There is not a FISA judge anywere that would not retroactivly OK that wire tap.

This Bullshit is about wanting to watch who ever they chose to without any oversight.

Nothing more......nothing less.

[yourout]

67. kick

[Marie26]

68. TRANSCRIPT here!

Courtesy of the DNI Website:

REMARKS BY GENERAL MICHAEL V. HAYDEN

PRINCIPAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE,
AND FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY

ADDRESS TO THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB: WHAT AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE
& ESPECIALLY THE NSA HAVE BEEN DOING TO DEFEND THE NATION

NATIONAL PRESS CLUB
WASHINGTON, D.C.
10:00 A.M. EST
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2006

http://www.dni.gov/release_letter_012306.html

[Imagevision]

70. It would be foolish if they didn't spy, if you werer Rove you would too!

[Marie26]

71. One other blantant lie by Hayden - no PC requirement in 4th Am?

QUESTION: Jonathan Landay with Knight Ridder. I'd like to stay on the same issue, and that had to do with the standard by which you use to target your wiretaps. I'm no lawyer, but my understanding is that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution specifies that you must have probable cause to be able to do a search that does not violate an American's right against unlawful searches and seizures. Do you use --

GEN. HAYDEN: No, actually -- the Fourth Amendment actually protects all of us against unreasonable search and seizure.

QUESTION: But the --

GEN. HAYDEN: That's what it says.

QUESTION: But the measure is probable cause, I believe.

GEN. HAYDEN: The amendment says unreasonable search and seizure.

QUESTION: But does it not say probable --

GEN. HAYDEN: No. The amendment says --

QUESTION: The court standard, the legal standard --

GEN. HAYDEN: -- unreasonable search and seizure. ...

Just to be very clear -- and believe me, if there's any amendment to the Constitution that employees of the National Security Agency are familiar with, it's the Fourth. And it is a reasonableness standard in the Fourth Amendment. And so what you've raised to me -- and I'm not a lawyer, and don't want to become one -- what you've raised to me is, in terms of quoting the Fourth Amendment, is an issue of the Constitution. The constitutional standard is "reasonable." And we believe -- I am convinced that we are lawful because what it is we're doing is reasonable. "

Text of the Fourth Amend.: 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.


So according to the head of the former head of the NSA, the current deputy director of the DNI, the government does not need probable cause to search Americans' posessions & communications. This is a blantant, obvious, lie & he said it straight-faced to the American press.

[kentuck]

72. "supported by oath or affirmation..."

They are supposed to take an oath that there is probable cause...

[Marie26]

73. An oath before a judge

Wiretaps are searches under the 4th Am., so to be constitutional, they need to first show there is "probable cause" of a crime to get the wiretap. This is approved by a judge (usually a FISA judge) if the judge believes such probable cause exists. Hayden seems to be saying that the 4th Am. only requires that the search is "reasonable" (not true). And what's worse, he completely omits that part about going before a judge, and says that the wiretap is justified as long as the NSA itself believes it is reasonable. His interpretation makes the 4th Amendment meaningless. This completely omits the vital step of judicial approval, and gives the NSA complete freedom to operate unchecked & do whatever it deems "reasonable." It's bad enough that it seems to be their policy, but it's even worse when he claims that this is all the 4th Amendment requires. He's wrong, and he's lying.