posted on December 16, 2005 01:24:41 PM new
You must've heard about the secret department, now exposed, in the Pentagon, that ILLEGALLY invaded the civil rights of over 500 people.
It ILLEGALLY keeps track of anyonne who disagrees with the bush administration, even PEACEFUL anti-war demonstrators..
Once again, while the bushies push for "democracy" in their own country of Iraq, they're trashing it HERE!
We WERE attacked on our own soil even thought we were fighting THERE!
posted on December 16, 2005 01:35:47 PM new
AAAWwww, poor PooBear, can't find a newspaper, a website, a radio, a TV, he's cut off from society altogether!!!
Just be patient, bearsy, you'll hear about it. The honest people in the Pentagon are spilling their guts
posted on December 16, 2005 02:00:08 PM new
Is the Pentagon spying on Americans?
Secret database obtained by NBC News tracks ‘suspicious’ domestic groups
NBC VIDEO
• Pentagon spying?
Dec. 13: A secret Pentagon database indicates the U.S. military is collecting information on American peace activists and monitoring Iraq war protests. NBC's Lisa Myers reports.
Nightly News
Lisa Myers
Senior investigative correspondent
WASHINGTON - A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military.
A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a “threat” and one of more than 1,500 “suspicious incidents” across the country over a recent 10-month period.
“This peaceful, educationally oriented group being a threat is incredible,” says Evy Grachow, a member of the Florida group called The Truth Project.
“This is incredible,” adds group member Rich Hersh. “It's an example of paranoia by our government,” he says. “We're not doing anything illegal.”
The Defense Department document is the first inside look at how the U.S. military has stepped up intelligence collection inside this country since 9/11, which now includes the monitoring of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups.
“I think Americans should be concerned that the military, in fact, has reached too far,” says NBC News military analyst Bill Arkin.
The Department of Defense declined repeated requests by NBC News for an interview. A spokesman said that all domestic intelligence information is “properly collected” and involves “protection of Defense Department installations, interests and personnel.” The military has always had a legitimate “force protection” mission inside the U.S. to protect its personnel and facilities from potential violence. But the Pentagon now collects domestic intelligence that goes beyond legitimate concerns about terrorism or protecting U.S. military installations, say critics.
Four dozen anti-war meetings
The DOD database obtained by NBC News includes nearly four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, including some that have taken place far from any military installation, post or recruitment center. One “incident” included in the database is a large anti-war protest at Hollywood and Vine in Los Angeles last March that included effigies of President Bush and anti-war protest banners. Another incident mentions a planned protest against military recruiters last December in Boston and a planned protest last April at McDonald’s National Salute to America’s Heroes — a military air and sea show in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
The Fort Lauderdale protest was deemed not to be a credible threat and a column in the database concludes: “US group exercising constitutional rights.” Two-hundred and forty-three other incidents in the database were discounted because they had no connection to the Department of Defense — yet they all remained in the database.
The DOD has strict guidelines (.PDF link), adopted in December 1982, that limit the extent to which they can collect and retain information on U.S. citizens.
Still, the DOD database includes at least 20 references to U.S. citizens or U.S. persons. Other documents obtained by NBC News show that the Defense Department is clearly increasing its domestic monitoring activities. One DOD briefing document stamped “secret” concludes: “[W]e have noted increased communication and encouragement between protest groups using the [I]nternet,” but no “significant connection” between incidents, such as “reoccurring instigators at protests” or “vehicle descriptions.”
The increased monitoring disturbs some military observers.
President Bush refused to say whether the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States, but leaders of Congress condemned the practice on Friday and promised to look into what the administration has done.
"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said there would be hearings early next year and that they would have "a very, very high priority." He wasn't alone in reacting harshly to the report.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the story, first reported in Friday's New York Times, was troubling.
Bush said in an interview that "we do not discuss ongoing intelligence operations to protect the country. And the reason why is that there's an enemy that lurks, that would like to know exactly what we're trying to do to stop them.
"I will make this point," Bush said. "That whatever I do to protect the American people and I have an obligation to do so that we will uphold the law, and decisions made are made understanding we have an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the American people."
The president spoke in an interview to be aired Friday evening on "The Newshour with Jim Lehrer."
(Story continues below)
Bush played down the importance of the eavesdropping story. "It's not the main story of the day," Bush told Lehrer. "The main story of the day is the Iraqi elections" for parliament which took place on Thursday.
[ edited by Linda_K on Dec 16, 2005 02:06 PM ]
posted on December 16, 2005 02:03:12 PM new
Well since you admit your lead in the thread is totally inflamitary, let me show YOU something you faile to mention:
News Media Go Ballistic in Domestic Spying Flap
December 16, 2005 03:28 PM EST
Within the Washington Beltway, timing is everything. So it's no surprise that during the heated debate by US Senators over the extension of the so-called Patriot Act, the mainstream news media come out with stories that accuse the Bush Administration of authorizing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans and foreigners living within US borders. For instance, here's how the Washington Post reporters lead their story:
"President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on US citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night.
"The super-secretive NSA, which has generally been barred from domestic spying except in narrow circumstances involving foreign nationals, has monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program, the New York Times disclosed last night."
No where in the lead does the reader discover that the reason these people were targeted for surveillance is that their names and other information about them came up in intelligence intercepts or were culled from phone records and computer databases of suspected Al-Qaeda operatives overseas.
The Washington Post and others in the media who began to salivate over this additional ammunition to be used against the Bush terrorism war, also failed to highlight the fact that the administration jumped quickly in order to garner as much information as possible in as short a time as possible. It's the nature of wartime intelligence. Of course, the liberals and the news media really don't believe we're in a war -- they may pay lip service about supporting our troops, yada, yada, yada, but they treat the war on terrorism the way they treated the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and the war on breast cancer.
Further in the article, the Post does mention that the purpose of this spying operation was "to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas, according to two former senior administration officials."
The NSA, which is the technological arm of the intelligence community, fretted over the likelihood that information could be lost if the agency wrote and submitted an affidavit to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. And what happens if the judge reviewing the warrant affidavit is a Clinton appointee? Or worse, what if the judge is a Carter appointee who refuses to issue a warrant over his or her signature?
Of course, the Democrats, working in collusion with the news media were well-prepared to make their "I'm shocked and concerned" statements. For example, Senator Jay Rockefeller, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is already formulating a political strategy in order to use this report against President Bush. This is the same Rockefeller who, prior to the Iraq invasion, flew to Syria and Saudi Arabia to inform them about Bush's war plans.
Liberals are already talking about the possibility that Bush violated the law. Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said the secret order may amount to the president authorizing criminal activity. Of course, readers are not told that Ms. Martin is a liberal-left policy wonk and that the CNSS is a left-wing policy think-tank.
But back to my point about timing being everything. The New York Times, which broke the story, admits that they sat on the story for about a year due to claims by Bush's staff that the publication of the story could negatively affect national security. Sounds almost patriotic until you start to question why the Times decided to break the story on the day the Senate addressed the Patriot Act extension? In fact, today's Democrat talking points included references to the NSA spy story during any televised debate on the Patriot Act.
There is also the fact that the New York Times reporter has a book coming out within the next couple of weeks on this very subject. Look for an exclusive interview on CBS's 60 Minutes.
The NSA spy operation actually began within days after the 9-11 attacks. Part of the operation included the monitoring of domestic telephone conversations, e-mail and even fax communications of individuals identified by the NSA as being connected to Al-Qaeda or other known terrorist groups. At the time, fear was mounting that there were other terrorist cells involved in planning attacks within the US.
Since the US was on high alert, the Bush Administration used all resources at its disposal including teams of Defense Intelligence Agency operatives in major cities conducting the type of surveillance usually within the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation: surveillance of persons of interest using technological means rather than human assets.
The Washington Post reports that "Congressional sources familiar with limited aspects of the program would not discuss any classified details but made it clear there were serious questions about the legality of the NSA actions." Which means in Beltway-talk: Senator Patrick "Leaky" Leahy or other loose-lipped Democrat will leak the information at the right time.
And then the Washington Post ends it's story with the rantings of the usual left-wing national security expert, being careful not to identify her as a liberal:
"This is as shocking a revelation as we have ever seen from the Bush administration," said Martin, who has been sharply critical of the administration's surveillance and detention policies. "It is, I believe, the first time a president has authorized government agencies to violate a specific criminal prohibition and eavesdrop on Americans."
And what news story is complete without a quote from the ACLU? Without so much as a feigned investigation, the ACLU spokesperson talks about criminal activity perpetrated by the Bush Administration:
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she is "dismayed" by the report.
"It's clear that the administration has been very willing to sacrifice civil liberties in its effort to exercise its authority on terrorism, to the extent that it authorizes criminal activity," Fredrickson said.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 02:06:45 PM new
Linda, I knew craw would refuse to post a like, shes just too dam lazy. Or doesnt care, either way we know its side of the truth isnt always true.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 02:10:22 PM new
Yep...you're right, bear. It's the new deceptive way of making things look worse than they are....always by the bush-haters...but mg/cf/lb is the worst.
I LOVE Jay Leno's statement....too true.
More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don't get the New York Times over there."—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 02:10:28 PM new
Oh poor Poobear, he can't read his own OPs so I didn't really expect him to read my post....poor old blind thing...to be pitied.....
posted on December 16, 2005 02:29:53 PM new
Craw, maybe YOU do have reason to be worried, since the spying operation was "to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas"
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 02:32:53 PM new
Once AGAIN, poobear, YOU CAN'T READ
But it's reassuring to know that you and linda obtain your political savvy from Jay Leno....explains a lot of things
[ edited by mingotree on Dec 16, 2005 02:45 PM ]
posted on December 16, 2005 03:17:20 PM new
'long as you're not doing anything bad, what's wrong with it?
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
posted on December 16, 2005 03:21:26 PM new
I hope, profe, that by your wink you
indicate you know better than "'long as you're not doing anything bad, what's wrong with it?"
What they are doing is illegal, against the constitution, and directed NOT just at people doing anything wrong but directed at anyone they please.
posted on December 16, 2005 03:54:09 PM new
I've got $20. to start a relief fund to buy craptree a new brain.
Amen,
Reverend Colin http://www.reverendcolin.com
posted on December 16, 2005 06:24:02 PM new
Colon, linda and bear...don't have any defense as usual....makes ya mad when I best ya doesn't it?
So the childish posts which avoid contributing anything ...
linda , as usual, needs backup
colin
posted on December 16, 2005 03:54:09 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've got $20. to start a relief fund to buy craptree a new brain.
Amen,
Reverend Colin
http://www.reverendcolin.com
Linda_K
posted on December 16, 2005 04:57:28 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's correct, profe.
------
I'll chip in to that fund, Colin. But I don't think it will help."""
Hey linda, are you ready to show me that god who's NOT in your mind
posted on December 16, 2005 07:26:21 PM new
But then we aren't on the surveillance list like you craw. Only you and your kind have to worry about becoming a target.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 16, 2005 07:46:02 PM new
By saying "Again" you are under the mistaken impression that this has happend before, when in fact it hasn't happend yet.
Ron
"Better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you are not."
posted on December 16, 2005 07:48:24 PM new
Bear: But then we aren't on the surveillance list like you craw.
I don't understand what you mean in your above statements, Bear. Are you saying because Mingo is a Democrat that she is or should be under surveillance?
Bear:Only you and your kind have to worry about becoming a target.
Do you believe all Democrats or those who vote any other party other than Republican should be treated as if under suspicion?
posted on December 17, 2005 07:50:11 AM newI've got $20. to start a relief fund to buy craptree a new brain
Wasn't that $20.00 supposed to purchase a license to become a bishop? Are you continuing to buy your way into heaven??
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
