Remember: Bush was spying on us BEFORE 9/11

[EFerrari]

and yet, was unable to prevent the attacks of that day.

From an LBN thread, Jan '06:

The National Security Agency advised President Bush in early 2001 that it had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups, according to a declassified document.

The NSA's vast data-mining activities began shortly after Bush was sworn in as president and the document contradicts his assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups.

In its "Transition 2001" report, the NSA said that the ever-changing world of global communication means that "American communication and targeted adversary communication will coexist."

"Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the Fourth Amendment and all applicable laws," the document says.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2039722

[Richard Steele]

1. Yes he was, and that's a fact. recommended.

[EFerrari]

4. I have yet to hear a single elected official acknowledge this.

And this morning on WJ, there was a discussion regarding a hearing, here in the 9th Circuit, to determine if two cases against the NSA will go forward.

The entire discussion was in the context of a "post 9/11 world."

Somehow, we have to find a way to inject a little reality into our national discourse -- if that's still possible.

[havocmom]

2. Yep.

K & R

[Blackhatjack]

3. Add the surveillance to the fact that Condi and Bush virtually ignored warnings about Al Qaeda...

... so just who was being spied upon? and for what reasons?

I tend to believe that the surveillance was for nefarious purposes before 911.

Bush demoted the counterterrorism chief, and Condi failed to hold a meeting on the findings that were passed on to the new Administration by the Clinton Administration.

[EFerrari]

7. They were negligent enough to outrage someone as circumspect

as Richard Clarke. That says a lot, imho.

[EVDebs]

5. So how did they miss the guys in FBI care living in SanDiego ????

[EFerrari]

6. Oops! I guess they don't read the phonebook?

:shrug:

I'd like to hear Nancy or just ONE Democrat point out that Bush has not kept us safe: his illegal wiretapping of American citizens did not prevent 9/11.

[spanone]

8. then why didn't they stop 9/11???????

[EFerrari]

9. Exactly. So this bs about needing to spy on us to thwart terrorists

is plainly bs. :shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. Because they needed another Pearl Harbor. LIHOP/MIHOP.

I lean MIHOP.

Don't forget, CindiLIAR was briefed by Sandy Berger on Al Qaeda and what a threat they were. She shelved his briefing report and poo-pooed all the info she got from that stupid CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. They knew full well what was going on. Remember the PDB "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." dated....August 6, 2001.

[EFerrari]

11. My (smallish) point is, they make no sense even in the terms

they themselves have set for this debate. Without even going into what did or might have really happened on that day.

They can't argue that they need to spy on us to keep us "safe" when they were already spying on us and didn't keep us safe. :shrug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. I agree. NONE of it makes sense and if WE know about the pre-911 spying, so does Congress.

Yet they fall for the terrorist bullshit story and give the criminals MORE power by passing the FISA Bill?? Something stinks. IMCPO.

In my other post I was just answering spanone's rhetorical question....just for fun. It never hurts to enlighten a freeper or 2 while they're here lurking about in the shadows.:)

[EFerrari]

15. What an optimist you are.

lol

:)

[EFerrari]

18. Appeals court may let NSA lawsuits proceed

Appeals court may let NSA lawsuits proceed

SAN FRANCISCO--A federal appeals court on Wednesday appeared unwilling to end a pair of lawsuits that claim the Bush administration engaged in widespread illegal surveillance of Americans.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals repeatedly pressed Gregory Garre, the Bush administration's deputy solicitor general, to justify his requests to toss out the suits on grounds they could endanger national security by possibly revealing "state secrets."

Judge Harry Pregerson wondered: "We just have to take the word of members of the executive branch that it's a state secret. That's what you're saying, isn't it?"

A moment later Judge Michael Hawkins suggested that granting the request could "mean abdication" of our duties.


http://news.com.com/Appeals+court+may+let+NSA+lawsuits+proceed/2100-1028_3-6202865.html?part=rss&tag=2547-1_3-0-20&subj=news

[mod mom]

12. Emptywheel On TIA and TSP (TIA prior to 2003 when congress terminated funding)

July 30, 2007

TIA and TSP Timing

by emptywheel

Commenter joejoejoe sent me a superb timeline to show the chronology of Congress' building opposition to the Total Information Awareness program as it relates to the NSA's domestic wiretap program (how cool is that? I, the chronology weenie, am getting timelines out of the blue! Better than Christmas!!), which appears at the bottom of this post.

I'd like to pull out just a few salient dates and add four (in bold italics) to what joejoejoe did. I think the time line lends support for the argument that one of the problems--a big problem--with the domestic wiretap program is that it violated clear instructions from Congress.

2/20/03 - President Bush signed reconciled House Senate version of above law with provision that terminates funding to TIA in 90 days and requires a Congressional update.(Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, No.108–7, Division M, §111(b) )

5/20/03 - 90 days later, Pentagon changes name of TIA from Total Information Awareness to Terrorist Information Awareness and calls it new program. Problem solved!

7/17/03 - Briefing for Intelligence Committee leadership (Pat Roberts, Jay Rockefeller, Porter Goss, and Jane Harman) on domestic wiretap program. This would be the last briefing before the crisis March 10 meeting.

7/17/03 - After his SECOND briefing on the program, Jay Rockefeller writes his CYA memo to Cheney, which states (thanks to Ann for the reminder on the date):

I am writing to reiterate my concerns regarding the sensitive intelligence issues we discussed today with the DCI, DIRNSA,Chairman Roberts and our House Intelligence counterparts.



As I reflected on the meeting today, and the future we face, John Poindexter's TIA project sprung to mind, exacerbating my concern regarding the direction the Administration is moving with regard to security, technology, and surveillance.



I am retaining a copy of this letter in a sealed envelope in the secure spaces of the Senate Intelligence Committee to ensure that I have a record of this communication.

7/18/03 - Senate votes unanimously to block funding for the Total Information Awareness program. According to the Defense Department appropriations, no funding "may be obligated or expended on research and development on the Terrorism Information Awareness program." - - over Bush admin. objections. Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2004, Pub. L. No. 108–87, § 8131, 117 Stat. 1054, 1102 (2003)

-snip

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/07/tia-and-tsp.html

[EFerrari]

13. Great timeline. Thanks, mod mom.

:hi:

[jgraz]

16. This should be posted every day

Or perhaps pinned to the top of GD.

Or maybe we should change our name to BushWasSpyingOnUsBefore911Underground.com.

[EFerrari]

17. I agree! The way this issue is talked about in the media

is divorced from the facts. We need to get those facts back into the conversation.