America... Spying on Americans

"The classification Top Secret is limited to defense information or material that requires the highest degree of protection. The Top Secret classification is applied only to information or material that is paramount to national security and the unauthorized disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security. "

So,the release of ANY top secret info is illegal,no matter who does it.

I wonder how many people here have a real idea of what exactly the domestic spying program entails. And I don't mean the gleaned tidbits on CNN (or Meet the Press for the "truly informed"). The fact is that the administration, in the interest of keeping this capability viable - an ever more unlikely proposition - has not really divulged much about the nuts and bolts. So the vast majority of posturing, flapjaw-ing, espousing, ruminating, and condemning is uninformed at best, plain stupid at worst, or probably somewhere in the middle - vaguely knowledgable, but still not really in-the-know.

I think it can be really amazing just how many people feel they are somehow (don't try to pin it down), qualified to extrapolate information and offer opinions. Perhaps they should stick to topics that they have some inkling of experience with.

Executive Summary

In the greatest surveillance effort ever established, the US National Security Agency (NSA) has created a global spy system, codename ECHELON, which captures and analyzes virtually every phone call, fax, email and telex message sent anywhere in the world. ECHELON is controlled by the NSA and is operated in conjunction with the Government Communications Head Quarters (GCHQ) of England, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) of Canada, the Australian Defense Security Directorate (DSD), and the General Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) of New Zealand. These organizations are bound together under a secret 1948 agreement, UKUSA, whose terms and text remain under wraps even today.

The ECHELON system is fairly simple in design: position intercept stations all over the world to capture all satellite, microwave, cellular and fiber-optic communications traffic, and then process this information through the massive computer capabilities of the NSA, including advanced voice recognition and optical character recognition (OCR) programs, and look for code words or phrases (known as the ECHELON "Dictionary") that will prompt the computers to flag the message for recording and transcribing for future analysis. Intelligence analysts at each of the respective "listening stations" maintain separate keyword lists for them to analyze any conversation or document flagged by the system, which is then forwarded to the respective intelligence agency headquarters that requested the intercept.

But apart from directing their ears towards terrorists and rogue states, ECHELON is also being used for purposes well outside its original mission. The regular discovery of domestic surveillance targeted at American civilians for reasons of "unpopular" political affiliation or for no probable cause at all in violation of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution - are consistently impeded by very elaborate and complex legal arguments and privilege claims by the intelligence agencies and the US government. The guardians and caretakers of our liberties, our duly elected political representatives, give scarce attention to these activities, let alone the abuses that occur under their watch. Among the activities that the ECHELON targets are:

Why don't you take your idiotic complaint to the New York Times.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the American people have not been informed of all the details of our president's unlawful and unconstitutional domestic spying and other secret programs. At least some of us are willing to speak out against the lies and propaganda that our government is trying to feed us. Despite your arrogant insults, we will continue to discuss this topic. Your approval isn't required.

Debra_Law wrote:

Why don't you take your idiotic complaint to the New York Times.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the American people have not been informed of all the details of our president's unlawful and unconstitutional domestic spying and other secret programs. At least some of us are willing to speak out against the lies and propaganda that our government is trying to feed us. Despite your arrogant insults, we will continue to discuss this topic. Your approval isn't required.

Quite a rant from someone who's extent of knowledge on the subject is what she reads in the editorial pages of several newspapers. If you scanned Caterpillar technical manuals now and again would that make you an expert in heavy machinery? (And technical manuals would have more real information that you have.)

Yes of course you will continue discussing it. That's all your kind really does. Postulate to death, you will still be just as wrong, just as in the dark, and just as foolish-looking to anyone who actually wakes up in the morning and does real work in this area, instead of confining their anti-terror work to the blogosphere.

Parker Cross wrote:

I wonder how many people here have a real idea of what exactly the domestic spying program entails. And I don't mean the gleaned tidbits on CNN (or Meet the Press for the "truly informed"). The fact is that the administration, in the interest of keeping this capability viable - an ever more unlikely proposition - has not really divulged much about the nuts and bolts. So the vast majority of posturing, flapjaw-ing, espousing, ruminating, and condemning is uninformed at best, plain stupid at worst, or probably somewhere in the middle - vaguely knowledgable, but still not really in-the-know.

I think it can be really amazing just how many people feel they are somehow (don't try to pin it down), qualified to extrapolate information and offer opinions. Perhaps they should stick to topics that they have some inkling of experience with.

Why don't you take your idiotic complaint to the New York Times.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the American people have not been informed of all the details of our president's unlawful and unconstitutional domestic spying and other secret programs. At least some of us are willing to speak out against the lies and propaganda that our government is trying to feed us. Despite your arrogant insults, we will continue to discuss this topic. Your approval isn't required.

Or, on the other hand, he can continue to write what appear to be his rationale thoughts on this forum. You take umbrage at his suggestion that what you -- and others -- are doing is speaking out of your proverbial a$$. That is your prerogative. But your approval of his post is also not required.

Ticomaya wrote:

Or, on the other hand, he can continue to write what appear to be his rationale thoughts on this forum. You take umbrage at his suggestion that what you -- and others -- are doing is speaking out of your proverbial a$$. That is your prerogative. But your approval of his post is also not required.

I think his "rationale" thoughts are easy to diagnose. Whether his rationale contains rational thoughts is another story completely.

If I scanned Caterpiller technical manuals I might not be an expert but I could discuss it competently based on my expertise in related areas. I would certainly have a better understanding than someone that never scanned them and only snipes from the side that I don't know anything about heavy machinery.

<... writing note to self ...>

mysteryman wrote:

Cyclo,
Doesnt the fact that there is someone leaking TOP SECRET info,info that can compromise the security of the country,bother you at all?

No matter what the reasons are,releasing that knd of info,especially to a govt body that leaks more then the Titanic did,is a crime and the leaker should be prosecuted.

Or,do you believe that its ok to release TOP SECRET info if it could possibly hurt Bush?

Where are your calls for Cheney to resign and be indicted for ordering Libby to release top secret info?
Where is the call for Bush to resign for releasing top secret info as he sees political expedient?

Or does "no matter what the reason" only apply to one side?

Gonzales Withholding Plame Emails

By Jason Leopold

16 February, 2006
Countercurrents.org

Sources close to the investigation into the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson have revealed this week that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has not turned over emails to the special prosecutor's office that may incriminate Vice President Dick Cheney, his aides, and other White House officials who allegedly played an active role in unmasking Plame Wilson's identity to reporters.

Moreover, these sources said that, in early 2004, Cheney was interviewed by federal prosecutors investigating the Plame Wilson leak and testified that neither he nor any of his senior aides were involved in unmasking her undercover CIA status to reporters and that no one in the vice president's office had attempted to discredit her husband, a vocal critic of the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence. Cheney did not testify under oath or under penalty of perjury when he was interviewed by federal prosecutors.

Or, on the other hand, he can continue to write what appear to be his rationale thoughts on this forum. You take umbrage at his suggestion that what you -- and others -- are doing is speaking out of your proverbial a$$. That is your prerogative. But your approval of his post is also not required.

Democrats are Communists ...

Some of them sure are. Sky is blue too. Why do you think liberals can be so hard to stomach?

Quote:

Or, on the other hand, he can continue to write what appear to be his rationale thoughts on this forum. You take umbrage at his suggestion that what you -- and others -- are doing is speaking out of your proverbial a$$. That is your prerogative. But your approval of his post is also not required.

From another thread, same poster who criticized us for not knowing what we were talking about:

Quote:

Democrats are Communists ...

Some of them sure are. Sky is blue too. Why do you think liberals can be so hard to stomach?

Cycloptichorn

Nah, I'm just advising my fellows about the sort of person who is ladelling out criticism on this issue; hardly non-partisan.

Now, if he/she would like to bring an actual argument, why, I'd be more than willing to listen to it; but I fear it's just another wing-basher, much like the ones that you ignore.

Cycloptichorn

Lol, yeah, I'm sure you do; but you are hardly in the center yourself, friend.

I resolve to keep an open mind on the issue until events prove themselves one way or the other.

Cycloptichorn