CIVIL LIBERTIES  
AlterNet / By Liliana Segura
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 170

'A Ton More People Were Wiretapped Than We've Been Led to Believe': FBI Whistleblower Thomas Tamm

The man who blew the lid off Bush's spying program believes more details on government spying must, and will, come to light.
April 18, 2009  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

This week the New York Times revealed that the National Security Agency has continued spying on Americans well into the Obama era, with government officials listening in on phone conversations and monitoring e-mails on a massive scale.

Times reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau -- who broke the story of the Bush administration's domestic spying program in December 2004 -- reported that "in recent months," the NSA has engaged in an "overcollection" of domestic communication, far exceeding the already broad legal limits Congress established when it passed legislation to legalize the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program and granting immunity for the telecoms that enabled it.

The same article reveals that in 2005 or 2006, the NSA attempted to wiretap an unidentified member of Congress, lending further credence to speculation earlier this year by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., that he might have been spied on.

For many who have followed the long political saga that saw warrantless wiretapping revealed, debated and ultimately legalized at the hands of Congress, this report comes as no surprise.

"Everyone knew that the FISA bill, which congressional Democrats passed -- and which George Bush and Dick Cheney celebrated -- would enable these surveillance abuses," Glenn Greenwald wrote after the story broke.

Nevertheless, for many people it may come as a shock that nearly 4 1/2 years after the illegal program was uncovered, not only has the government continued to spy on Americans with total impunity, most of the details of Bush's warrantless wiretapping scheme remain a mystery.

"What really concerns me is that we still don't know the truth," Thomas Tamm, a former FBI official told me. "We do not know what they did."

Tamm should know. He is the person who blew the whistle on the NSA spying program, a former employee of the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, a highly sensitive unit of the Justice Department. He remained anonymous for years, until his identity was revealed in a front-page story by Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff late last year.

The article described how Tamm, a veteran employee of the FBI, came across proof that the U.S. government had been unlawfully eavesdropping on Americans by intercepting domestic communications.

"The idea of lawlessness at the Justice Department angered him," Isikoff wrote. After many sleepless nights and frustrating conversations with his superiors -- "supervisors told him to drop the subject" -- he decided he could no longer keep the abuse to himself.

Finally, one day during his lunch hour, Tamm ducked into a subway station near the U.S. District Courthouse on Pennsylvania Avenue. He headed for a pair of adjoining pay phones partially concealed by large, illuminated Metro maps. Tamm had been eyeing the phone booths on his way to work in the morning. Now, as he slipped through the parade of midday subway riders, his heart was pounding, his body trembling. Tamm felt like a spy. After looking around to make sure nobody was watching, he picked up a phone and called the New York Times.

What Tamm revealed would not be reported for a year-and-a-half, when Risen and Litchblau published their now-famous front page story. They went on to win the Pulitzer Prize. Meanwhile, Tamm "has not fared as well."

"The FBI has pursued him relentlessly for the past 2 1/2 years," Isikoff wrote. "Agents have raided his house, hauled away personal possessions and grilled his wife, a teenage daughter and a grown son. More recently, they've been questioning Tamm's friends and associates about nearly every aspect of his life.

"Tamm has resisted pressure to plead to a felony for divulging classified information. But he is living under a pall, never sure if, or when, federal agents might arrest him."

Tamm remains in a sort of legal limbo, with the Department of Justice informing him that no decision on whether to prosecute him would be made until Barack Obama took office. Four months into Obama's term, however, Tamm has not heard anything.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has blocked efforts by civil-liberties organizations to hold accountable those who unlawfully spied on Americans, even as more details have emerged revealing the broad targets of the NSA program, which included journalists and even members of Congress.


View as a single page
 
Liliana Segura is an AlterNet staff writer and editor of Rights & Liberties and War on Iraq Special Coverage.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: 9/11, death penalty, fbi, michael isikoff, domestic spying, warrantless wiretapping, john ashcroft, state secrets, national security agency, james risen, thomas tamm, eric litchblau

comments COMMENTS ( 170 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

These have been really outstanding pieces you have been doing. Thank you.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: godsbreath64 on Apr 18, 2009 12:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill Maher had it right all along when he said every morning when he wakes up, he emails a copy of the constitution to give THEM something worthwhile to look at >;-)

Thanks again for the great work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So Try Emailing the Constitution! Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» Bill, I am really sorry. Posted by: godsbreath64

Comments are closed-

Not To Worry ... Obama Will Fix This Privacy Thing ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 18, 2009 1:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OOOOPS ! Nothing to see here... move along please, move along ...

Why is Obama following Bush's lead on state secrets?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

THE COMMIES/ NAZIS LISTEN TO EVERYTHING
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TrollTreason on Apr 18, 2009 2:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ESPECIALLY TO POLITICALLY MINDED, EDUCATED INDIVIDUALS, LIKE ALTERNET POSTERS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

9/11 brought us wiretapping. Want to stop it? Expose the lies of 9/11!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: pfgetty on Apr 18, 2009 3:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All this fluster about getting evidence that we are wiretapped is a waste of time. The American people just don't care.
As long as the official story of 9/11 stands, the American people feel that they are more secure if US agencies do some wiretapping. If you stop it completely, there will be a flurry of attacks saying that we need wiretapping to keep us safe from terrorists.
This issue just won't get traction except from the far left and fringe libertarians.

But expose 9/11 as a pack of lies, which it is, and we will see the end of wiretapping, because the people will finally realize that the whole terrorism thing is a crock of shit. And they will be angry. And finally they will care...........the average American will be so incensed at the power of our government over their lives.

But the lies of 9/11 will not be exposed to the general public because the msm AND alternative media have participated in a program of complete avoidance of the topic of 9/11. There are people who have studied and analyzed 9/11 and can provide absolute proof that 9/11 was an inside job. All it takes is the presentation of their facts. The work is done, ready to be brought to the public. Nothing could be easier for venues like Alternet. But Alternet has decided it will continue to conspire to keep all of this information from the American people.
It will continue to waste its time exposing wiretapping, and Americans really don't care.
Why Alternet and the rest avoid 9/11? We don't know. They won't tell us.
The recent work by Kevin Ryan and Steven Jones provides absolute proof of the use of controlled demolition of the WTC. Better than anything they've got for evidence for wiretapping. But Alternet has completely ignored the scientific papers presented, which have been exposed in Europe with fanfare. Here in the US, our press continues to be under some sort of spell, or contract, with the government to never talk about 9/11.
We need some journalists to break out and tell us what they know, why this issue is avoided.

Alternet could be that first to come forward with this information. The news could spread, even embarrassing the msm to present it. It would change the world. For the better.
Do it, Alternet!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're a nut, Lauren. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: You're a bull shit artist Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Who belongs in jail? Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: You are just a sore loser Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Yep, he's a bull shit artist Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» Sonic booms near the ground? Posted by: LeftWright
» What happened to the bodies? Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: I live in California Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Where in California, GB? Posted by: LeftWright
» No need for me to debunk you. Posted by: GuitarBill
» 272 tons of TNT? Posted by: GuitarBill
» GB - Take it up with NIST Posted by: LeftWright
» "Physics, facts and logic"? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Right On! Posted by: Styve
» Now Billy, need I/ they say more? Posted by: godsbreath64
» Insane, much? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Dr. Billy, Dr Billy Posted by: godsbreath64
» RE: Don't call him names Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Don't call him names Posted by: GuitarBill
» Could you confirm some facts for me? Posted by: Reader in Japan
» What Israel hates most of all? Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

The Bush-Obama National Security State
[Report this comment]
Posted by: DrBrian on Apr 18, 2009 4:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's increasingly clear to all except the most deluded Obamaniacs that the current administration is very little different from its predecessor. The new president has made a few, much ballyhooed public pronouncements intended to reassure the nation that he's not abusing his powers, but he has yet to renounce any of the sweeping, unconstitutional powers Bush and Cheney arrogated to themselves with the retroactive consent or cynical connivance of a do-nothing Congress.

The spying, denial of detainee rights, maltreatment and authoritarian intelligence and law enforcement powers remain, and for us to trust Obama with them because of some perceived beatific characteristics is foolhardy at best and psychotic at worst.

These abuses, combined with his trillion dollar financial giveaway to his Wall Street swindler campaign benefactors, should be enough to open our eyes and energize our resistance to the direction he is taking us.

I should know. Because of my medical assistance to both sides during Nepal's pro-democracy movement, and my truthful statements to BBC News about the atrocities I had observed at the hands of the Royal Police, I was beaten, taken into custody, and taken out secretly at night to be shot by the Armed Police. The police told me the US Embassy knew I was there and would not intervene on my behalf.

Fortunately, a UN Human Rights team arrived and repeatedly placed desperate calls to the US Embassy without avail, so undertook to negotiate my release and safe deportation. After the King restored democracy I was called back to the country and feted widely, but US officials went around spreading rumors that I was wanted for murder, and my friends and relatives in the US were told by the FBI not to contact or assist me in any way, a state which persists.

Dissent from the US policy of supporting brutal right-wing dictatorships and impartial medical assistance were enough to deem me a terrorist, even though I am a long-time supporter of peace, human rights and democracy.

Lord Acton warned us that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Bush and Obama have had the closest to absolute power the world has ever seen. We ignore his warning at our peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Dismantle AIPAC Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

Where are the cameras
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Erin on Apr 18, 2009 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have seen "google earth" and have been able to locate my house from above, but recently I was shown another application where you can see your house like you are on the ground level. You can walk right down your street and see the front windows, porches, and back yards of everyone on any street. My question is where the F@*K are the cameras??? My other observation is that "google" has no advertisements. All others have to get advertisers to keep their sites running. So, my other question is who is funding Google???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: Mbell
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: metavurt
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: willymack
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: Quannah

Comments are closed-

Shocking ... FBI harassment!!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4 on Apr 18, 2009 6:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“[W]hat lengths men will go in order to carry out, to their extreme limit, the rites of a collective self-worship which fills them with a sense of righteousness and complacent satisfaction in the midst of the most shocking injustices and crimes.”
-Love and Living, by Thomas Merton

A little like this ...
http://www.freedomfchs.com/unwarranted_surveillance.pdf

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

WHEN will the Truth come out?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: madmax427 on Apr 18, 2009 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so disappointed with all these articles which try to limit the illegal activity of NSA to JUST wiretapping! I KNOW from personal experience Their capabilities far exceed JUST wiretapping! Things like taking over a computer remotely, affecting the ability to send/receive emails, blocking access to important programs like websites by changing key functions.

Like the 9/11 'conspiracy', The Truth involves so much more, so why are We trying to LIMIT the investigation?

I have been called crazy & most recently, delusional. O.K. I am willing to Prove what I say: I will turn over My computer to an expert IF He/She will check the operating system & PUBLISH the results of the investigation. IF I'm so far out, PUBLISH it! IF I am CORRECT PUBLISH THAT!

http://www.whatsyourlifeworth2.info

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHEN will the Truth come out? Posted by: anonymous comment
» RE: Sounds like a comitted stalker to me Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4
» Waterboard Silverstein Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

no *DUH*
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Apr 18, 2009 9:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but when anybody who understood the technology said anything about it

defensive Americans told us we didn't know what we were talking about.

I can't WAIT until American figure out that this has HUGE CORPORATE ESPIONAGE implications both domestically & internationally.

wanna start a company?

better hope that a multi-national BIG PLAYER doesn't decide that the field of play BELONGS TO THEM...

the easiest way to KEEP THE INDIVIDUAL FUCKED by Money & Power is to ensure... they never get to play on a level field...

"oh but this means its good for the American Interest or American companies!!!"... yeah, sure it does... you go right on believing that...

surveillance to prevent dissent.. & surveillance to prevent competition to those corporations WHO BOUGHT & PAID FOR THE US GOVERNMENT & its 'agencies'.

AT&T FUNDED THE FREAKING DENVER '08 DNC...
but then, they funded OBAMA, so I guess that's GOOD FOR THE WORLD Human Rights & Environment... because American Democratic Party is synonymous with "goodness & mercy" yeah... sure it is.
wake up.
The American Democratic representatives funded WHINSEC & a *lot* of human rights & civil rights abusive projects...


perspective, people.


Perspective.

The Jeff Farias Show: streams FREE & LIVE Mon-Fri, 6-9pmEST

FREE podcast

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

What's so bad about it, anyway?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: willymack on Apr 18, 2009 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems that a significant portion of our people have adapted a "ho hum" attitude toward the government obtruding into our privacy. Statements like "if they want to put themselves to sleep watching me, they can knock themselves out", or "there must be a really good reason for what they're doing", are common. Let's consider this subject from another perspective. Suppose you have a nosy neighbor (who hasn't?) who INSISTS on knowing everything about you, and can be seen skulking about, or slowly driving by. You confront said neighbor who indignantly denies any wrongdoing and calls your sanity into question. You then call the cops who tell you in no uncertain terms that not only are the actions of the nosy neighbor LEGAL, but that they provide a valuable public service. How tolerable would THAT be to Joe Six-pack? How is this any different from electronic surveillance?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good point Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

anonymous comment
[Report this comment]
Posted by: anonymous comment on Apr 18, 2009 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The investigation of the NSA needs to be very broad. After the bizarre, Kafkaesque things that I've experienced, I know that we're in deep trouble, if not "totally screwed", to use Anderson Cooper's expression about our uncertain collective fate.

My own personal experiences relate to surveillance; surreptitious home intrusions; vandalism and theft of personal property, including mail; and defamation. I moved to another state and the problems followed. I've had items stolen from my car, including a cell-phone from a locked hotel room. A threatening note was tacked to my front door. I moved and trouble followed.

I solicited the input of a psychiatrist who said, "I believe that someone is psychologically terrorizing you. And I don't see any evidence of delusions or paranoia." The police aren't interested, taking a "no real evidence, no crimes" approach. I can't know who is behind the crimes that are being committed, but this isn't your average stalking situation.

Something is amiss in the good, old USA and I say, "Investigate, investigate, investigate." I'm not afraid of the truth either.

I'm a white, professional, law-abiding divorced female -- I've done nothing wrong. If this could happen to me, it could happen to anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: anonymous comment Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4

Comments are closed-

gimmie shelter
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gimmie shelter on Apr 18, 2009 1:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tamm should get many more awards. He is a true hero of the people. He risked his career to help get the message out to friends he did not even know.

This government is so afraid of "We the People", that they are watching returning vets as possible terror threats, listening to our conversations, reading our emails and watching us on traffic cameras and soon they will be trying to limit our guns while blaming it on Mexico.
It is getting to the point where I am becoming embarrassed to call myself American. Nothing I see these days reminds me of what our great nation used to be and stand for.

As for this war on terror it is all a bunch B.S. it was just another way to steal our money and keep us quiet while they plotted their next scam on us. Who in their right mind could believe there was a real war on terror when the government did not even attempt to restrict our borders from supposed terrorist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: kaelieh
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter

Comments are closed-

Heil Obama!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kaelieh on Apr 18, 2009 1:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was WWII really so long ago that we have forgotten all the horrors of it?

My God, what do we do? As long as we are waging wars in the Middle East and NATO exists, who is going to say enough? If we not invading their land who will dare stand up and say, "No more?"

Here at home if we dare critize the government we get called [now] right-wingers at best and tin foil hatters at worst.

When did all the "nutty" conspiracy theorists get to be right? I always suspected that they might be. That they knew something I didn't. But my god, why are they right? I know men can be evil and corrupt and power hungry. I just can't seem to understand how they got control of America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Heil Obama! Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Heil Obama! Posted by: Aquinas

Comments are closed-

gimmie shelter
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gimmie shelter on Apr 18, 2009 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny you should mention WWII. Did you know that I.B.M. invented and marketed a machine called a tabulator which they leased and serviced to and for the Third Reich in Germany.. I think if it were not for this invention that the war profits for IBM would not have been as large for those war years. The tabulator increased the efficiently of exterminating Jews and thus allowed for such greater numbers of them to be killed.

Never make the mistake of thinking a corporation cares if anyone lives or dies, their only concern is profit and exploitation.

Now imagine that they are in control of our government. No need to imagine anymore because it is a fact all anyone need do is follow our Taxpayers) money to themselves. Does Wall Street ring a bell?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: Rip Tragle
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter

Comments are closed-

HOW MANY MORE SHOES CAN FALL ?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 18, 2009 3:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stories like this one explain why Obama isn't in a big rush to indict people. Once a few were put on trial, everyone else would clam up. I shudder to think of what's left to find out. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Let's hear it for our "Justice" Department, which is
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Aquinas on Apr 18, 2009 4:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
chock full of politicians who make political decisions way before they bother with legal decisions. What possible reason could the Justice Department have for delaying whether to prosecute Tamm until Obama gets in office. What in hell does that have to do with enforcing the law if in fact there are grounds for prosecuting him in the first place, which I doubt.
Why should we believe the Justice Department when it has degenerated into a fan club for the president. It doesn't serve justice to check with the president before prosecuting crimes. The Attorney General is supposed to enforce the law period, not check with the president to see if its politically feasible to do so. That's not law, that's politics!
We have another example of this "selective enforcement" with Obama's decision to "look forward" only, when the facts require that he look backwards long enough to determine who authorized torture in our name. That's pure political theater trying to mask as concern for the state of the union. In short Obama, you're a phony hiding behind meaningless rhetoric while the nation suffers irreparable harm from the Bush gangsters. Thanks Obama, you're also making it easier for other lawyers to "bend the laws" according to the precedent you set by choosing not to prosecute. This is NOT "change" as you promised with your high flying rhetoric; this is more of the same, where the current tyrant in office gets to decide which laws he will obey, while holding the rest of us to the letter of the law. Unless Obama rethinks this decision and goes where the facts direct him and the AG, he is as complicit as the Bush gangsters and doesn't deserve the support of the people.
The people do not want blood, they're not a frenzied mob, they simply want justice applied equally regardless of where the accusing finger points. Anything less is a farce and will insure that the people will display even more disrespect for the law than they already have and with ample justification.
It's always lawyers who seek to shape the law to meet their agenda at the expense of everything else, including the Constitution. Obama is a lawyer and knows better, therefor he's guilty of obstruction of justice but that only applies to the peons and the cannon fodder; at least until they take to the streets and make their own law, at which time the lawyers will be the first to feel the sting of real justice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The NSA Was Monitoring Everything. Another Telecom Geek Speaks
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ishmael1 on Apr 18, 2009 4:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've spent 28 years in Telecommunications Operations for A.T.&T., Qwest and a host of other telecoms. I specialized in new equipment installation, Final testing and maintenance of advanced fiberoptic systems up to the OC/192 DWDM level. In my career, I also was responsible for keeping A.T.&T.'s service working out of San Francisco in the immediate aftermath of the 1989 Loma Prieta Quake. If you got a call from San Francisco during that time, it was because of MY work. Having worked in the same building as Mark Klein for a number of years, I read his affadavit for the EFF from the perspective of one greatly experienced in Telecom engineering. Here is the link to the EFF cases site. Klein's affadavit is linked there.

http://www.eff.org/cases/att


The ONLY way for the Warrantless Wiretap Program to work, BY DESIGN, is to monitor ALL telecom voice and data traffic coming off the Optical Hybrid Splitters. The key page for me is page 17 of the declaration that lists the Other Common Carriers who lease bulk service from A.T.&T. Companies like Sprint, Qwest, Allegiance, Level 3 and Cable and Wireless were having their customers' traffic routed into the NSA rooms. That's WHY they NEEDED telecomm immunity.

So Privacy of Communications is dead. When I started in 1980, the Telecommunications Act of 1934 was still in force. Under that law, as an A.T.&T. employee, I had to sign forms acknowledging that I was subject to Termination of Employment, Civil and Criminal penalties if I revealed ANY conversations I overheard in the performance of my duties to ANYONE EVER. We have gone from one extreme to the other.

So not only is privacy of communications dead for all individuals, it is also dead for all Businesses as well. Transmitting trade secrets or proprietary data over Telecom lines? The NSA has it. So how do you know some enterprising NSA employee isn't filtering THOSE out for sale to competitors later? You don't. How do we know info gathered about you wasn't passed on to prospective employers? we don't.

The purpose of this program was never to track terrorists. It was ALWAYS to spy and compile dossiers on everyone, especially reporters, dissident groups and political opponents. It was also to preidentify possible "troublemakers" for the Security agencies.

So if you want to keep your ideas and words secure, don't use the phone or internet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I realized that too Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

Can the listeners be overwhelmed?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Jeanne on Apr 18, 2009 8:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If a concerted, combined, simultaneous mass emailing of a garbage "message" containing just the key words (whatever they might be) that trigger a second look were sent, would it overwhelm the system? It's a fantasy I've had, but have no idea if would jam up the works. Certainly would be a good lesson to the violators of our right to privacy. And, maybe an incentive to be more discriminating about who they spy on. I hope just speculating isn't a crime...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Can the listeners be overwhelmed? Posted by: gimmie shelter
» RE: I think twitter did the trick Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

No surprise here. The pols knew what they were getting into when they signed on to this crap.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Apr 19, 2009 10:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This issue was brought up by Independent candidates in full force but few of us chose wisely. How about calling for an abolition of the NSA or reforming it ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Wiretap my phone? That's ridiculous.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: AJR Journal on Apr 19, 2009 12:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why wiretap my phone? Yougottabekidding.
The Feds have no interest whatsoever in my telephone conversations. The idea that they are wiretapping my phone is paranoid, to say the least. I am not living in such baseless fear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are not living with reality Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: You are not living with reality Posted by: Reader in Japan
» RE: Wiretap my phone? That's ridiculous. Posted by: Reader in Japan

Comments are closed-

911
[Report this comment]
Posted by: geecie30 on Apr 19, 2009 5:16 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
after all 911 was an inside job. I think it would be smart for the elite in all branches of government to watch the sheep and make sure that order is kept. Our government made a big mistake and wants to keep damage control. This wiretapping is a means keep business as usual. No matter what we do or whom we elect we will get corruption and feet draggers. The media will do the same. We will be fed by corporate power and it will come as a shock when something happens. Our system gains when we react. It is against the law for a citizen to be proactive. Don't you want to live like native americans did a few hundred years ago or are you too busy watching American idol and Brittany Spears is doing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

When information is classified in order to...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: leafsong1 on Apr 20, 2009 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...protect government officials from felony prosecution, the person responsible for calssifying that information is guilty of obstruction of justice. Any person who has access to this information and actively conceals it is guilty of obstruction of justice. If, on the other hand, they reveal that information to the press, they are excercising their right to not incriminate themselves; to not commit the crime of obstruction of justice. As usual, the criminals are being protected from exposure and prosecution, while the citizens excercising their rights are facing jail time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Is that all
[Report this comment]
Posted by: maxsmart on Apr 20, 2009 5:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you think it stops there. And just for whistle blowers, what about anyone else that attracts attention for any reason good or bad! If They gave him a bad time what might they be doing to others and who knows what. They might just be streading rumors to discredit someone and make their life miserable, or maybe identity theft to cause someone more trouble. What if they just don't like someone and they don't have anything else to do at the time waiting for a terrorist to pop up and none do...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Neither Congress nor the courts Determined What NSA Surveillance Is Admissible In Court
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ross Wolf on Apr 21, 2009 4:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Neither Congress nor the courts—determined what NSA electronic surveillance could be used by police or introduced into court by the government to prosecute citizens.

In 2004, former Attorney General John Ashcroft asked government prosecutors to review thousands of old intelligence files including wiretaps to retrieve information prosecutors could use in “ordinary” criminal prosecutions. That was shortly after a court case lowered a barrier that blocked prosecutors from using illegal-wire tap evidence in Justice Dept. “Intelligence Files” to prosecute ordinary crimes. It would appear this information, may also be used by government to prosecute civil asset forfeitures.
See:http://www.securityfocus.com/news/5452

Considering this court case, it might be possible for NSA to share its “recent” electronic-domestic-spying with countless U.S. police agencies; including government contracted--companies and private individuals that have security clearances to facilitate seizing Americans’ property—-to keep part of the bounty. Police too easily can take an innocent person’s hastily written email, fax or phone call out of context to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause an arrest or asset forfeiture.

There are over 200 U.S. laws and violations mentioned in the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 and the Patriot Act that can subject property to civil asset forfeiture.” Under federal civil forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for government to forfeit their property.

In the U.S. private security companies and their operatives work so closely with law enforcement to forfeit property—providing intelligence information, they appear to merge with police.

Rep. Henry Hyde’s bill HR 1658 passed, the “Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” and effectively eliminated the “statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture. The statute now runs five years from when police allege they “learned” that an asset became subject to forfeiture. With such a weak statute of limitations and the low standard of civil proof needed for government to forfeit property “A preponderance of Evidence”, it is problematic law enforcement and private government contractors will want access to telecom-NSA and other government wiretaps perhaps illegal, to secure evidence to arrest Americans and or civilly forfeit their homes, inheritances and businesses under Title 18USC and other laws. Of obvious concern, what happens to fair justice in America if police become dependent on “Asset Forfeiture” to help pay their salaries and operating costs?

Under the USA Patriot Act, witnesses can be kept hidden while being paid part of the assets they cause to be forfeited. The Patriot Act specifically mentions using Title 18USC asset forfeiture laws: those laws include a provision in Rep. Henry Hyde’s 2000 bill HR 1658—for “retroactive civil asset forfeiture” of “assets already subject to government forfeiture”, meaning "property already tainted by crime" provided “the property” was already part of or “later connected” to a criminal investigation in progress" when HR.1658 passed. That can apply to more than two hundred federal laws and violations.

To help protect Americans from continuing police forfeiture abuse, Congress should pass legislation that raises the standard of evidence Government uses for Civil Asset Forfeiture from a mere “Preponderance of Evidence”, to “Clear and Convincing Evidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Abuse of cell phone interceptions along border areas
[Report this comment]
Posted by: socrates2 on Apr 22, 2009 11:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ask any attorney who practices criminal law along any border, Mexico or Canada whether civilian cell phones were illegally tapped and intercepted (and search warrants later sought). Ask the same attorneys about the covert aid to local, border-town cops who suddenly began making more drugs arrests based on "anonymous tips" of drug use.
This is a _scandal_ that only those who work in law enforcement (and they ain't tellin') and criminal law know about.
Of course the "end justifies the means" so your typical anti-drug conditioned citizen will shrug his shoulders and say "good riddance."
Under W and his Patriot Act our Constitution was torn to shreds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

These have been really outstanding pieces you have been doing. Thank you.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: godsbreath64 on Apr 18, 2009 12:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill Maher had it right all along when he said every morning when he wakes up, he emails a copy of the constitution to give THEM something worthwhile to look at >;-)

Thanks again for the great work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So Try Emailing the Constitution! Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» Bill, I am really sorry. Posted by: godsbreath64

Comments are closed-

Not To Worry ... Obama Will Fix This Privacy Thing ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 18, 2009 1:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OOOOPS ! Nothing to see here... move along please, move along ...

Why is Obama following Bush's lead on state secrets?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

THE COMMIES/ NAZIS LISTEN TO EVERYTHING
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TrollTreason on Apr 18, 2009 2:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ESPECIALLY TO POLITICALLY MINDED, EDUCATED INDIVIDUALS, LIKE ALTERNET POSTERS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

9/11 brought us wiretapping. Want to stop it? Expose the lies of 9/11!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: pfgetty on Apr 18, 2009 3:05 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All this fluster about getting evidence that we are wiretapped is a waste of time. The American people just don't care.
As long as the official story of 9/11 stands, the American people feel that they are more secure if US agencies do some wiretapping. If you stop it completely, there will be a flurry of attacks saying that we need wiretapping to keep us safe from terrorists.
This issue just won't get traction except from the far left and fringe libertarians.

But expose 9/11 as a pack of lies, which it is, and we will see the end of wiretapping, because the people will finally realize that the whole terrorism thing is a crock of shit. And they will be angry. And finally they will care...........the average American will be so incensed at the power of our government over their lives.

But the lies of 9/11 will not be exposed to the general public because the msm AND alternative media have participated in a program of complete avoidance of the topic of 9/11. There are people who have studied and analyzed 9/11 and can provide absolute proof that 9/11 was an inside job. All it takes is the presentation of their facts. The work is done, ready to be brought to the public. Nothing could be easier for venues like Alternet. But Alternet has decided it will continue to conspire to keep all of this information from the American people.
It will continue to waste its time exposing wiretapping, and Americans really don't care.
Why Alternet and the rest avoid 9/11? We don't know. They won't tell us.
The recent work by Kevin Ryan and Steven Jones provides absolute proof of the use of controlled demolition of the WTC. Better than anything they've got for evidence for wiretapping. But Alternet has completely ignored the scientific papers presented, which have been exposed in Europe with fanfare. Here in the US, our press continues to be under some sort of spell, or contract, with the government to never talk about 9/11.
We need some journalists to break out and tell us what they know, why this issue is avoided.

Alternet could be that first to come forward with this information. The news could spread, even embarrassing the msm to present it. It would change the world. For the better.
Do it, Alternet!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're a nut, Lauren. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: You're a bull shit artist Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Who belongs in jail? Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: You are just a sore loser Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Yep, he's a bull shit artist Posted by: WhuThe?!?
» Sonic booms near the ground? Posted by: LeftWright
» What happened to the bodies? Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: I live in California Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Where in California, GB? Posted by: LeftWright
» No need for me to debunk you. Posted by: GuitarBill
» 272 tons of TNT? Posted by: GuitarBill
» GB - Take it up with NIST Posted by: LeftWright
» "Physics, facts and logic"? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Right On! Posted by: Styve
» Now Billy, need I/ they say more? Posted by: godsbreath64
» Insane, much? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Dr. Billy, Dr Billy Posted by: godsbreath64
» RE: Don't call him names Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Don't call him names Posted by: GuitarBill
» Could you confirm some facts for me? Posted by: Reader in Japan
» What Israel hates most of all? Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

The Bush-Obama National Security State
[Report this comment]
Posted by: DrBrian on Apr 18, 2009 4:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's increasingly clear to all except the most deluded Obamaniacs that the current administration is very little different from its predecessor. The new president has made a few, much ballyhooed public pronouncements intended to reassure the nation that he's not abusing his powers, but he has yet to renounce any of the sweeping, unconstitutional powers Bush and Cheney arrogated to themselves with the retroactive consent or cynical connivance of a do-nothing Congress.

The spying, denial of detainee rights, maltreatment and authoritarian intelligence and law enforcement powers remain, and for us to trust Obama with them because of some perceived beatific characteristics is foolhardy at best and psychotic at worst.

These abuses, combined with his trillion dollar financial giveaway to his Wall Street swindler campaign benefactors, should be enough to open our eyes and energize our resistance to the direction he is taking us.

I should know. Because of my medical assistance to both sides during Nepal's pro-democracy movement, and my truthful statements to BBC News about the atrocities I had observed at the hands of the Royal Police, I was beaten, taken into custody, and taken out secretly at night to be shot by the Armed Police. The police told me the US Embassy knew I was there and would not intervene on my behalf.

Fortunately, a UN Human Rights team arrived and repeatedly placed desperate calls to the US Embassy without avail, so undertook to negotiate my release and safe deportation. After the King restored democracy I was called back to the country and feted widely, but US officials went around spreading rumors that I was wanted for murder, and my friends and relatives in the US were told by the FBI not to contact or assist me in any way, a state which persists.

Dissent from the US policy of supporting brutal right-wing dictatorships and impartial medical assistance were enough to deem me a terrorist, even though I am a long-time supporter of peace, human rights and democracy.

Lord Acton warned us that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Bush and Obama have had the closest to absolute power the world has ever seen. We ignore his warning at our peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Dismantle AIPAC Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

Where are the cameras
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Erin on Apr 18, 2009 6:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have seen "google earth" and have been able to locate my house from above, but recently I was shown another application where you can see your house like you are on the ground level. You can walk right down your street and see the front windows, porches, and back yards of everyone on any street. My question is where the F@*K are the cameras??? My other observation is that "google" has no advertisements. All others have to get advertisers to keep their sites running. So, my other question is who is funding Google???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: Mbell
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: metavurt
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: willymack
» RE: Where are the cameras Posted by: Quannah

Comments are closed-

Shocking ... FBI harassment!!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4 on Apr 18, 2009 6:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“[W]hat lengths men will go in order to carry out, to their extreme limit, the rites of a collective self-worship which fills them with a sense of righteousness and complacent satisfaction in the midst of the most shocking injustices and crimes.”
-Love and Living, by Thomas Merton

A little like this ...
http://www.freedomfchs.com/unwarranted_surveillance.pdf

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

WHEN will the Truth come out?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: madmax427 on Apr 18, 2009 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so disappointed with all these articles which try to limit the illegal activity of NSA to JUST wiretapping! I KNOW from personal experience Their capabilities far exceed JUST wiretapping! Things like taking over a computer remotely, affecting the ability to send/receive emails, blocking access to important programs like websites by changing key functions.

Like the 9/11 'conspiracy', The Truth involves so much more, so why are We trying to LIMIT the investigation?

I have been called crazy & most recently, delusional. O.K. I am willing to Prove what I say: I will turn over My computer to an expert IF He/She will check the operating system & PUBLISH the results of the investigation. IF I'm so far out, PUBLISH it! IF I am CORRECT PUBLISH THAT!

http://www.whatsyourlifeworth2.info

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHEN will the Truth come out? Posted by: anonymous comment
» RE: Sounds like a comitted stalker to me Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4
» Waterboard Silverstein Posted by: weathered

Comments are closed-

no *DUH*
[Report this comment]
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on Apr 18, 2009 9:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but when anybody who understood the technology said anything about it

defensive Americans told us we didn't know what we were talking about.

I can't WAIT until American figure out that this has HUGE CORPORATE ESPIONAGE implications both domestically & internationally.

wanna start a company?

better hope that a multi-national BIG PLAYER doesn't decide that the field of play BELONGS TO THEM...

the easiest way to KEEP THE INDIVIDUAL FUCKED by Money & Power is to ensure... they never get to play on a level field...

"oh but this means its good for the American Interest or American companies!!!"... yeah, sure it does... you go right on believing that...

surveillance to prevent dissent.. & surveillance to prevent competition to those corporations WHO BOUGHT & PAID FOR THE US GOVERNMENT & its 'agencies'.

AT&T FUNDED THE FREAKING DENVER '08 DNC...
but then, they funded OBAMA, so I guess that's GOOD FOR THE WORLD Human Rights & Environment... because American Democratic Party is synonymous with "goodness & mercy" yeah... sure it is.
wake up.
The American Democratic representatives funded WHINSEC & a *lot* of human rights & civil rights abusive projects...


perspective, people.


Perspective.

The Jeff Farias Show: streams FREE & LIVE Mon-Fri, 6-9pmEST

FREE podcast

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

What's so bad about it, anyway?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: willymack on Apr 18, 2009 10:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems that a significant portion of our people have adapted a "ho hum" attitude toward the government obtruding into our privacy. Statements like "if they want to put themselves to sleep watching me, they can knock themselves out", or "there must be a really good reason for what they're doing", are common. Let's consider this subject from another perspective. Suppose you have a nosy neighbor (who hasn't?) who INSISTS on knowing everything about you, and can be seen skulking about, or slowly driving by. You confront said neighbor who indignantly denies any wrongdoing and calls your sanity into question. You then call the cops who tell you in no uncertain terms that not only are the actions of the nosy neighbor LEGAL, but that they provide a valuable public service. How tolerable would THAT be to Joe Six-pack? How is this any different from electronic surveillance?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good point Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

anonymous comment
[Report this comment]
Posted by: anonymous comment on Apr 18, 2009 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The investigation of the NSA needs to be very broad. After the bizarre, Kafkaesque things that I've experienced, I know that we're in deep trouble, if not "totally screwed", to use Anderson Cooper's expression about our uncertain collective fate.

My own personal experiences relate to surveillance; surreptitious home intrusions; vandalism and theft of personal property, including mail; and defamation. I moved to another state and the problems followed. I've had items stolen from my car, including a cell-phone from a locked hotel room. A threatening note was tacked to my front door. I moved and trouble followed.

I solicited the input of a psychiatrist who said, "I believe that someone is psychologically terrorizing you. And I don't see any evidence of delusions or paranoia." The police aren't interested, taking a "no real evidence, no crimes" approach. I can't know who is behind the crimes that are being committed, but this isn't your average stalking situation.

Something is amiss in the good, old USA and I say, "Investigate, investigate, investigate." I'm not afraid of the truth either.

I'm a white, professional, law-abiding divorced female -- I've done nothing wrong. If this could happen to me, it could happen to anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: anonymous comment Posted by: wehaveseenthismovieb4

Comments are closed-

gimmie shelter
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gimmie shelter on Apr 18, 2009 1:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tamm should get many more awards. He is a true hero of the people. He risked his career to help get the message out to friends he did not even know.

This government is so afraid of "We the People", that they are watching returning vets as possible terror threats, listening to our conversations, reading our emails and watching us on traffic cameras and soon they will be trying to limit our guns while blaming it on Mexico.
It is getting to the point where I am becoming embarrassed to call myself American. Nothing I see these days reminds me of what our great nation used to be and stand for.

As for this war on terror it is all a bunch B.S. it was just another way to steal our money and keep us quiet while they plotted their next scam on us. Who in their right mind could believe there was a real war on terror when the government did not even attempt to restrict our borders from supposed terrorist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: kaelieh
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter

Comments are closed-

Heil Obama!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kaelieh on Apr 18, 2009 1:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was WWII really so long ago that we have forgotten all the horrors of it?

My God, what do we do? As long as we are waging wars in the Middle East and NATO exists, who is going to say enough? If we not invading their land who will dare stand up and say, "No more?"

Here at home if we dare critize the government we get called [now] right-wingers at best and tin foil hatters at worst.

When did all the "nutty" conspiracy theorists get to be right? I always suspected that they might be. That they knew something I didn't. But my god, why are they right? I know men can be evil and corrupt and power hungry. I just can't seem to understand how they got control of America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Heil Obama! Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Heil Obama! Posted by: Aquinas

Comments are closed-

gimmie shelter
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gimmie shelter on Apr 18, 2009 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny you should mention WWII. Did you know that I.B.M. invented and marketed a machine called a tabulator which they leased and serviced to and for the Third Reich in Germany.. I think if it were not for this invention that the war profits for IBM would not have been as large for those war years. The tabulator increased the efficiently of exterminating Jews and thus allowed for such greater numbers of them to be killed.

Never make the mistake of thinking a corporation cares if anyone lives or dies, their only concern is profit and exploitation.

Now imagine that they are in control of our government. No need to imagine anymore because it is a fact all anyone need do is follow our Taxpayers) money to themselves. Does Wall Street ring a bell?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: Rip Tragle
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter

Comments are closed-

HOW MANY MORE SHOES CAN FALL ?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 18, 2009 3:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stories like this one explain why Obama isn't in a big rush to indict people. Once a few were put on trial, everyone else would clam up. I shudder to think of what's left to find out. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Let's hear it for our "Justice" Department, which is
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Aquinas on Apr 18, 2009 4:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
chock full of politicians who make political decisions way before they bother with legal decisions. What possible reason could the Justice Department have for delaying whether to prosecute Tamm until Obama gets in office. What in hell does that have to do with enforcing the law if in fact there are grounds for prosecuting him in the first place, which I doubt.
Why should we believe the Justice Department when it has degenerated into a fan club for the president. It doesn't serve justice to check with the president before prosecuting crimes. The Attorney General is supposed to enforce the law period, not check with the president to see if its politically feasible to do so. That's not law, that's politics!
We have another example of this "selective enforcement" with Obama's decision to "look forward" only, when the facts require that he look backwards long enough to determine who authorized torture in our name. That's pure political theater trying to mask as concern for the state of the union. In short Obama, you're a phony hiding behind meaningless rhetoric while the nation suffers irreparable harm from the Bush gangsters. Thanks Obama, you're also making it easier for other lawyers to "bend the laws" according to the precedent you set by choosing not to prosecute. This is NOT "change" as you promised with your high flying rhetoric; this is more of the same, where the current tyrant in office gets to decide which laws he will obey, while holding the rest of us to the letter of the law. Unless Obama rethinks this decision and goes where the facts direct him and the AG, he is as complicit as the Bush gangsters and doesn't deserve the support of the people.
The people do not want blood, they're not a frenzied mob, they simply want justice applied equally regardless of where the accusing finger points. Anything less is a farce and will insure that the people will display even more disrespect for the law than they already have and with ample justification.
It's always lawyers who seek to shape the law to meet their agenda at the expense of everything else, including the Constitution. Obama is a lawyer and knows better, therefor he's guilty of obstruction of justice but that only applies to the peons and the cannon fodder; at least until they take to the streets and make their own law, at which time the lawyers will be the first to feel the sting of real justice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The NSA Was Monitoring Everything. Another Telecom Geek Speaks
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ishmael1 on Apr 18, 2009 4:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've spent 28 years in Telecommunications Operations for A.T.&T., Qwest and a host of other telecoms. I specialized in new equipment installation, Final testing and maintenance of advanced fiberoptic systems up to the OC/192 DWDM level. In my career, I also was responsible for keeping A.T.&T.'s service working out of San Francisco in the immediate aftermath of the 1989 Loma Prieta Quake. If you got a call from San Francisco during that time, it was because of MY work. Having worked in the same building as Mark Klein for a number of years, I read his affadavit for the EFF from the perspective of one greatly experienced in Telecom engineering. Here is the link to the EFF cases site. Klein's affadavit is linked there.

http://www.eff.org/cases/att


The ONLY way for the Warrantless Wiretap Program to work, BY DESIGN, is to monitor ALL telecom voice and data traffic coming off the Optical Hybrid Splitters. The key page for me is page 17 of the declaration that lists the Other Common Carriers who lease bulk service from A.T.&T. Companies like Sprint, Qwest, Allegiance, Level 3 and Cable and Wireless were having their customers' traffic routed into the NSA rooms. That's WHY they NEEDED telecomm immunity.

So Privacy of Communications is dead. When I started in 1980, the Telecommunications Act of 1934 was still in force. Under that law, as an A.T.&T. employee, I had to sign forms acknowledging that I was subject to Termination of Employment, Civil and Criminal penalties if I revealed ANY conversations I overheard in the performance of my duties to ANYONE EVER. We have gone from one extreme to the other.

So not only is privacy of communications dead for all individuals, it is also dead for all Businesses as well. Transmitting trade secrets or proprietary data over Telecom lines? The NSA has it. So how do you know some enterprising NSA employee isn't filtering THOSE out for sale to competitors later? You don't. How do we know info gathered about you wasn't passed on to prospective employers? we don't.

The purpose of this program was never to track terrorists. It was ALWAYS to spy and compile dossiers on everyone, especially reporters, dissident groups and political opponents. It was also to preidentify possible "troublemakers" for the Security agencies.

So if you want to keep your ideas and words secure, don't use the phone or internet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I realized that too Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

Can the listeners be overwhelmed?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Jeanne on Apr 18, 2009 8:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If a concerted, combined, simultaneous mass emailing of a garbage "message" containing just the key words (whatever they might be) that trigger a second look were sent, would it overwhelm the system? It's a fantasy I've had, but have no idea if would jam up the works. Certainly would be a good lesson to the violators of our right to privacy. And, maybe an incentive to be more discriminating about who they spy on. I hope just speculating isn't a crime...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Can the listeners be overwhelmed? Posted by: gimmie shelter
» RE: I think twitter did the trick Posted by: Sister_Lauren

Comments are closed-

No surprise here. The pols knew what they were getting into when they signed on to this crap.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Apr 19, 2009 10:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This issue was brought up by Independent candidates in full force but few of us chose wisely. How about calling for an abolition of the NSA or reforming it ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Wiretap my phone? That's ridiculous.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: AJR Journal on Apr 19, 2009 12:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why wiretap my phone? Yougottabekidding.
The Feds have no interest whatsoever in my telephone conversations. The idea that they are wiretapping my phone is paranoid, to say the least. I am not living in such baseless fear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are not living with reality Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: You are not living with reality Posted by: Reader in Japan
» RE: Wiretap my phone? That's ridiculous. Posted by: Reader in Japan

Comments are closed-

911
[Report this comment]
Posted by: geecie30 on Apr 19, 2009 5:16 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
after all 911 was an inside job. I think it would be smart for the elite in all branches of government to watch the sheep and make sure that order is kept. Our government made a big mistake and wants to keep damage control. This wiretapping is a means keep business as usual. No matter what we do or whom we elect we will get corruption and feet draggers. The media will do the same. We will be fed by corporate power and it will come as a shock when something happens. Our system gains when we react. It is against the law for a citizen to be proactive. Don't you want to live like native americans did a few hundred years ago or are you too busy watching American idol and Brittany Spears is doing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

When information is classified in order to...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: leafsong1 on Apr 20, 2009 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...protect government officials from felony prosecution, the person responsible for calssifying that information is guilty of obstruction of justice. Any person who has access to this information and actively conceals it is guilty of obstruction of justice. If, on the other hand, they reveal that information to the press, they are excercising their right to not incriminate themselves; to not commit the crime of obstruction of justice. As usual, the criminals are being protected from exposure and prosecution, while the citizens excercising their rights are facing jail time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Is that all
[Report this comment]
Posted by: maxsmart on Apr 20, 2009 5:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you think it stops there. And just for whistle blowers, what about anyone else that attracts attention for any reason good or bad! If They gave him a bad time what might they be doing to others and who knows what. They might just be streading rumors to discredit someone and make their life miserable, or maybe identity theft to cause someone more trouble. What if they just don't like someone and they don't have anything else to do at the time waiting for a terrorist to pop up and none do...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Neither Congress nor the courts Determined What NSA Surveillance Is Admissible In Court
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ross Wolf on Apr 21, 2009 4:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Neither Congress nor the courts—determined what NSA electronic surveillance could be used by police or introduced into court by the government to prosecute citizens.

In 2004, former Attorney General John Ashcroft asked government prosecutors to review thousands of old intelligence files including wiretaps to retrieve information prosecutors could use in “ordinary” criminal prosecutions. That was shortly after a court case lowered a barrier that blocked prosecutors from using illegal-wire tap evidence in Justice Dept. “Intelligence Files” to prosecute ordinary crimes. It would appear this information, may also be used by government to prosecute civil asset forfeitures.
See:http://www.securityfocus.com/news/5452

Considering this court case, it might be possible for NSA to share its “recent” electronic-domestic-spying with countless U.S. police agencies; including government contracted--companies and private individuals that have security clearances to facilitate seizing Americans’ property—-to keep part of the bounty. Police too easily can take an innocent person’s hastily written email, fax or phone call out of context to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause an arrest or asset forfeiture.

There are over 200 U.S. laws and violations mentioned in the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 and the Patriot Act that can subject property to civil asset forfeiture.” Under federal civil forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for government to forfeit their property.

In the U.S. private security companies and their operatives work so closely with law enforcement to forfeit property—providing intelligence information, they appear to merge with police.

Rep. Henry Hyde’s bill HR 1658 passed, the “Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” and effectively eliminated the “statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture. The statute now runs five years from when police allege they “learned” that an asset became subject to forfeiture. With such a weak statute of limitations and the low standard of civil proof needed for government to forfeit property “A preponderance of Evidence”, it is problematic law enforcement and private government contractors will want access to telecom-NSA and other government wiretaps perhaps illegal, to secure evidence to arrest Americans and or civilly forfeit their homes, inheritances and businesses under Title 18USC and other laws. Of obvious concern, what happens to fair justice in America if police become dependent on “Asset Forfeiture” to help pay their salaries and operating costs?

Under the USA Patriot Act, witnesses can be kept hidden while being paid part of the assets they cause to be forfeited. The Patriot Act specifically mentions using Title 18USC asset forfeiture laws: those laws include a provision in Rep. Henry Hyde’s 2000 bill HR 1658—for “retroactive civil asset forfeiture” of “assets already subject to government forfeiture”, meaning "property already tainted by crime" provided “the property” was already part of or “later connected” to a criminal investigation in progress" when HR.1658 passed. That can apply to more than two hundred federal laws and violations.

To help protect Americans from continuing police forfeiture abuse, Congress should pass legislation that raises the standard of evidence Government uses for Civil Asset Forfeiture from a mere “Preponderance of Evidence”, to “Clear and Convincing Evidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Abuse of cell phone interceptions along border areas
[Report this comment]
Posted by: socrates2 on Apr 22, 2009 11:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ask any attorney who practices criminal law along any border, Mexico or Canada whether civilian cell phones were illegally tapped and intercepted (and search warrants later sought). Ask the same attorneys about the covert aid to local, border-town cops who suddenly began making more drugs arrests based on "anonymous tips" of drug use.
This is a _scandal_ that only those who work in law enforcement (and they ain't tellin') and criminal law know about.
Of course the "end justifies the means" so your typical anti-drug conditioned citizen will shrug his shoulders and say "good riddance."
Under W and his Patriot Act our Constitution was torn to shreds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
Is Greece the New AIG?
 
Confused About Nutrition? Eat Food!
 
Insurer Denies Life-Prolonging Treatment To Five-Year-Old Boy With Cancer
 
Budget Paranoia
 
Why Does the U.S. Assassinate Americans?
 
Jon Stewart: Why Does Sarah Palin Need a Cheat Sheet?
 
We Must Lift the Veil on US Troops in Pakistan
 
Pushing for “Zero Tolerance” on Sexual Violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo
 
Updated: Obama Calls GOP Bluff on Health-Care Reform
 
The Tea Party Dumps Economic Populism: Where are the Progressives?
 
MORE 
ALL BLOGS 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
  1. Why Are Americans Passive as Millions Lose Their Homes, Jobs, Families and the American Dream?
  2. 5 Ways Techno-Gadgetry Is Bringing Out the Worst in Humanity
  3. Why Has the FDA Allowed a Drug Marked 'Not Safe for Use in Humans' to Be Fed to Livestock Right Before Slaughter?
  4. Shadow Elite: How the World's New Power Brokers Are Upending Our Democracy
  5. New Poll Results Are Proof That Republicans Don't Think
  6. White "Savior-Afflicted" Christians, Black Haitian Babies: This Won't End Well
  7. Why I Had to Stop Making Hardcore Porn
  8. It's Now More Dangerous to Give Birth in California Than It Is in Kuwait or Bosnia
  9. Sarah Palin Aims to Bust Up the Republican Party -- And the Tea Party Movement
  10. The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat?
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
ABOUT DIGG