Clinton Authorized NSA Monitoring Of U.S. Phone Calls

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by GotZoom, May 12, 2006.

  1. GotZoom
    Offline

    GotZoom Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    5,719
    Thanks Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Cordova, TN
    Ratings:
    +366
    Let's see. Bush says NSA can look at phone records/numbers, Clinton authorizes actual listening to conversations.

    -------

    During the 1990's under President Clinton, the National Security Agency monitored millions of private phone calls placed by U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries under a super secret program code-named Echelon.

    On Friday, the New York Times suggested that the Bush administration has instituted "a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices" when it "secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without [obtaining] court-approved warrants."

    But in fact, the NSA had been monitoring private domestic telephone conversations on a much larger scale throughout the 1990s - all of it done without a court order, let alone a catalyst like the 9/11 attacks.

    In February 2000, for instance, CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft introduced a report on the Clinton-era spy program by noting:

    "If you made a phone call today or sent an e-mail to a friend, there's a good chance what you said or wrote was captured and screened by the country's largest intelligence agency. The top-secret Global Surveillance Network is called Echelon, and it's run by the National Security Agency."

    NSA computers, said Kroft, "capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world."

    Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told "60 Minutes" that the agency was monitoring "everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs."

    Mr. Frost detailed activities at one unidentified NSA installation, telling "60 Minutes" that agency operators "can listen in to just about anything" - while Echelon computers screen phone calls for key words that might indicate a terrorist threat.

    The "60 Minutes" report also spotlighted Echelon critic, then-Rep. Bob Barr, who complained that the project as it was being implemented under Clinton "engages in the interception of literally millions of communications involving United States citizens."

    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/18/221452.shtml
     
  2. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    The silence is deafening...

    Nice find, D.
     
  3. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    but but but but----it's different. :teeth:
     
  4. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,560
    Thanks Received:
    13,013
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,439
    Real different...Clinton complied with the FISA laws. Fancy that...Clinton complied with the law; Bush didn't. Shocking.

    Shortly after the disclosure of the NSA's warrantless domestic surveillance program in December 2005, conservative media figures attempted to draw a parallel between the Clinton administration's use of a surveillance program known as Echelon and the warrantless domestic eavesdropping authorized by the Bush administration. In the wake of this new revelation, media have equated the NSA call-tracking operation and Echelon. For instance, a May 12 New York Post editorial claimed that "the program has clear antecedents in a widely rumored surveillance program called Echelon, which was hotly debated across the Internet back in 1999 -- nearly two years before President Bush took office." On the May 12 edition Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said, "This has been happening since 2000. This isn't one man's policy. The foundation was already laid for this six years ago."

    But as Media Matters noted in response to the earlier comparisons, in contrast with the Bush administration's surveillance program, the eavesdropping of U.S. residents conducted under Echelon was carried out in compliance with FISA, according to then-CIA Director George J. Tenet. In his April 12, 2002, testimony before the House Intelligence Committee Tenet denied that Echelon was used to spy on U.S residents without a warrant. He said, "We do not target their conversations for collection in the United States unless a FISA warrant has been obtained from the FISA court by the Justice Department." Then-National Security Agency director Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden -- currently Bush's nominee for CIA director -- also appeared before the committee and testified, "If [an] American person is in the United States of America, I must have a court order before I initiate any collection [of communications] against him or her."

    By contrast, since the disclosure of their warrantless domestic surveillance program, Bush has asserted -- and administration officials such as Hayden have repeated -- that he possesses the authority to eavesdrop on U.S. residents' communications without FISA approval.

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200605120018
     
  5. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    And i heard about this today and got even more incensed. I never knew about this till all the stuff about the phone records came out. How come our media has failed us again?

    Obviously the latest news campaign is to trash Bush but that isnt my angle. All of this is Wrong no matter who is doing it. The fact that Clinton, a man less trustworthy than Bush, went further proves my point. What happens if a man like Howard dean or Hillary ever got into office? What are the limits that they will goto then? :dunno:

    People hand over their freedoms in the name of security everyday because it doesnt affect them directly. Then when the government bans something that does affect them, they're the first ones crying foul but its too late to stop it.

    Never give up your freedoms for temporary security because when the threat is gone, your freedoms are still gone too.
     
  6. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391

    You are positively prescient, Dillo! :D
     

Share This Page