The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year, government officials said in recent interviews.

That's ok, they're just targeting domestic terrorists. Nothing to worry about here. Move along.

i jusr knew there was a way for obama to be let off the hook...

Did they mistakenly target a few Liberals?

"I'm Barack Obama, and I have a waterdog."

The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year, government officials said in recent interviews.

Ah yes, there is that change so many voted for.

When such things were discovered via reviews under the Bush Admin the lefty-loonies were quick to shout "See, Bush is evil" or "Bush is spying on us illegally".

Let's see how many of those same lefty-loonies say something similar about The One.

Let's see how many of those same lefty-loonies say something similar about The One.

#6 | Posted by 101Chairborne

This was a bad thing. Happy?

According to the articles, new safeguards have been put in place to prevent it from happening again. Hopefully that is true. It also says that this will continue to be monitored.

The potential for abuse existed under the law, and apparently it happened. If that potential has been addressed and corrected, then I'm happy. If not, then it needs to be or this DOJ is no better than the last on this issue.

At the very least chair, they are saying that they are taking measures to bring the program into compliance with the law. Very different from last admin. Where they'd admit but claim it was perfectly legal under executive priv. Whether or not that is a distinction without a difference remains to be seen.

The sad part is that unless somebody talks in the future we'll likely never know.

This was a bad thing. Happy?

#7 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-04-16 09:33 AM | Reply

Oh yes, I'm ecstatic...
Does it make the Obama Admin evil? Is Obama guilty of spying on us illegally?

I personally don't think it's automatically a bad thing, it's just the way government works. That's why they have reviews and built in checks and balances. They worked now, and they worked in the Bush Admin. The difference is that the complainers then will not be the complainers now.

"Does it make the Obama Admin evil? Is Obama guilty of spying on us illegally?"

As I said - only if they don't fix the problem.

Now for the bad news - I'm pretty sure most, if not all of the abuses they uncovered occurred at the end of the last administration. ; )

"That's why they have reviews and built in checks and balances. They worked now, and they worked in the Bush Admin."

See HC's post.

"That's why they have reviews and built in checks and balances. They worked now, and they worked in the Bush Admin."

See HC's post.

Can Obama rescind this "Executive" priviledge? I know he promised to look at every Executive Order, does this apply? BTW... If these abuses took place in the end of the previous Administration, why in the hell isn't Congress or the Chairs of Committees in charge of oversight equally as guilty?

"Can Obama rescind this "Executive" priviledge?"

I believe this pertains to an actual law passed by Congress.

"I know he promised to look at every Executive Order, does this apply?"

This wasn't an Executive Order, but the infractions were discovered during a review Obama ordered Holt to conduct.

Hagbard's point (I believe) was that under Bush the pattern when something like this was discovered was to claim it was legal and try to push the envelope further.

Hopefully, as the articles seem to indicate, Obama will make them fix the problems.

Regardless, it needs to be monitored closely.

"...Obama ordered Holt..."

Sorry - Holder.

This all goes back to what I said when these programs were established. To paraphrase: "With programs like this in place, how loud will the screaming from the right be when they realise that a Democratic president is going to have those same powers?"

I could not have said it any better than this:

Glenn Greenwald wrote on Tuesday:

When you cheer on a Surveillance State, you have no grounds to complain when it turns its eyes on you. If you create a massive and wildly empowered domestic surveillance apparatus, it's going to monitor and investigate domestic political activity. That's its nature.
It's like that classic SNL sketch from 1988 with Tom Hanks as Mr. Short Term Memory. Hanks is at a restaurant and orders his favorite meal: poached salmon. He takes a bite of his fish then, forgetting he took a bite, shouts, "Ah! There's something in my mouth! There's something in my mouth!" The wingnuts begged and fear-mongered for this gigantic overreaching surveillance state and now they're suddenly alarmed that it's covering terrorists other than brown-skinned foreigners with funny hats?

Now for the bad news - I'm pretty sure most, if not all of the abuses they uncovered occurred at the end of the last administration. ; )

#10 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-04-16 09:57 AM | Reply

At first I missed the sarcasm.

As for safeguards being built in, there were, and they happened under the Bush Admin. Typical, they didn't seem to work. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the ones the Obama Admin places won't either. It's the nature of the beast, not Hope nor Change.

The wingnuts begged and fear-mongered for this gigantic overreaching surveillance state and now they're suddenly alarmed that it's covering terrorists other than brown-skinned foreigners with funny hats?

Just curious how you conclude it is repubs screaming? It is comical to blame one party as opposed to the party which went right along with the enhanced program? Not to mention the leader of said party who voted yes. They have been in charge of Committees which has the oversight. You remember how the dems regained power in 06? Claiming the repubs failed in every oversight capacity.

The wingnuts begged and fear-mongered for this gigantic overreaching surveillance state and now they're suddenly alarmed that it's covering terrorists other than brown-skinned foreigners with funny hats?

#16 | Posted by Reagan58 at 2009-04-16 10:40 AM | Reply

The leftwingnuts were alarmed when it was announced but are happy with the gigantic overreaching surveillance state now that The One is in charge. Hell, just read the thread.

Pointing out hypocrisy isn't a one way street. When pointing at it on the right, you should remember the reaction from the left at the same time period. There are some people that remain consitent, but we're painting with broad brushes, and that means the left are just as hypocritical.

"According to the articles, new safeguards have been put in place to prevent it from happening again."

Are the articles verifiable? Would you believe such an article if it came out, say, a year ago with regard to abuses of privacy then?

These abuses must be investigated; if NSA agents went beyond legally defined limits, and did so withjout approval from superiors, they should be censured or prosecuted as appropriate.

If their superiors knowingly permitted or ordered the extra legal survelience, they must be censured or prosecuted.

It matters not whether the violations of constitutionally protected privacy occured during this or any previous administration. The law must be enfroced or we have no nation of laws.

101,

I remain alarmed that such an apparatus exists but as a realist I didn't think that a change of parties in the WH was going to change it.

Anyway it time for concall hell.

Are the articles verifiable? Would you believe such an article if it came out, say, a year ago with regard to abuses of privacy then?

#20 | Posted by JOE

Try moving beyond your selective reading of my posts and then you might comprehend what I really said on the subject.

Would you believe such an article if it came out, say, a year ago with regard to abuses of privacy then?

#20 | Posted by JOE at 2009-04-16 10:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

Neither then nor now. Just a reality.

I could not have said it any better than this:

Glenn Greenwald wrote on Tuesday:

#16 | Posted by Reagan58 at 2009-04-16 10:40 AM

Wasn't that about the right wing extreme groups being monitored? Nothing to do with this thread. You need to post that Greenwald article to the other thread. At least then you won't look like some troll criticizing repubs.

Joe
No I woiuldnt believe it if it came out a year ago and I'm hesitant to take it on faith now. Like I said earlier, absent a whistleblower we're unlikely to know for sure if that faith was deserved.

"Hagbard's point..."

Yeah that was my point about bush, but I don't rule out that Obama may be pursuing the same goal through different tactics.

The "Last few months" is not the Bush administration. Besides Obama said "The Buck Stops Here" and "You Come Talk to Me" Iwas wrong then and wrong now. OBAMA LIED!

Danni, you're silence is deafening.

Did they mistakenly target a few Liberals?

#4 | Posted by wisgod

........no........

....it was on purpose.........

The NSA might lead a political appointee and the president to believe that they have revealed something about their illegal activities and promised to clean up their act. But obviously all that can be done is to take the NSA's word for it. There is no way to check and verify NSA compliance. The NSA is a rogue agency that does whatever in the hell they want and there is no one outside the NSA who has the clearance or the know-how in order to check on them. Even if a president went walking in the front door and told them to show him what they are doing they would tell him sorry you don't have the clearance.

That damn Bush!!! Obama will fix everything for us.

I have trouble attacking obama for this as I also think it sometimes has to bo done

what worries me is the idea that obama will release some of the cia secrets that not only have kept us safe but by keeping them secret also helps to ensure the safety of the cia who Is keeping us safe

it COULD be a deffining point of his presidency because IF we get hit...

he is finished.

Change we can believe in...

because IF we get hit...
he is finished.

ROTFLMAO

Just like it finished Bush.

BLT on burnt toast

"That damn Bush!!! Obama will fix everything for us."

Bush was so fucked up, fixing some of this is very easy. don't torture....don't spy on Americans...etc

Kinda like Bush could not figure out simple right from wrong.

I hope you grunts are right but the fact remains..
IF we get hit..

he is kaput.........

IF we get hit..

he is kaput.........

You are such a rtard, Ishkababble.

Was Dumbya kaput after allowing 911 to occur?

Or did you morons vote him in fer a second time?

There is no such thing as absolute safety in terms of terorism.

Anyone who says there is is a liar and more likely than not trying to erode yer civil liberties.

Anyone who is even remotely suprised by this story aint been paying attention at all.

Be Well.

I hope you grunts are right but the fact remains..
IF we get hit..
he is kaput.........

Bush got sympathy from all of the western world and most of the world in general from conservatives liberals and all in between.

LOL you're a shallow foul little man.

Bush was so fucked up, fixing some of this is very easy. don't torture....don't spy on Americans...etc

Kinda like Bush could not figure out simple right from wrong.

#37 | Posted by fresno500

It would be as simple as saying 'don't ever do that again' WTF over.

Shocking!

Oh yes, I'm ecstatic...
Does it make the Obama Admin evil? Is Obama guilty of spying on us illegally?

#9 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-04-16 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

It just means that train that Bush set in motion is taking longer to stop than expected.

NSA works for its own masters...certainly not Congress or a particular president:>)

It just means that train that Bush set in motion is taking longer to stop than expected.

#43 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

gonna catch them right-wing terrorist threats! "Taking longer to stop"??? Come on common sense, they're just now ramping up baby. Get with the program. They'll spill some old memos now and again from Reagan and Bushes (none from Clinton) to make them seem pure - but make no mistake...

FLASHBACK: Two FBI Whistleblowers Confirm Illegal Wiretapping of Government Officials

The National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) has obtained a copy of an official complaint filed by a veteran FBI Special Agent, Gilbert Graham, with the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-OIG). SA Graham's protected disclosures report the violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in conducting electronic surveillance of high-profile U.S. public officials.

Bush was so fucked up, fixing some of this is very easy. don't torture....don't spy on Americans...etc

Kinda like Bush could not figure out simple right from wrong.

#37 | Posted by fresno500

Boy, are you the bright one. Obama is conducting the exact same programs and "torture" that Bush did. Do you have those same words of condemnation for Obama?

"Obama is conducting the exact same programs and "torture" that Bush did.

#48 | Posted by everlong at 2009-04-16 06:16 PM"

Untrue. Just one example: No more waterboarding.

It Ain't Criminal if you have Perpetual Amnesty!

The NSA like the CIA has a "blank" Amnesty card thats signed by the President,all they have to do is fill in whatever criminal activity they've recently been caught for and they have instant and total "Immunity"! God Bless America!

Untrue. Just one example: No more waterboarding.

#49 | Posted by mOntecOre

it's called the (UN)-Patriot Act people. Cheney wrote it when he worked for Bush 1, but got fired 4 years to early...to implement it. How do you think he wrote it so fast, the book/act is huge. What was that,? maybe the 4th Amendment going out the window too...?

Obama is adopting many of the same techniques that Bush used for years in extracting information, yet none of the Dems are really complaining. I knew that once he got to see exactly what the hell was going on in the real world he would change his tone. I know it kills him to admit that Bush was right about many of his methods, but it is his ass if something happens to America and he didn't use all resources at his disposal. And then of course the left and Dems would bitch that some how it's Bush's fault that it all happened. Though I didn't vote for him, I do pray he does such a superb job that I do the second go around. While people will disagree, both parties hold equal responsibility for the mess we are in. To blame one man and the party is living in a fairytale and not looking at the evidence right in front of you. Many of the Dems I know have drank so much of the Obama coolaide it is sicking to listen to them rant about bush. The reality of it all is both parties screwed some thing up, and some before Bush got into officer. The housing and mortgage crisis started back with Cater and strengthened under Clinton. Bush should have stopped it long before 2003 like has been reported but the 9/11 attacks took up the majority of his first term. I doubt a Democrat would have done much differently. WE are all in this mess together. And WE have to work together to get out of it. Though I would like to see Texas succeed from the rest of the country I doubt it will ever happen. Now piss off and go back to y'alls pissin n moaning that you drudgies are known for

Whats really sad is they won't be punished for it. None of the Bush Company will be punished for anything. Seems to Me if one gets in a high enough position then the rules don't apply to them. We should all have learned that through the Nixon Pardon. I guess some of us held out hope that our Country wasn't like every other Country but we are. We are just as corrupt and Corruptable as any other. When a Country that was founded upon the Rule of Law and of Laws doesn't see those Laws obeyed and when broken punished We have ceased to exist as a Country for the Rule of Law. We have become the enemy within. Sad day for the United States of America that's for damned sure.

Larry