Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYTimes: NSA domestic spying much broader than White House said

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:09 AM
Original message
NYTimes: NSA domestic spying much broader than White House said
NYTimes: NSA domestic spying much broader than White House said
by PsiFighter37
Fri Dec 23, 2005 at 11:47:46 PM PDT

Well, I'll be damned. Even though Bush has admitted to spying within the country illegally using the NSA, it appears that the program is much larger than originally thought:



WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials

The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.



What follows is exactly the problem when you have corporations too tied into the government:


As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said.



The article ends with a note from a computer engineer:


Phil Karn, a computer engineer and technology expert at a major West Coast telecommunications company, said access to such switches would be significant. "If the government is gaining access to the switches like this, what you're really talking about is the capability of an enormous vacuum operation to sweep up data," he said.


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/24/14746/603
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/politics/24spy.html?ei=5094&en=7e76956223502390&hp=&ex=1135486800&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1135425951-ARBWqIqEnx4N2wiyiktvFA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, I'm one of those pesky people who never 'misunderestimate' this
bunch. I think they're listening to everyone and everything 24/7. I can't be surprised on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Being pesky doesn't prevent the eventual anger, though
I'm in the same boat concerning lowest expectations about this crew of thugs and jerks, but, when you read about it on the front page, the blood begins to boil.

Time to impeach KGB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
julianer Donating Member (964 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. It has been happening for decades
here:

http://cndyorks.gn.apc.org/mhs/

The UK routinely listens to every communication it can and filters it all for data mining purposes. It happens here:

http://www.gchq.gov.uk/

Though the government won't allow many details about what actually goes on there. To quote the site,

'Our Sigint work protects the vital interests of the nation: we provide information to support Government decision making in the fields of national security, military operations and law enforcement. The intelligence we provide is at the heart of the struggle against terrorism and also contributes to the prevention of serious crime.'

The secrecy about GCHQ activities is one of the reasons that the UK is about the only country that still refuses to allow phone tap evidence in court. If it were presented it would be reasonable to ask where it came from and how it was gathered etc.

The UK and US governments share intelligence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. I see some telecommunications companies being sued
Edited on Sat Dec-24-05 07:28 AM by formercia
to bankruptcy if they allowed their systems to be used without a warrant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
3. Them bastiges...... nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nordmadr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:35 AM
Response to Original message
4. Is the NYT trying to save their credibility? This can not be legal.
Every Senator, Democrat or Republican, if they have any integrity and desire to see this Nation remain free must call for a full investigation into this. For once they must DO their job rather than seek more "Controlling Interest" in the the United Corporation of America. We the people demand no less. Is anyone listening?

Olafr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
5. Old news
The blogs - even us idiots on DU - have been pointing out that this was not about 'wiretaps' it was about unleashing the NSA's Echelon system on domestic communications. That system does not target specific individuals, it snarfs all communications looking for 'stuff of interest' and linking interesting stuff with sources and destinations and eventually with people at each end. It creates a giant monitoring database that can be mined for ALL SORTS OF INFORMATION by anyone with access.

The followup question is WHO HAD ACCESS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-24-05 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. and for what purpose was it used?
does anyone think that potentially helpful political information was IGNORED by the KGB clan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC