Reality Check: We Did Amend FISA After 9/11
Reality Check: We Did Amend FISA After 9/11
Defenders of President Bush’s secret spying program argue that it would have been impractical for the administration to seek amendments to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in the weeks after 9/11. Here’s Bill Kristol in the most recent issue of the Weekly Standard:
Was the president, in the wake of 9/11, and with the threat of imminent new attacks, really supposed to sit on his hands and gamble that Congress might figure out a way to fix FISA, if it could even be fixed?
The fact is the administration sought, and received, major amendments to FISA just weeks after 9/11 through the PATRIOT Act. Specifically, Section 218 of the PATRIOT Act loosened the requirements of FISA. Previously, the government was required to certify that obtaining foreign intelligence was the purpose of the surveillance. Section 218 allowed surveillance to be approved even if obtaining foreign intelligence was only a purpose of the surveillance. It sounds like a small change, but it is considered one of the most controversial provisions in the PATRIOT act.
The Bush administration argued then, and continues to argues today, that this change was essential for national security. We now know it’s all a ruse. Time spent in Congress debating Section 218 of the PATRIOT Act was a charade. President Bush ignores FISA completely when it suits his purposes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/After_domestic_spying_reports_U.S._spying_1227.html
Screw Kristol. Screw Rice.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:51 pmWe now know it’s all a ruse.
Well, duh! Now you are being obtuse. If they are thinking they are lying!
December 27th, 2005 at 3:53 pmKristol is still weak on it’s face. It’s an agrument in favor of bypassing congress. These people don’t get it.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:54 pmWe now know it’s all a ruse.
Well, duh! Now you are being obtuse. If they are thinking they are lying!
OK, so you are trying to give them the benefit of the doubt. I’ve run out of doubt and my poor old granny has run out of benefits.
December 27th, 2005 at 3:54 pmWhat’s amazing is that they lie so blatantly and still get away with it. Their bullying of the MSM has worked and they know it.
On a related note, another conservative has left the reservation: John Whitehead.
See
http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/16678_surveillance.html
(hat tip: Seeing The Forest)
December 27th, 2005 at 3:59 pm.
surprise bushie, WE are NOT ‘follow a long’ sheep, and the sheep that did are waking up, happy impeachment
December 27th, 2005 at 4:06 pmEverythings SO CRAZY Maybe It’s Time
To CREATE Something NEW on Planet EARTH
4 All of US – EARTH CITIZENS
Ck out NEW IMAGE of OUR HOME EARTH and ideas at
http://www.OneGlobalCommunity.com
U Can Copy, PASTE ON YOUR REFRIG
And Pass this SPACE IMAGE ON FREE, if U Want 2
December 27th, 2005 at 4:06 pm.
Everythings SO CRAZY Maybe It’s Time
To CREATE Something NEW on Planet EARTH
4 All of US – EARTH CITIZENS
Ck out NEW IMAGE of OUR HOME EARTH and ideas at
http://www.OneGlobalCommunity.com
U Can Copy, PASTE ON YOUR REFRIG
And Pass this SPACE IMAGE ON FREE, if U Want 2
December 27th, 2005 at 4:08 pm.
The American people still don’t get the importance of all of this. The Bush toadies are out there claiming this is no-harm, no-foul, and the public is not grasping the issue.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:11 pmThat Bush ignored the courts doesn’t resonate with them.
Man that was some 8 layer dip.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:16 pmBush has failed to implement the recommendations of the 911 Commission. If he cared at all about security then we would at the very least have secured our nuclear facilities.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:16 pm“the purpose” v. “a purpose”
December 27th, 2005 at 4:18 pmA VAST difference.
To state the blindingly obvious:
Our democracy is in danger.
so, now the spying on the u.n. is back in the news… how timely…!!
i don’t know how i could be any more disgusted with my own government than i am now… i’ve been disgusted for a long time and, every time i say i couldn’t get any more ticked off than i already am, guess what…? it gets worse…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
December 27th, 2005 at 4:19 pmDoes any one know what Michael Brown’s security clearance was? If he leaves the government does that continue?
December 27th, 2005 at 4:21 pmThere’s going to come a time when we’ll want our congress person’s opinion on paper. Write and ask their opinion about bypassing the congress. Get it in writing.
http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/issues/alert/?alertid=8329176
December 27th, 2005 at 4:23 pm#1AOBGYN, great link. Can we be sued or sanctioned by another country for extending our scope of observation which we deem critical to our National Security?
December 27th, 2005 at 4:35 pmCouldn’t a tenth grader use some of the President’s reasoning to blame the victim group with shame. How dare they, we were just bombed, we have to protect ourselves. Doesn’t that approach seem a little condescending?
All these Bush Apologist need to sign the following:
I, [state your name], do give up all my Constitutional rights* necessary in support of the Federal Government’s ‘War on Terror’. I freely give up these rights indefinitely no matter if a Republican or a Democrat is the President. I will not criticize the President no matter their party as long they are fighting the ‘War on Terror’.
Full Name
* Rights to be determined by the President with no oversight by the Congress or the Judiciary
December 27th, 2005 at 4:35 pmofficer, I found it ‘impractical’ to obey the law,and besides i’m in a hurry…..but I thought I didn’t break the law, someone told me ‘they’ thought I didn’t break the law ether. Don’t try this with any cop I know.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:39 pmPublic policy as shield for private malfeisance.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:47 pmAs my friend John Harris at the Wash Post would say, “liberals lie, facts don’t.”
-
December 27th, 2005 at 4:51 pmWas the president, in the wake of 9/11, and with the threat of imminent new attacks, really supposed to sit on his hands…
I don’t see why not. That’s exactly what he did in the runup to 9/11 with the threat of imminent new attacks.
If this president had done everything within his power (or anything, for that matter) to prevent the 9/11 attacks and they had still occured, then there might — just might – be some merit to the assertion that the specified powers of the presidency are not sufficient to fight terrorism.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:54 pmYou’d have to be a dumb drunk to make that arguement with a cop – Oh…Yeah – I forgot.
December 27th, 2005 at 4:56 pmKristol is employed by Murdock as a professional media whore. He wanted to set up a new pro-Western regime in Iraq under Chalabi. From the election results it would appear the Iraqis don’t read the Weekly Standard or watch Fox News.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:15 pmThe more and more I hear about this, the more it sounds like the Bush Administration is going down in flames. I’m all for getting the terrorists, but not at the price of my privacy or civil liberties. Bush seems completly oblivious to the fact that he’s broken the law and claims his “war-time” powers give him the power. Ticky Dick got caught with unwarranted spying, and President Clinton got impeached over a blowjob. Seems like this should be an easy out.
December 27th, 2005 at 5:18 pmYou’ve really got to give them a break. I mean, they only had 4 years to submit new legislation.
I’m sure they were SO focused on catching Osama bin Laden (way to go, guys!) dismantling Social Security, and preparing the country for a large-scale crisis (way to handle Katrina, guys!) that they didn’t have time to go through Congress and get the law fixed. So they had no choice but to break the law–they only had 4 years!
December 27th, 2005 at 5:19 pmThis will be going to a Senate hearing soon. If they absolve Bush of any wrong doing, what will the perception be then?
December 27th, 2005 at 5:32 pmRaymond B
http://www.voteswagon.com
Wintson Smith’s job at the Ministry of Truth was to change the news reports of the past so that they coincided with the current political whims of the rulers. For example, when the choclate ration was cut from 40 to 20, Winston had to go and change all the references to the chocolate rationing to be less than 20. This was so the leaders could plausibly claim that the chocolate ration had actually been INCREASED to 20, when in reality it had been cut. For those that wanted to risk deathm they could go and check the papers from the last year and it would say that the ration would be 15 and not 40.
Today, the GOP doesn’t have to bother, the president can lie on national TV knowing that no one (of consequence) will dare to point out that he lied.
First, even if a reporter goes back and checks the record, their editors and publishers will never allow them to release the information. Context and history of a news story are the core of what is now denigrated as ‘liberal’ media.
Second, if you or I were to post a blog saying, ‘But in this issue of , the ration used to be 40 units of Chocolate’, the GOP bloggers like LGF or Powerline, or their media outlets, like Newsmax, will simply smear us as being anti-American liberal traitors telling lies, and that would be enough ‘reasonable doubt’ to dismiss any discussion of reality (see how they dealt with Bush’s cowardice during the VietNam war). And the Freepers, all raised since birth on nothing but Rush Limbaugh, will all be dreaming of the day that Our Leader orders them to slaughter us for being traitors because we questioned his chocolate rationing policy.
I have gone through George Orwell’s precient 1984 and cut the one third out of the book that does not directly apply to the GOP. The rest of the book, about 2/3 of it, describes exactly the way that the GOP has been ruling America since they installed Reagan as the puppet president.
One last thing, please use the actual name of the Big Brother law:
December 27th, 2005 at 5:34 pmUSAPATRIOT Act. It is NOT the PATRIOT Act, it is the USAPATRIOT Act. A big part of that ‘law’ is contained in the USA part of it. The name is an acronym which stands for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”. Please do not truncate the name, use it’s full acronym, USAPATRIOT Act.
Junior’s goin’ down.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/After_domestic_spying_reports_U.S._spying_1227.html
December 27th, 2005 at 5:38 pm#28, Comrade, How right you are!!
December 27th, 2005 at 5:50 pmI had to buy another copy of 1984 to keep it for reference.
When did Kristol get his law degree? How many years has he been practicing law?
Just another armchair justice who can’t even comprehend simple case law.
December 27th, 2005 at 6:09 pmhaven’t seen input from many prominent Senators on this issue. Senator’s Clinton, Mikulski, Sarbanes and others have been too silent.
If you feel it’s wrong say so, if you feel it necessary…say so.
December 27th, 2005 at 6:36 pmall one need ask is how they would have reacted if clinton had decided to exert himself in this fashion.
since 9/11/01 hasn’t it been possible for bush to addres this to congress? like the wake of 9/11 is still cresting in exigency. c’mon. are we all idiots?
Bush hasn’t asked Congress because they’d have said no. period. he hasn’t because he knew it’s illegal and will remain illegal; it’s an end run. bush’s surreptitious power grab is illegal in our system that separates the federal government into three co-equal branches precisely so that no one branch could never become this tyrannical in its behavior.
not scared yet?
what if the next constitutional provision that W suggests has been abrogated in the war on terror is that which limits his term of office? is this ok for the commander in chief also? no doubt, in kristol’s view, this would be far preferable to bush sitting on his hands. my view is that the sooner he sits on them the better.
let’s not kid ourselves as to who the terrorists really are. i’ve been far more terrorized by the actions of my own government than by any foreign power at any time in my lifetime. hell, the local police have terrorized me far more than any foreigners. the fear these assholes seek to instill is the same as that weilded by the cheneys and bushes of the world. they just want to control everything. assholes, who seek to dominate the weak in a blind aggrandizement of illegitimate power. it’s the oldest con in the world, ostensibly legitimate violence to gain control over the weak and powerless in the name of the crown.
as a believer in instant karma, i know that we shall all soon see the undoing of these evil men. we won’t have to wait. their comeuppance shall be right here and now during our lifetimes. the visiting upon the children of the sins of the father is passed. the slowburn is spinning ever more rapidly now, and the time is nigh.
the greatest danger to mankind and to our nation has been with us here all along. the wisest amongst us have seen it all along. the precautions taken so long ago to preserve freedom were never expected to last forever. Indeed, it is precisely because the nation was seen as likely to become beset on ALL sides, within and without, that the separation of power was undertaken in the first place. but the evil once long ago thrown off has come again into the city. it is already within and without our gates, people. it’s just now coming home to roost with the assholes who deserve to suffer for their wrongs. semper fi.
December 27th, 2005 at 6:47 pmall one need ask is how they would have reacted if clinton had decided to exert himself in this fashion.
since 9/11/01 hasn’t it been possible for bush to addres this to congress? like the wake of 9/11 is still cresting in exigency. c’mon. are we all idiots?
Bush hasn’t asked Congress because they’d have said no. period. he hasn’t because he knew it’s illegal and will remain illegal; it’s an end run. bush’s surreptitious power grab is illegal in our system that separates the federal government into three co-equal branches precisely so that no one branch could never become this tyrannical in its behavior.
not scared yet?
what if the next constitutional provision that W suggests has been abrogated in the war on terror is that which limits his term of office? is this ok for the commander in chief also? no doubt, in kristol’s view, this would be far preferable to bush sitting on his hands. my view is that the sooner he sits on them the better.
let’s not kid ourselves as to who the terrorists really are. i’ve been far more terrorized by the actions of my own government than by any foreign power at any time in my lifetime. hell, the local police have terrorized me far more than any foreigners. the fear these assholes seek to instill is the same as that weilded by the cheneys and bushes of the world. they just want to control everything. assholes, who seek to dominate the weak in a blind aggrandizement of illegitimate power. it’s the oldest con in the world, ostensibly legitimate violence to gain control over the weak and powerless in the name of the crown.
as a believer in instant karma, i know that we shall all soon see the undoing of these evil men. we won’t have to wait. their comeuppance shall be right here and now during our lifetimes. the visiting upon the children of the sins of the father is passed. the slowburn is spinning ever more rapidly now, and the time is nigh.
the greatest danger to mankind and to our nation has been with us here all along. the wisest amongst us have seen it all along. the precautions taken so long ago to preserve freedom were never expected to last forever. Indeed, it is precisely because the nation was seen as likely to become beset on ALL sides, within and without, that the separation of power was undertaken in the first place. but the evil once long ago thrown off has come again into the city. it is already within and without our gates, people. it’s just now coming home to roost with the assholes who deserve to suffer for their wrongs. semper fi.
December 27th, 2005 at 6:48 pmI’m all for getting the terrorists, but not at the price of my privacy or civil liberties.
Except we’re not trading liberty for security. We are giving up our civil liberties and still not getting the terrorists.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:06 pmExcept we’re not trading liberty for security. We are giving up our civil liberties and still not getting the terrorists.
According to the Democrats, since the Department of Homeland Security began operating in March 2003, it has failed to:
_Compile a single, comprehensive list prioritizing protections for the nation’s most critical and potentially vulnerable buildings, transportation systems and other infrastructure.
_Install monitors at borders and every international seaport and airport to screen for radiation material entering the country.
_Install surveillance cameras at all high-risk chemical plants.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:19 pm_Create one effective network to share quickly security-related intelligence and alerts with state, local and private industry officials.
_Track foreign visitors through a computerized system that takes their fingerprints and photographs as they enter and exit the country.
“It would be one thing if the department didn’t identify security lapses in the first place, but a more troubling situation when they make promises to the American people and then leave them unfulfilled,” Rep. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, the committee’s top Democrat, said in a statement accompanying the report.
screw all the crap and lets focus- while listening to Air America I was presented with the following from the Chimp- (paraphrasing from a speech or something in Buffalo NY)– regarding wiretapping, if we- the gov– are going to wiretap we are going to get permission before we do the tapping. Additionally- it is the admins position that we will always follow the rule of law. Now- if the chimp said the above, And I believe that I was not listening to a doctored recording, the the chimp is a liar and thus, should be impeached. Nothing less is called for. Nothing less is called for.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:35 pmbilljpa@aol.com
Perhaps a little humor is needed.
(Read this poem aloud in a breathless conspiratorial voice)
Something may be happening that the authorities do not know,
It may be debilitating to the country’s status quo.
Look out, mama, the world is gonna blow
‘Cause something may be happening the authorities do not know!
An Omaha citizen might relocate to Idaho,
A political opponent may say he does not know,
An overwhelmed citizen may tell you his woe
Careful! As something may be happening the authorities do not know.
Let us spy upon our sisters in San Diego
Let us listen to the pastor on the radio,
Let us track the moneyman and all of his dough
For something may be happening the authorities do not know.
Are you living now in San Francisco?
Are you perhaps gay and on a TV show?
Does your sister experience her monthly flow?
Oh, yes, something may be happening the authorities do not know.
Are you speeding as you drive on Abbey Road?
Which people do the crooks and the criminals goad?
Do you admire the government or its unseemly foes?
Wait! Something may be happening the authorities do not know.
In the city, spy upon the citizens you do not know,
Track the movements of gun owners at their show,
Watch as the lights are turned way down low,
Ooh! Something may be happening the authorities do not know.
The forecasted weather says it may someday snow,
And perhaps Mt St Helen’s will ultimately blow
Is the Devil coming up from somewhere down below?
Shout! “Something may be happening the authorities do not know!â€
“Whose business is it,†you want to know,
“Whither I come or whither I go?â€
“Please show me where it says that I must disclose
The something that may be happening that the authorities do not know?â€
“I can criticize in a voice so low and I can also shout Hell No!
And the government ought never to know
The movies that I see or the times that I go
For they should not care that something is happening that they do not know.â€
“Whose business is it that I suffer from vertigo?
What if I fruitlessly search for El Dorado?
It’s not your business, you hypocritical ‘ho,
Whatever is happening you do not need to know.â€
—Thanks for reading and remember: “It’s OPEN Government and SECRET Citizens that the US is all about. Don’t get it backwards…”
December 27th, 2005 at 7:54 pm#39, applause.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:59 pmI don’t think you have to worry too much about the NSA listening to you. Bad poetry is not very hight on the list of threats from hostile foreign powers.
December 27th, 2005 at 8:13 pmhight?
December 27th, 2005 at 8:35 pmBlue State Red #41,
This forum is in American English, not Yiddish.
Luv you Libs.I suppose thousands of americans will end up languishing in prison because of Dubya’s “spying”. Any terrorist attacks here lately?
December 27th, 2005 at 8:41 pmIf I understand things correctly, there is now potentially a database with every e-mail and phone call made in the U.S. for the past 4 years. Are we really to believe that this won’t be misused?
December 27th, 2005 at 9:01 pmAs a matter of fact, #43, the SPLC documented 60 attacks or plots that have been carried out in the US since 9/11. Unfortunately for all the glassy eyed zombies who accept everything the administration says without question, not a single one had anything to do with Al Qaeda, Islam, or people from the Middle East. They were all carried out by good ole US Citizens. Right wing extremists, white supremacist groups, and other white nominally Christian individuals and groups planned or carried out all of them. But Bush doesn’t want to anger his base, so when innocent Americans are terrorized by Christian fundamentalists throwing molitov cocktails at women’s clinics, they quietly sweep it under the rug.
But it’s really the Quakers, and people advocating for peace and civil rights, that are the danger. Sure. Keep on marching, buddy, and one day you’ll wake up and realize that to speak out will guarantee you are handcuffed and taken away.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:29 pm#43, you conservatives amaze me.
Bush can do no wrong? Failure after failure, and now provable and blatant violation of US law and his sacred oath to the Constitution, and you guys still love him?
The GOP allowed Sept. 11 to take place. Not only did they not lift a finger to stop the attacks from happening before hand, the pilots in DC were physically retrained from getting into their cockpits and defending the Nation’s Capital. I’m not talking some conspiracy theories, here, I am reffering to the Fed’s own account of that day.
I have said since that day, look at the results. Don’t listen to what the GOP says, look at the outcome.
Iraq? Wasn’t the plan all along to encourage the formation of another Iranian extremist government? Why else would they defy the generals and send a handful of troops? Why else would they stand by and allow the looting and destruction of the Iraqi governmental infrastructure? Why else would they encourage the internecine rivalry of that nation?
So that they can justify diverting our nation’s resources away from social development and into their donor’s coffers by starting a civil war that will allow them to fool we citizens into staying there for the next 30 years!
Look at the results!
I predict that if they can not ensure control over the ballot counting before the next presidential elections, then they will stage another Sept. 11 attack and then we citizens will demand the end of all out freedoms and insist that Bush stay on as dictator-for-life.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:49 pmAlso be wary of the causality spin.
Claims that the FISA Court was unfair to Bush, so THEREFORE Bush started bypassing them.
That’s not supported by the recently-released numbers.
The big uptick in FISA rejections/modifications came after Bush started his policy of ignoring them.
December 27th, 2005 at 9:52 pmAccording to bush and cheney, we dont need congress, we dont need courts, we dont need a free press, we dont need a bill of rights or a constitution ..trust them…Yeh trust them to start ww3….They honestly believe they are above the law and I dont recall anyone making bush god of the world..
December 27th, 2005 at 10:01 pmLis Riba,
Those numbers are for modifications. The important numbers are the numbers of rejections by the FISA court.
Since it’s inception in 1978 there have been 18,761 FISA warrants requested. Only 5 (some say 4) have been rejected. Only 5.
This secret court was made intentionally very loose. That is why it is a secret court.
The court allows for 72 hours of wiretapping, before the warrant is obtained.
If the court finds that the 72 hours of warrants were not necessary or deserved the warrant, the evidence is destroyed. Nobody is repremanded or anything. The wiretap just stops.
That is about as loose as a court or investigation can get.
And Bush still couldn’t live by these absolutely loose rules.
All the while, I am thinking:
Dude, tuck in your ears!
December 27th, 2005 at 10:09 pm#43 Don’t be surprised if there is an attack before the State ot the Union address. Bush needs the usapatriot act extended. NYsubway down for three days, explosives missing. Perfect chance to pull another9/11. Keep all rethugs in fear and chimpie will contol all your rights.
December 27th, 2005 at 10:16 pmdon, bsr,
you’re missing the point:
imagine hillary clinton with this power.
don’t like that, do you?
sure, “it’ll never happen”
that’s what i said back in ‘99 when bush announced he was running for prez (i lived in texas at the time).
WAKE UP!
it’s a power no president, democrat or republican, should have!!
reread this from Robert (#17), above:
if you can’t understand that, you’re an idiot. this is the administration saying, “trust us, and oh by the way, we don’t trust you.”
once again, i say, WAKE UP!
December 27th, 2005 at 10:26 pmThis is the quintessential story of Bush Jr. All privilege, no responsibilty. Accountability to the few, not of the few. A little bit facist, a little bit feudal, mostly just selfish and self-righteous. “Do unto others…” no, wait, not that Jesus. The other Jesus. The
one with firebolts coming out of his eyes.
It’s terrifying to see the President declare he is above the law, but it’s not surprising. It’s pathetic to see the President’s defenders presented as reasonable people who are simply pointing out that on 9/11 the hijackers suspended the U.S. Constitution and it no longer applies (except for the second amendment. That one’s different.)
But despite the booming echo echo echo of the Leadership and it’s minions, the overreach here is so obvious that I think the public needs very little to hang its outrage on.
It is obviously in the interest of the nation that the Democrats gain control of some branch of government. Any sane Conservative should be able to see that.
December 27th, 2005 at 10:51 pmthe SPLC documented 60 attacks or plots that have been carried out in the US since 9/11. Unfortunately for all the glassy eyed zombies who accept everything the administration says without question, not a single one had anything to do with Al Qaeda, Islam, or people from the Middle East. They were all carried out by good ole US Citizens. Right wing extremists, white supremacist groups, and other white nominally Christian individuals and groups planned or carried out all of them. But Bush doesn’t want to anger his base, so when innocent Americans are terrorized by Christian fundamentalists throwing molitov cocktails at women’s clinics, they quietly sweep it under the rug.
#45 Stevelaw, yep, you’ve identified the terrorists all right.
December 27th, 2005 at 11:12 pmEmperor George believes that he can do anything he desires,
so failure to stop him now, could lead to Gulags in America!
Everybody must contact their Senators and Representatives to demand that Dubya be impeached, or forced to resign like President Nixon!
Force the Republicans in Congress to wake-up and impeach W!
December 27th, 2005 at 11:56 pm#54 Well, technically, Guantánamo is in America, so there are gulags from the year 2001, at least.
December 28th, 2005 at 8:42 amDespite all the news accounts and punditry since the New York Times published its Dec. 16 bombshell about the National Security Agency’s domestic spying, the media coverage has made virtually no mention of the fact that the Bush administration used the NSA to spy on U.N. diplomats in New York before the invasion of
Iraq.
That spying had nothing to do with protecting the United States from a terrorist attack. The entire purpose of the NSA surveillance was to help the White House gain leverage, by whatever means possible, for a resolution in the
U.N. Security Council to green light an invasion. When that surveillance was exposed nearly three years ago, the mainstream U.S. media winked at Bush’s illegal use of the NSA for his Iraq invasion agenda.
Back then, after news of the NSA’s targeted spying at the
United Nations broke in the British press, major U.S. media outlets gave it only perfunctory coverage — or, in the case of the New York Times, no coverage at all. Now, while the NSA is in the news spotlight with plenty of retrospective facts, the NSA’s spying at the U.N. goes unmentioned: buried in an Orwellian memory hole.
A rare exception was a paragraph in a Dec. 20 piece by Patrick Radden Keefe in the online magazine Slate — which pointedly noted that “the eavesdropping took place in Manhattan and violated the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, the Headquarters Agreement for the United Nations, and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, all of which the United States has signed.â€
But after dodging the story of the NSA’s spying at the U.N. when it mattered most — before the invasion of Iraq — the New York Times and other major news organizations are hardly apt to examine it now. That’s all the more reason for other media outlets to step into the breach.
In early March 2003, journalists at the London-based Observer reported that the NSA was secretly participating in the U.S. government’s high-pressure campaign for the U.N. Security Council to approve a pro-war resolution. A few days after the Observer revealed the text of an NSA memo about U.S. spying on Security Council delegations, I asked Daniel Ellsberg to assess the importance of the story. “This leak,†he replied, “is more timely and potentially more important than the
Pentagon Papers.†The key word was “timely.â€
Publication of the top-secret Pentagon Papers in 1971, made possible by Ellsberg’s heroic decision to leak those documents, came after the Vietnam War had been underway for many years. But with an invasion of Iraq still in the future, the leak about NSA spying on U.N. diplomats in New York could erode the Bush administration’s already slim chances of getting a war resolution through the Security Council. (Ultimately, no such resolution passed before the invasion.) And media scrutiny in the United States could have shed light on how Washington’s war push was based on subterfuge and manipulation.
“As part of its battle to win votes in favor of war against Iraq,†the Observer had reported on March 2, 2003, the U.S. government developed an “aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the e-mails of U.N. delegates.†The smoking gun was “a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency — the U.S. body which intercepts communications around the world — and circulated to both senior agents in his organization and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency.†The friendly agency was Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters.
The Observer explained: “The leaked memorandum makes clear that the target of the heightened surveillance efforts are the delegations from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Guinea and Pakistan at the U.N. headquarters in New York — the so-called ‘Middle Six’ delegations whose votes are being fought over by the pro-war party, led by the U.S. and Britain, and the party arguing for more time for U.N. inspections, led by France, China and Russia.â€
The NSA memo, dated Jan. 31, 2003, outlined the wide scope of the surveillance activities, seeking any information useful to push a war resolution through the Security Council — “the whole gamut of information that could give U.S. policymakers an edge in obtaining results favorable to U.S. goals or to head off surprises.â€
Noting that the Bush administration “finds itself isolated†in its zeal for war on Iraq, the Times of London called the leak of the memo an “embarrassing disclosure.†And, in early March 2003, the embarrassment was nearly worldwide. From Russia to France to Chile to Japan to Australia, the story was big mainstream news. But not in the United States.
Several days after the “embarrassing disclosure,†not a word about it had appeared in the New York Times, the USA’s supposed paper of record. “Well, it’s not that we haven’t been interested,†Times deputy foreign editor Alison Smale told me on the evening of March 5, nearly 96 hours after the Observer broke the story. But “we could get no confirmation or comment†on the memo from U.S. officials. Smale added: “We would normally expect to do our own intelligence reporting.†Whatever the rationale, the New York Times opted not to cover the story at all.
Except for a high-quality Baltimore Sun article that appeared on March 4, the coverage in major U.S. media outlets downplayed the significance of the Observer’s revelations. The Washington Post printed a 514-word article on a back page with the headline “Spying Report No Shock to U.N.†Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times published a longer piece that didn’t only depict U.S. surveillance at the United Nations as old hat; the LA Times story also reported “some experts suspected that it [the NSA memo] could be a forgery†— and “several former top intelligence officials said they were skeptical of the memo’s authenticity.â€
But within days, any doubt about the NSA memo’s “authenticity†was gone. The British press reported that the U.K. government had arrested an unnamed female employee at a British intelligence agency in connection with the leak. By then, however, the spotty coverage of the top-secret NSA memo in the mainstream U.S. press had disappeared.
As it turned out, the Observer’s expose — headlined “Revealed: U.S. Dirty Tricks to Win Vote on Iraq War†— came 18 days before the invasion of Iraq began.
From the day that the Observer first reported on NSA spying at the United Nations until the moment 51 weeks later when British prosecutors dropped charges against whistleblower Katharine Gun, major U.S. news outlets provided very little coverage of the story. The media avoidance continued well past the day in mid-November 2003 when Gun’s name became public as the British press reported that she been formally charged with violating the draconian Official Secrets Act.
Facing the possibility of a prison sentence, Katharine Gun said that disclosure of the NSA memo was “necessary to prevent an illegal war in which thousands of Iraqi civilians and British soldiers would be killed or maimed.†She said: “I have only ever followed my conscience.â€
In contrast to the courage of the lone woman who leaked the NSA memo — and in contrast to the journalistic vigor of the Observer team that exposed it — the most powerful U.S. news outlets gave therevelation the media equivalent of a yawn. Top officials of the Bush administration, no doubt relieved at the lack of U.S. media concern about the NSA’s illicit spying, must have been very encouraged.
December 28th, 2005 at 10:37 amThe problem is, those actions are silenced by the USA media and lawmakers, and one day, when the whole mess resurfaces, exploding in the face of the public, a lot of people in the USA are caught unaware and ask “Why against us?”
December 28th, 2005 at 12:47 pmCan we just get on with the impeachment?
December 28th, 2005 at 1:44 pm#58 – Sure Brod, just as soon as Dems win back the House and Senate. And with many Americans still thinking Dems are the party of military wimpiness – it might be a while before you can impeach anybody except enemy “sympathizers”.
December 28th, 2005 at 1:59 pmKristol = Chickenhawk PNAC creator
December 28th, 2005 at 2:05 pmNews Flash: Reports out of Iraq claim that Iraqi Kurds are planning to seize Kirkuk and the oil fields around it!
If this occurs it will set-off all-out civil war in Iraq, between the Kurds and Sunni Arabs, and cause Turkey to invade northern Iraq to wipe out the Peshmerga militia!
President Bush would then go down in history, as the fool who caused ethnic genocide in Arabia!
December 29th, 2005 at 12:33 amThe question: Was the president, in the wake of 9/11, and with the threat of imminent new attacks, really supposed to sit on his hands and gamble that Congress might figure out a way to fix FISA, if it could even be fixed? Answer: Bush DID sat on his hands and gambled the lives of near 3000 deaths for 7 minutes in a preschool in Flordia on Sept. 11.
December 29th, 2005 at 3:31 amI think the more important question is whether FISA is Constitutional or not. The law itself conflicts with what the powers the Constitution and the Founding Fathers gave to the President.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007734
December 29th, 2005 at 9:31 amNSA spied on me!
In early 2003 I sent emails to all of the Security Council Members, asking them to vote against war, specifically stating that I was asking their assistance as my government no longer spoke for me.
Not only did they not speak for me, they spied for me!
December 29th, 2005 at 10:56 amH. RES. (House Resolution) 635. Title: Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration’s intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment. Sponsor: Representative Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] Introduced 12/18/2005. No co-sponsors. Latest Action: Referred to house committee.
Rumor has it that John Conyers will amend to include Wiretapping.
December 30th, 2005 at 10:13 amDear Sheila – What do you think the odds are of the latest Conyer-craft being adopted???
December 30th, 2005 at 8:54 pmAphrodite – I really don’t know. But I do know this, if he is allowed to get away with this…we’ll deserve what we get.
January 3rd, 2006 at 12:30 pmI keep hearing how “The majority of American’s back President Bush” on this issue.
January 15th, 2006 at 10:55 pmI didn’t know that the Constitution was subject to popular opinion!
Wrong is wrong.
We are just watching history repeat itself. God help us.
[...] Blog Name: Think Progress Article Title: Reality Check: We Did Amend FISA After 9/11 Defenders of President Bush’s secret spying program argue that it would have been impractical for the administration to seek amendments to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in the weeks after 9/11. Here’s Bill Kristol in the m… [...]
February 22nd, 2006 at 12:23 am