February 09, 2006

Details of NSA Surveillance Coming Soon to a Newspaper Near You

The White House has released highly classified details of the NSA program to intercept communications between terrorists and people within the US.

From the Associated Press via Breitbart.com:

After weeks of insisting it would not reveal details of its eavesdropping without warrants, the White House reversed course Wednesday and provided a House committee with highly classified information about the operation.

When asked what prompted the move to give lawmakers more details, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the administration has stated "from the beginning that we will work with members of Congress, and we will continue to do so regarding this vital national security program."

But the AP says that pressure from RINOs was the reason:
It also came after Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., chairwoman of a House intelligence subcommittee that oversees the NSA, broke with the Bush administration and called for a full review of the NSA's program, along with legislative action to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Given the track record of Congress for keeping secrets, today's release of information virtually guarantees that we, and our enemies, will be reading all about the NSA program very soon in the New York Times or Washington Post.

If a Federal employee reveals "confidential" (the lowest security classification) material, he or she faces time in Leavenworth Federal prison. When Senator Leahy disclosed a series of top secret documents in the mid 80s, he was punished by being taken off the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:02 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I want credit and a cheezeburger for calling this some time back. The game is afoot starting now for '06 and '08.

Posted by: hondo at February 09, 2006 12:22 AM (3aakz)

2 How did we ever win WW1 and WW2? News took weeks, months and in some cases years to get stateside. Of course there were lots of people worrying about their loved ones, but practically EVERYONE was busy, WINNING the war. None of this wimpy whiny ass hand wringin' and especially about enemies (now TERRORIST PUKES) being tracked. Following the last French bailout, the media has learned how to destroy us, if I had to sum up what passes for concern and a "right to know" in the name of news. AP says RINO, but it's the AP so.....

Posted by: forest hunter at February 09, 2006 12:29 AM (Fq6zR)

3 And tomorrow they're sharing highly classified information with the Senate intelligence committee! Oh, the horror! How dare anyone in Congress ask for intelligence oversight?

Posted by: IO ERROR at February 09, 2006 12:30 AM (YVC2I)

4 IO ERROR They have always been given information of on the overall program - some tend to forget. What they will get now (which is extremely unusual) is detailed specifics on specific cases (their successes I grant you) - which will in turn somehow manage to be leaked to the MSM & general public.

Posted by: hondo at February 09, 2006 12:40 AM (3aakz)

5 IO ERROR - hondo is essentially correct, except for where hondo says "detailed specifics" read: "rope to hang themselves with". forest hunter: "RINO" was my word.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 09, 2006 02:14 AM (RHG+K)

6 IO ERROR, before you get your panties in a wad, read up a little on WWII. Particularly do a google on "enigma" and "purple". Ponder what effects the leaking of that information would have had on the war effort. Perhaps then you will understand why some (ie: anyone with half a brain) are livid that these details are being provided to a group that leaks like a collander which has been used for shotgun target practice...

Posted by: Cybrludite at February 09, 2006 05:02 AM (XFoEH)

7 Yep, Hondo's right. There HAS been Congressional oversight. There was a committee selected for this, as in every other aspect of government there are oversight committees. And these committees are comprised of those on both sides of the aisle out of fairness. However, this is a little more sensitive to national security that picking a judge or haggling over which taxes to raise. Revealing sensitive details of this program to them is akin to mapping out troop positions in the Middle East. Pelosi had better tread very carefully. I trust her less than anyone on the committee.

Posted by: Oyster at February 09, 2006 05:14 AM (YudAC)

8 The Dread Pundit Bluto Sorry bout that! I promise to you use both eyes in the future. This is me walking out on a diseased limb with a sack of spuds attached to a safety line in the hand of my Ex-wife and in her other, a saw. Love you baby ! Thanx for the triiiiiiiiiip! RINO means?

Posted by: forest hunter at February 10, 2006 09:31 PM (Fq6zR)

9 You guys are forgetting to spit your tobacco juice. Do you think terrorists are so stupid that they don't know they are being listened to? Of course not. The secrecy was to keep the American people from knowing our dear elected officials are illegally spying on us!

Posted by: Joe at February 12, 2006 09:14 AM (1QjKa)

10 There's a lawful way to compel the Congress to investigate, even if they don't want to, or are convinced "they don't need to": [ Click ]

Posted by: Constant at February 15, 2006 10:13 PM (ZZCJg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
21kb generated in CPU 0.0622, elapsed 0.1727 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.1263 seconds, 246 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.