actually they are expanding spying particularly into Swiss bank accounts On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The NSA and the CIA, under Obama, aren't pulling back on a single wire > tapping or internet observation policy that the Bush administration > used. And why should they? Obama certainly doesn't want a terrorist > plot sliding in under a lax radar and ruining him. And he knows > nothing he does, up to and including establishing political gulags, > will ever be scrutinized by the media. > > On Jul 7, 2:20 pm, Frederick The Moderate <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Well Dick, I guess reading comprehension isn't your strength. Where in > > the article does it say that they will continue to be listening in on > > DOMESTIC (that means in America) phone calls? Where does it say they > > will monitor internet traffic that is NOT directed at government > > sites? Do you understand that these were the components that caused > > the most outrage? How about this paragraph: > > > > "I never had a problem with the components of E3 under Bush, as > > described in this article and I don't recall these components ever > > being the primary subject of any uproar. All the hoolpa was about > > what > > this is not: Actively listening in on domestic phone calls or > > monitoring any internet traffic that is NOT headed directly to > > government sites." > > > > Nevermind, I get it. If Bush did it, was great. If Obama filters out > > the parts that violated the 4th Amendment most severely and modifices > > the others, it's a "crime". You're a good little sheeple, the dick. > > Follow party lines at all times buddy. > > > > On Jul 7, 10:21 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I guess you have problems with reading comprehension. My problems are > > > not with the policy. My problems are with the fact that this president > > > and his congress had major problems with this exact policy was put in > > > place by Bush and we heard all kinds of reports on the media and in the > > > MSM about how terrible it was. The ACLU, big supporters of Obama, and > > > the people of ANSWER, Code Pink, etc, all were out in protest of the > > > policy. This was one of the big selling points by the Dems during the > > > election. Now these same people are trying to sneak the exact policy, > > > including using the same telecon corporations, and we are now supposed > > > to roll over, kick our heels and proclaim it as a genius policy. That > > > is what the goal was. That is the context of the commentary. > > > > > As a matter of fact I think the Bush policy was right. I think the > > > media, in particular the NYT with its printing out our policies of > > > following the progress of Al Qaeda using their cell phones, printing > out > > > that we were tracking the flow of money to Al Qaeda with the help of > the > > > Belgian govt and the corporation involved and also with their > editorials > > > and slanted news stories about this particular policy could not have > > > been more in the tank for our enemies if they tried. Go back and read > > > my comments again and learn something if you can. > > > > > Frederick The Moderate wrote: > > > > I guess the goal of this blogger (whose out of context commentary is > > > > obviously slanted to his agenda) is to point out that ANYTHING > > > > connected with Bush, must be evil if allowed to continue. Although I > > > > had a REAL problem with Bush listening in on domenstic, private phone > > > > calls but I'm not sure I see anything here I have a problem with. > This > > > > was the part that was actually reasonable. The Obama Administration > > > > has not committed to utilizing the full scope of E3, as they want to > > > > determine which parts were UnConstitutional as utilized by Bush and > > > > remedy that first. I think a simple caveat on all the sites stating: > > > > "Hi, guess what? Bad guys want to crash our system so we have this > > > > protective thing going on, here at US govt & military websites. If > you > > > > log on here, you're subject to scrutiny. Have a nice day" > > > > > > I never had a problem with the components of E3 under Bush, as > > > > described in this article and I don't recall these components ever > > > > being the primary subject of any uproar. All the hoolpa was about > what > > > > this is not: Actively listening in on domestic phone calls or > > > > monitoring any internet traffic that is NOT headed directly to > > > > government sites. > > > > > > So Dick, would you prefer we left ourselves unprotected? Or are you > > > > just with the blogger that "If it's Bush, It's bad."? > > > > > > On Jul 7, 7:54 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076 > > > > > >> Thought this was one of the things they were going to stop doing. > Is > > > >> this another lie from the Obama WH? More hypocrisy or just what we > > > >> warned them about last fall. > > > > > >> July 6th, 2009 > > > > > >> NSA will monitor private-sector networks > > > >> <http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076> > > > > > >> Posted by Richard Koman @ July 6, 2009 @ 10:53 AM > > > > > >> *Categories:* NSA <http://government.zdnet.com/?cat=177>, Security > > > >> <http://government.zdnet.com/?cat=51> > > > > > >> *Tags:* Monitor <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Monitor.html>, > Network > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Network.html>, AT&T Corp. > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/AT%26T+Corp..html>, U.S. Department > Of > > > >> Homeland Security > > > >> < > http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/U.S.+Department+Of+Homeland+Security.html>, > > > >> NSA <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/NSA.html>..., Post Story > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Post+Story.html>, Privacy Advocate > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Privacy+Advocate.html>, Networking > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Networking.html>, Telecom & > Utilities > > > >> <http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Telecom+%26+Utilities.html>, > > > >> Telecommunications < > http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/Telecommunications.html> > > > > > >> 17 TalkBacks <http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076#comments> > > > > > >> * > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> o > > > > > >> * Print <http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076#> > > > >> * Email > > > >> <mailto: > ?subject=NSA%20will%20monitor%20private-sector%20networks%20%7C%20ZDNet%20Government%20%7C%20ZDNet.com&body=NSA%20will%20monitor%20private-sector%20networks%0Ahttp%3A%2F% > 2Fgovernment.zdnet.com%2F%3Fp%3D5076%0A> > > > >> * Thumbs Up <http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076#>Thumbs Down > > > >> <http://government.zdnet.com/?p=5076#> > > > >> * > > > >> +5 > > > >> 7 > > > > > >> The Bushization of Obama continues with a plan to involve the NSA in > > > >> screening private-sector networks, The Washington Post reports. > > > >> < > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/02/AR200...> > > > > > >> The plan not only uses the NSA to monitor private networks but it > does > > > >> so in a way that makes it unclear who exactly is in charge of the > effort. > > > > > >> "We absolutely intend to use the technical resources, the > > > >> substantial ones, that NSA has. But . . . they will be guided, > led > > > >> and in a sense directed by the people we have at the Department > of > > > >> Homeland Security," the department's secretary, Janet > Napolitano, > > > >> told reporters in a discussion about cybersecurity efforts. > > > > > >> "In a sense?" Great. > > > > > >> Indeed, DHS also offers this none-too-satisfying assurance: "the new > > > >> program will scrutinize only data going to or from government > systems." > > > > > >> Hmm, wasn't that the promise Bush made about warrantless NSA > wiretaps - > > > >> that only calls going between the U.S. and certain countries would > be > > > >> monitored? And then we found out the NSA was listening to calls > between > > > >> U.S. locations. > > > > > >> First private site to be followed: good ol' NSA buddy AT&T. > > > > > >> AT&T, the world's largest telecommunications firm, was the Bush > > > >> administration's choice to participate in the test, which has > been > > > >> delayed for months as the Obama administration determines what > > > >> elements to preserve, former government officials said. The > pilot > > > >> program was to have begun in February. "To be clear, Einstein 3 > > > >> development is proceeding," DHS spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said. "We > are > > > >> moving forward in a way that protects privacy and civil > liberties." > > > > > >> So, what's going on exactly? The Post story says: > > > > > >> Each time a private citizen visited a "dot-gov" Web site or sent > an > > > >> e-mail to a civilian government employee, that action would be > > > >> screened for potential harm to the network. > > > > > >> The AT&T test is part of a Bush-era pilot program for Einstein 3, a > > > >> program that calls for telecommunications companies to route the > > > >> Internet traffic of civilian agencies through a monitoring box that > > > >> would search for and block computer codes designed to penetrate or > > > >> otherwise compromise networks. > > > > > >> According to Wikipedia > > > >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_%28US-CERT_program%29>, > Einstein is: > > > > > >> designed to collect session data including: > > > > > >> * Autonomous system numbers (ASN) > > > >> * ICMP type and code > > > >> * Packet length > > > >> * Protocol > > > >> * Sensor identification and connection status (the location > of > > > >> the source of the data) > > > >> * Source and destination IP address > > > >> * Source and destination port > > > >> * TCP flag information > > > >> * Timestamp and duration information > > > > > >> There's also a classified NSA system, known as Tutelage, that can > decide > > > >> how to handle malicious intrusions. It's currently in place > defending > > > >> military networks. > > > > > >> Privacy advocates are watching carefully but appear to be willing to > > > >> listen to assurances that plans are in place to support privacy and > > > >> civil liberties. > > > > > >> "We came away saying they have a lot of work in front of them to > get > > > >> this done right," the Center for Democracy and Technology's Ari > > > >> Schwartz said. "We're looking forward to their next steps." > > > > > >> Richard KomanAs a lawyer and technology writer, Richard Koman brings > a > > > >> unique perspective to the blog's intersection of law, government and > > > >> technology. See his full profile > > > > ... > > > > read more » > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
