Quote:
|
Originally Posted by USA Today Article (all quotes apply)
Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, declined to discuss the agency's operations. "Given the nature of the work we do, it would be irresponsible to comment on actual or alleged operational issues; therefore, we have no information to provide," he said. "However, it is important to note that NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the law."
|
Somehow, that isn't reassuring at all.
Quote:
|
She [Dana Perino] added that all national intelligence activities undertaken by the federal government "are lawful, necessary and required for the pursuit of al-Qaeda and affiliated terrorists." All government-sponsored intelligence activities "are carefully reviewed and monitored," Perino said. She also noted that "all appropriate members of Congress have been briefed on the intelligence efforts of the United States."
|
Personally, it's bothersome to me that despite this practice being "lawful and necessary" we (American citizens), are only finding out about it as a result of some journalistic probing. That makes me think very strongly that those practicing this spying are suspect that it might not be kosher; and thus have to defend it, instead of explaining it in more depth.
Quote:
The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single "violation" could cover one customer or 1 million.
In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.
|
The president's representatives have been in court quite a bit lately, facing various legal charges. The fact that these people are able to ovverride laws and rights in the name of fighting terrorism is disheartening. It also doesn't seem very democratic to have a president using executive force to limit individual rights.
Quote:
|
Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It also tried appealing to Qwest's patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest's refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled.
|
Kudos to Qwest. In essence, I guess Qwest could be considered a terrorist threat now that they are refusing to blindly follow their governments demands, instead opting to protect those they serve financially.
That being said, it's a very well written, and informative article. Instead of just providing the hot issue, it also provides back story, as well as information regarding the laws and rights that the president's actions may be compromising.