Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

host · 07-10-2007, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I bet less than 0.001% of the population could give you the exact details of conversations, emails, memos, who attended meetings, times and dates of same, etc. that occurred between 6 months and a year ago. Could you? And if you don't remember perfectly, isn't it safer to say you don't know?

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...070902065.html
Gonzales Was Told of FBI Violations
After Bureau Sent Reports, Attorney General Said He Knew of No Wrongdoing

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 10, 2007; Page A01

As he sought to renew the USA Patriot Act two years ago, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales assured lawmakers that the FBI had not abused its potent new terrorism-fighting powers. "There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse," Gonzales told senators on <h3>April 27, 2005</h3>.....

ace, WaPo "reporter" John Solomon, didn't include this April 5, 2005 Gonzales prepared statement, delivered, under oath, to the senate judiciary committee.
Are your saying that Gonzales is not responsible for deliberately misleading items that he included prepared statements, knowing that they will be delivered in sworn testimony, and that the contradict the information, on the exact same subject, that has been crossing his desk, for weeks?

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv..._20070710.html
</div> </div> <div id="wrapperMainCenter" style="width: 655px;"> <div id="wrapperInternalCenter"> <script language="Javascript" src="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/javascript/winopen/reuters_winopen.js"></script> <div id="article"> <div class="newsGraphic"> <style type="text/css">
table.dataTable th.date, table.dataTable td.date { white-space: nowrap; }

</style> <h1>Civil Liberties Violations</h1> <h2>Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said he was surprised and unaware of civil liberties violations committed by the FBI during its exercise of Patriot Act powers — including the use of so-called National Security Letters — until an internal Justice Department report uncovered them in March 2007. But Gonzales and his predecessor, John Ashcroft, were routinely sent notifications from the FBI when such violations occurred and had to be reported to the president's Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB), according to documents released this month under the Freedom of Information Act. Here is a timeline:</h2> <br /> <table class="dataTable"> <tr><th class="date">Date</th><th>Event</th><th>Documentation</th></tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>2004</b></td> <td>Attorney General John Ashcroft receives several reports of civil liberties violations from the FBI as they are being transmitted to the president's Intelligence Oversight Board.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBS2004Ashcroft.pdf">FBI Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>Nov. 10, 2004</b></td> <td>Bush names Gonzales to be his next attorney general, succeeding Ashcroft.</td> <td><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40219-2004Nov10.html">Washington Post story</a></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>Feb. 3, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sworn in as the nation's 80th attorney general.</td> <td><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61932-2005Feb3.html">Washington Post story</a></td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>Feb. 10, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an intelligence investigations of a U.S. citizen that went on for more than a year without proper notification or oversight.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBFeb10-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>Feb. 14, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving a counterterrorism investigation in which agents continued the collection of electronic surveillance of a U.S. person after a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court's order had expired.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBFeb14-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>Feb. 16, 2005</td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the improper search of a peson's property in an intelligence investigation.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBFeb16-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>March 18, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an error during a counterterrorism investigation.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBMar18-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>March 22, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an error made by a telephone carrier during an electronic surveillance operation.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBMar22-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date">

Quote:

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=1&gl=us

STATEMENT OF ALBERT0 R. GONZALES
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES
BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SENATE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
<h2>APRIL 5.2005</h2>

......page 29

Section 1001 also directs the Office of Inspector General to submit to this Committee and
the House Judiciary Committee on a semi-annual basis a report detailing any abuses of
civil rights and civil liberties by Department employees or officials. To date, six such
reports have been submitted by the Office of the Inspector General pursuant to section
1001; they were transmitted in July 2002, January 2003, July 2003, January 2004,
September 2004, and March 2005.<h3> I am pleased to be able to state that the Office of the Inspector General has not documented in these reports any abuse of civil rights or civil liberties by the Department related to the use of any substantive provision of the USA PATRIOT Act....</h3>

<b>April 21, 2005</b></td><br> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the prohibited collection of email contents through a national security letter due to an error by the Internet provider.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBApr21-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>April 27, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee in favor of renewing the U.S. Patriot Act, declaring "There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse."</td> <td><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070900934.html">Senate Testimony</a></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>May 6, 2005</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the unauthorized collection of the wrong person's telephone data under a national security letter because an agent made an error in listing the wrong number.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBMay6-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>Dec. 11, 2006</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the unauthorized collection of the wrong person's telephone data under a national security letter because an agent made an error in listing the wrong number.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBDec11-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>Dec. 13, 2006</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the "unintentional, unauthorized interception" of U.S. persons during a counterterrorism invetsigation.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBDec13-05Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr class="shadedrow"> <td class="date"><b>Feb. 26, 2007</b></td> <td>Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the unauthorized collection of the wrong person's telephone data under a national security letter because an agent made an error in listing the wrong number.</td> <td><a href="http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/IOBFeb26-07Gonzales.pdf">IOB Violation Report</a> (PDF)</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="date"><b>March 9, 2007</b></td> <td>Gonzales gives a speech to the International Association of Privacy Professionals and reacts to the release of a Justice Department inspector general report documenting pervasive problems with the FBI's collection of phone and computer data under the Patriot Act. "I was upset when I learned this, as was Director Mueller. And to say that I am concerned about what has been revealed in this report would be an enormous understatement."</td> <td><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070900942.html">Gonzales Speech</a></td> </tr> </table> </div> <p class="lastPar"></p> <div id="topborder_bottom" class="toolbox">

Quote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6831937/site/newsweek/
Exclusive: Ashcroft on Triumphs—And Threats
Ashcroft: Intel foiled Qaeda plots, but the organization is 'morphing'
Charles Dharapak / AP
Ashcroft: Intel foiled Qaeda plots, but the organization is 'morphing'

By Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek

Jan. 24, 2005 issue - Last May, Attorney General John Ashcroft made headlines when he declared the Feds had "credible intelligence" that Al Qaeda was planning a major attack inside the United States "in the next few months." But no attack materialized. So what happened? Last week, in a NEWSWEEK interview, the departing A.G. took credit for tough actions that disrupted plots, "significantly damaged" Al Qaeda and "made it far more difficult" for the terrorists to operate. He pointed in particular to the obscure arrest of a New York taxi-driver student who, Ashcroft aides say, was ensnared with the help of one of the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act: the section giving the Feds new powers to obtain records of public-library users.

.....Justice officials say they learned of Babar's activities in part through a highly contentious method: monitoring his Internet use at a New York City public library, where he allegedly exchanged messages with Qaeda confederates abroad. (Ashcroft had previously told Congress that Justice had never used the library-snooping provision—an assertion he has conspicuously declined to repeat since the Babar case.)........

Consider the preceding MSNBC reporting when you read the following:

....and ace, page 19 of Gonzales's sworn April 5, 2005 statement, shows that he did prepare....did do research:

Quote:

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=1&gl=us
.....The Justice Department, for instance, has confirmed that, as recently as
the winter and spring of 2004, a member of a terrorist group closely affiliated with a1
Qaeda used Inteinet service provided by a public library to communicate with his
confederates. .......

Gonzales was not Atty. General when the following occurred, yet...in preparing a statement to advise the Senate Judiciary committee on how seriously the DOJ practiced safe guarding American's constitutional rights, he included this obscure anecdote, yet not only ommitted reports of FBI abuses of Patriot Act "privileges", but he assured the senators that there were no documented abuses.......

...and two years AFTER we now fid out that Gonzales was receiving a steady stream of reports of abuses by the FBI of Patriot Act provisions, we read this finding by the DOJ IG:

Quote:

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/testimony/0703b/index.htm
<center>Statement of

Glenn A. Fine
Inspector General
U.S. Department of Justice

before the

Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence U.S. House of Representatives

concerning

“The FBI’s Use of National Security Letters and Section 215 Requests for Business Records”

March 28, 2007</center>

......<h3>In addition, we found that the FBI had no policy requiring the retention of signed copies of national security letters. As a result, we were unable to conduct a comprehensive audit of the FBI’s compliance with its internal control policies and the statutory certifications required for NSLs.</h3>

In one of the most troubling findings, we determined that from 2003 through 2005 the FBI improperly obtained telephone toll billing records and subscriber information from 3 telephone companies pursuant to over 700 so-called “exigent letters.” These letters generally were signed by personnel in the Communications Analysis Unit (CAU), a unit of the Counterterrorism Division in FBI Headquarters, and were based on a form letter used by the FBI’s New York Field Division in the criminal investigations related to the September 11 attacks. The exigent letters signed by the CAU typically stated:

Due to exigent circumstances, it is requested that records for the attached list of telephone numbers be provided. Subpoenas requesting this information have been submitted to the U.S. Attorney’s Office who will process and serve them formally to [information redacted] as expeditiously as possible.

These letters were signed by CAU Unit Chiefs, CAU special agents, and subordinate personnel, <h3>none of whom were delegated authority to sign NSLs....</h3>

....so we have enough to reasonably state that Gonzales deliberately misled the senate about DOJ Patriot Act abuses and was not himslef concerned enough about eliminating those abuses, to even confirm whether the FBI <b>"had [a] policy requiring the retention of signed copies of national security letters"</b>.....

I think it is appropriate to ask this now, ace....do you receive any compensation, in money or other goods, to post your opinions on this forum?

....Or are you just an unconcerned citizen because you "have nothing to hide"? Do you see any problem cooperating if the DOJ told you that they were going to mount a closed cicuit video camera....with sound recording, in your living room, or above and behind where you sit at your computer?