TimesArgus.com - We Are Vermont

Report: Bush surveillance program was massive



Toolbox

By PAMELA HESS The Associated Press - Published: July 11, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the legal basis for the effort but shielding almost all details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal.

The report, compiled by five inspectors general, refers to "unprecedented collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Just what those activities involved remains classified, but the IGs pointedly say that any continued use of the secret programs must be "carefully monitored."

The report says too few relevant officials knew of the size and depth of the program, let alone signed off on it. They particularly criticize John Yoo, a deputy assistant attorney general who wrote legal memos undergirding the policy. His boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, was not aware until March 2004 of the exact nature of the intelligence operations beyond wiretapping that he had been approving for the previous two and a half years, the report says.

Most of the intelligence leads generated under what was known as the "President's Surveillance Program" did not have any connection to terrorism, the report said. But FBI agents told the authors that the "mere possibility of the leads producing useful information made investigating the leads worthwhile."

The inspectors general interviewed more than 200 people inside and outside the government, but five former Bush administration officials refused to be questioned. They were Ashcroft, Yoo, former CIA Director George Tenet, former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and David Addington, an aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

According to the report, Addington could personally decide who in the administration was "read into" — allowed access to — the classified program.

The only piece of the intelligence-gathering operation acknowledged by the Bush White House was the wiretapping-without-warrants effort. The administration admitted in 2005 that it had allowed the National Security Agency to intercept international communications that passed through U.S. cables without seeking court orders.

Although the report documents Bush administration policies, its fallout could be a problem for the Obama administration if it inherited any or all of the still-classified operations.

Bush started the warrantless wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006, and Congress authorized most of the intercepts in a 2008 electronic surveillance law. The fate of the remaining and still classified aspects of the wider surveillance program is not clear from the report.

The report's revelations came the same day that House Democrats said that CIA Director Leon Panetta had ordered one eight-year-old classified program shut down after learning lawmakers had never been apprised of its existence.

The IG report said that President Bush signed off on both the warrantless wiretapping and other top-secret operations shortly after Sept. 11 in a single presidential authorization. All the programs were periodically reauthorized, but except for the acknowledged wiretapping, they "remain highly classified."

The report says it's unclear how much valuable intelligence the program has yielded.

The report, mandated by Congress last year, was delivered to lawmakers Friday.

Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., told The Associated Press she was shocked to learn of the existence of other classified programs beyond the warrantless wiretapping.

Former Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made a terse reference to other classified programs in an August 2007 letter to Congress. But Harman said that when she had asked Gonzales two years earlier if the government was conducting any other undisclosed intelligence activities, he denied it.

"He looked me in the eye and said 'no,"' she said Friday.

Robert Bork Jr., Gonzales' spokesman, said, "It has clearly been determined that he did not intend to mislead anyone."

In the wake of the new report, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt, renewed his call Friday for a formal nonpartisan inquiry into the government's information-gathering programs.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden — the primary architect of the program— told the report's authors that the surveillance was "extremely valuable" in preventing further al-Qaida attacks. Hayden said the operations amounted to an "early warning system" allowing top officials to make critical judgments and carefully allocate national security resources to counter threats.

Information gathered by the secret program played a limited role in the FBI's overall counterterrorism efforts, according to the report. Very few CIA analysts even knew about the program and therefore were unable to fully exploit it in their counterrorism work, the report said.

The report questioned the legal advice used by Bush to set up the program, pinpointing omissions and questionable legal memos written by Yoo, in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. The Justice Department withdrew the memos years ago.

The report says Yoo's analysis approving the program ignored a law designed to restrict the government's authority to conduct electronic surveillance during wartime, and did so without fully notifying Congress. And it said flaws in Yoo's memos later presented "a serious impediment" to recertifying the program.

Yoo insisted that the president's wiretapping program had only to comply with Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure — but the report said Yoo ignored the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, which had previously overseen federal national security surveillance.

"The notion that basically one person at the Justice Department, John Yoo, and Hayden and the vice president's office were running a program around the laws that Congress passed, including a reinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment, is mind boggling," Harman said.

House Democrats are pressing for legislation that would expand congressional access to secret intelligence briefings, but the White House has threatened to veto it.








READER COMMENTS


Well, not to intentionally pour water over all your arguments surrounding your perceived angst over this surveillance program, but where were any of you when the Vermont State Government decided to recently set up dozens of surveillance cameras along I-89? Oops.
-- Posted by Tom Boyce on Mon, Jul 13, 2009, 10:26 am EST

report this comment



Why does everyone put up with leahy, sanders, welch governor and legislator who do not perform according to the Consittutions?

We are a Republic: A government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing accordin to law.

Law of the Constitutions

Its our job to get rid of the criminals but first we need to understand how they are violating the Constitution.
-- Posted by Bill Brueckner on Mon, Jul 13, 2009, 7:18 am EST

report this comment



"Don't you think it's racist that the Times Argus spell checker still considers Obama misspelled?"

No, it is just not common. I have yet to use a word-processing program where I have not had to add my surname to the dictionary. The absence of that surname is not a valid argument if you are presenting yourself as unbiased on race, or no more racist the "The Times-Argus." Don't pat yourself on the back just yet.
-- Posted by Christina Colombe on Mon, Jul 13, 2009, 12:50 am EST

report this comment



"...I'm seeing that Obama has changed some of his original plans..."

As far as I'm concerned
Obama is sticking to his plans
What are his plans?
To stay in power
What do they say about power?
Power corrupts.

PS
Don't you think it's racist that the Times Argus spell checker still considers Obama misspelled?
-- Posted by A None on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 11:51 pm EST

report this comment



We are at a key juncture in our nations history ....when we need to restore the confidence of the people in their government, in the Constitution which has
been misinterpreted and .... all the institutions of our society that were the
foundations of faith in ourselves need to return to serving the people.
We need to speak truth in word to each other . Our schools need to teach our real history to our young people rather than myths. Our financial institutions need to be honest in their lending and customers need to be also. We need to stop the
false security of placing our identities in things. We need to stop borrowing money from nations whose human rights policies are inhuman so we will not become like them. We need to make rules for Wall Street that results in renumeration that
reasonably reflects benefits to society in general, not just those who make money off of money. Reward whould come to people and companies that create jobs.
What does this have to do with the alleged illegal acts of a past administration ?

The society of fear was created in order to draw people's attention away from
our giving away our economy for the sake of profitability for shareholders over
the backbone of our former strength, the American worker. Our social problems
could be ignored if people had fear in their psychy of a threat to our very existence.

The answer is the ballot box and renewal of the values that kept us free for
over two hundred years. When we celebrated our 200th birthday as a nation,
was about the time that we began to decline. We have some hard work to do
to make sure our representative democracy is restored to the societal goals generally intended by the signers of both the Declaration of Independence and
the Constitution. The Declaration of Indepence today need to be independence
from our self destructive values.

It can begin by returning to be people of our word.
-- Posted by Wm Haslam on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 10:52 pm EST

report this comment



Yeah they are SNTC.. It boils down to George Orwells 1984 is alive in 2009.. Are any of us really surprised?

Gary I got your point, I just found it funny that you jumped in the conversation with the one line, that's about it really.. Now that you've actually brought up discussion, then I won't be flippant to you ...

There's a lot going on behind the doors of our government that many aren't privy too, I'm seeing that Obama has changed some of his original plans, for sure we all have, but we have no idea why those plans have changed once he got in to the White house and now has complete view of all the secret information that's available to him now. We can sit and speculate all day long, but we don't really have any real idea what we are up against, how much IS actually corruption or if they are just keeping the real fears hidden from the masses to prevent hysteria.

I don't always agree with the President, none of us ever will, but until we actually walk a mile in there shoes and see what they actually have on the table, we can only sit and speculate.

But, I do NOT think there should be any surveillance of anyone with out Warrant.. listening to my phone conversations is about as useless to the government as it can get!!! WASTE OF TIME AN MONEY.

They should be spending some serious time scrutinizing and listening to the SEC, they have dropped the ball so many times one has to wonder how much is corrupt with that agency. Way to many ponzi schemes to say they are doing their jobs!!!
-- Posted by Melissa B. on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 1:34 pm EST

report this comment



My posts aren't making it?
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 8:13 am EST

report this comment



Dont forget the same moron democrats that claim they had no idea of the NSA programs are the same morons taht just passed a $787 billion dollar spending spree and didnt read it nor have a clue what turtle or lizard or bridge they are wasting money on.
2010..all current politicians need to go, and new ones in taht are willing to read the bills and listen to information provided. Maybe nancy Pelosi uses SNOPES to verify her information ....lol
-- Posted by Are you Kidding? on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 8:09 am EST

report this comment



WAR - The conversation you've just entered unfortunately is taking place on earth. Let us know when you arrive.
-- Posted by walt amses on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 8:08 am EST

report this comment



Guantanamo...or why not residency next to WAWA?...he would give them warm milk and cookies...then stabbed in the back....but No-Fault Walt only sees it as somebody else's problem. Why not in your back yard, WAWA??

"And those who said, 'Appease...Appease' were killed by those they sought to please"
Senator Everitt McKinley Dirksen. If only Neville Chamberlain had as much sense!
-- Posted by walt aims right on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 7:14 am EST

report this comment



What we havent been spared are insubordinate diatribes by the likes of WAWA and his ilk...
-- Posted by walt aims right on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 7:07 am EST

report this comment



And NO terrorist attacks. Obama....tick...tick...tick
-- Posted by walt aims right on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 7:03 am EST

report this comment



Melissa B. writes: "He loves them more then bush? Really? Wow you get to talk to the president and know his personal feelings. That's so cool!"

Read my post a little more closely, Melissa. I wrote "Obama SEEMS to love these programs even more than Bush". I base this opinion of mine on numerous articles I have read about filings by the obama organization in defense of bush spying programs. One of these articles is from a site that you have linked to on these boards before, globalresearch.ca.,http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13155. Other articles about the obama organization's defense of bush programs can be found on rawstory.com and opednews.com.

One paragraph from the above referenced article states, "Arguments in San Francisco federal district court by U.S. Attorneys have been described by constitutional law experts as being "worse than Bush." In their motion to dismiss Jewell, the Obama administration cited the same perverse logic of the previous regime: that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue "out of hand.""

I'm sorry but that is not change that I can believe in.
-- Posted by Gary Murphy on Sun, Jul 12, 2009, 1:03 am EST

report this comment



"God, I miss Nixon! At least he cooperated with the opposition and had the decency to resign when he realized he was about to be nailed."

LOL. how right you are. Nixon tried to hide it until he got nailed, but he did resign before he was thrown out. These people are as bad as him.
-- Posted by Watercloset on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 11:44 pm EST

report this comment



When can we get these guys sent somewhere like Guantanamo? Its stuff like these surveillance programs that have been the only tangible threat to freedom that I have been presented with evidence of since 9/11 (and there are a lot of questions about 9/11....) Talk about your autocratic imperialistic unitary executive... Where were all of the conservatives concerned with too much executive power during the Bush administration? Welcome to the party, kids... glad you made it.
-- Posted by Bennett Shapiro on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 11:02 pm EST

report this comment



OK had to go have a life today. Glad to see some of you picked up on this discussion but it has started to get off track so let's pick it up again and steer it back on topic;
continuing on..................."MOST of the intelligence leads generated...........DID NOT have ANY connection to terrorism.............. But FBI agents told the authors that the "MERE POSSIBILITY of the leads producing useful information made investigating the leads worthwhile."

As you can read for yourself (NO interpretation needed) these "intel gatherings" are being conducted on every Average Joe (& Jane) with full knowledge (and now disclosure) that they are NOT terrorism related. They are "justified to the IG and Congress by the "mere possibility.......of being worthwhile" statement.

Someone mentioned our medical records below and yes, THAT information IS available however for what it's worth at this time HIPAA has that under guard (at least for now).

It IS important for all of you to know now that E-V-E-R-Y electronic, digital signal AND communication IS MONITORED! banks of computers funded by US, at several locations throughout the WORLD (yes, world) are in use, and through the use of "keywords" filter out the millions of "teen texts" and "shopping lists" as someone else pointed out in a previous post.

I'll leave you all to think on this and offer a book title for you to read, "Nowhere to Hide". Read it! I'll be back in the morning.

Goodnight.
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 10:17 pm EST

report this comment



He loves them more then bush? Really? Wow you get to talk to the president and know his personal feelings. That's so cool!
-- Posted by Melissa B. on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 6:04 pm EST

report this comment



I'm sure that, since Obama seems to love these programs even more than Bush, Obama is not a happy camper about this disclosure.
-- Posted by Gary Murphy on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 12:59 pm EST

report this comment



Based on the Bush Administration's justification of this program, we have also been spared plagues of locusts........and - in fact - a number of other things: rabid snakes; being forced at gunpoint to go to a Toby Keith concert; rubbing pebbles on our heads instead of having brunch; leprosy (mostly); aging nun riots; pandas on unicycles with Uzis; martian invasion; Having A-Rod explode; paying Michael Jackson's pharmacy bills.................it's proving a negative. All you've got to do is fill in the blank with whatever you want............"Flesh eating butterflies".........
-- Posted by walt amses on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 12:10 pm EST

report this comment



I mean how crazy and dumb as a stump do they think people are?
Lies go excused because, " he really didn't mean to decieve anyone?

How many nipped in the bud terror attacks has this massive surveilance prevented.
The fact no terror attacks have taken place proves NOTHING.

I think those responsible need be indicted and brought to justice before the statute of limits kicks in.
-- Posted by Joshua Bernstein on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 11:24 am EST

report this comment



God, I miss Nixon! At least he cooperated with the opposition and had the decency to resign when he realized he was about to be nailed.

There has been a shift in government but to blame Bush would be wrong. Look back to the Lend-Lease as the first treadboard on the bridge to a more powerful presidency, but the assumption, I think, was that it was a one time shot. Every following president has used that as a basis to assume more power- the Truman Doctrine, Formosa, Cuban Missile Crisis, Viet-Nam, Nixon (don't need an event there), Iran-contra, etc, etc. It doesn't matter what party-- it's the demands of the office that causes the problem.
-- Posted by Vermontrider None on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 8:30 am EST

report this comment



This was about arrogance and presidential power. What was available to Bush - and has been available for years - in case of an "emergency" was to go ahead, set up the surveillance and seek a warrant later. They wouldn't even do that. They (Cheney in particular) felt previous administrations had weakened the office of the president and they wanted to revive the imperial presidency. As in "If he president did it it can't be a crime". This program - among other initiatives - was a line in the sand regarding the relationship between the executive and legislative branches of government. They engage in this monumentally expensive clash of egos while 97% of what comes into our ports remains completely unchecked. Mind Boggling.
-- Posted by walt amses on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:59 am EST

report this comment



Mr. B

I am wondering-- who do you want to replace all these people with? What statespeople are you considering?

I didn't think about medical records-- good point. I see the advantages of having computerized medical records but then I also see the problems. If I go to my dr for a script, will that be used to determine whether or not I get life insurance? Who besides drs will have access to these records?

But, back to Bush and the courts-- actually from what I've read, it was Cheney who essentially ran the WH in the first term. Compare it to the 2nd-- he dropped out of sight and it was Cheney who argued throughout his terms of public service for a stronger executive. This does not excuse the President-- he is, after all where the buck stops.

But, back to the main point-- did, or do these programs actually do some good? And this also shows another weakness in the American way of life-- you can find a lawyer to do anything, write anything or say anything you want and then the other side has to pay another to argue against it. This would tie up the courts for a long time and what good would come of it, other than knowing, legally, that it happened.
-- Posted by Vermontrider None on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:58 am EST

report this comment



Dont forget about your medical records that are now being shared by everyone by law of the US Government.

The bill of rights is (4th amendment) supposed to protect the people from criminals like Leahy and the democrats and republicans.
-- Posted by Bill Brueckner on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:20 am EST

report this comment



The Congress makes the law, the president executes the law.

Leahy knew about violations from the earliest days of bush's administration. Violations of the 4th amendment and never acted. He did not represent Vermonters and the people of this nation according to the Constitution.
He also allowed the Iraq war an illegal unconstitutional preemptive act of aggression on another sovereign nation to begin without challeging it as unconstitution. He let Americans die to accomplish illegal acts. And without challenging the war allowed for the holocaust of a million people.

This is a sick nation degenerating into a hitler or mussolini style of governance.

Not only must this monster be taken out of office at the next election so to must all R and D's be replaced with statemen and statewomen who will obey the Constitutions.
-- Posted by Bill Brueckner on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:17 am EST

report this comment



Sorry, not enough caffeine, "you're on a roll AND right..."
-- Posted by Vermontrider None on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:12 am EST

report this comment



Wow, JSNTC, you're on a roll an right.

While I wish I could get angrier about the invasion of my privacy I realize that most of those rights were commercially sold years ago. Using the internet, using a credit card, an EZPass- what books I buy off of Amazon all go into the great marketing computer in the cave to profile me as a consumer. Probably those companies do this a lot more efficiently than the government does.

What does concern me is the colossal waste of time it must've been to cull through the thousands of hours of teens texting and calling each other to say nothing, grocery lists over the phone and take out orders that we communicate with. Surely the vast resources of the NSA could've been put to better use? Perhaps maybe building a better firewall so cyber attacks don't occur?

On your China bent-- the Varyag-- the former Russian carrier now owned by the Chinese? She's been moved into drydock to "install engines and other heavy equipment" and will be ready for sea trials by the end of the year.
So, now they will have power projection capabilities in blue waters. Not good.
-- Posted by Vermontrider None on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 7:11 am EST

report this comment



The report goes on to say, "too FEW relevant officials knew of the size and depth of the program, LET ALONE signed off on it."

Who DID know? Let's read on;

The report particularly criticizes JOHN YOO, a DEPUTY ASSISTANT attorney general who "wrote LEGAL memos undergirding the policy".

The "POLICY" was...................let's continue,

AG John Ashcroft, (Yoos' boss) was NOT AWARE (?) until March 2004 of the EXACT nature of the intelligence operations beyond wiretapping that HE HAD BEEN APPROVING for the previous TWO and ONE-HALF YEARS?????????

I would like to take an "unofficial" poll right now.
How many of us out here (and there) sign our name, nilly-willy, to something NOT written by ourselves without knowing WHAT we are signing? Wouldn't this be considered a basic human analytical thought process, NOT to sign a document OR LEGAL MEMO you didn't author?

WOW! Think about this...............

The problems ARE mounting but let's move along.......
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 5:32 am EST

report this comment



Let's look at the opening statement of the story. Bush surveillance program was MASSIVE. (My emphasis of which there will be many).

"The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information FAR BEYOND the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the LEGAL basis for the effort but SHIELDING ALMOST ALL details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal."

We'll come back to this later, let's continue on;

".......compiled by five inspectors general........"UNPRECEDENTED collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

"unprecedented"- at levels previously unknown

"Just what those activities involved remains classified, but the IGs POINTEDLY say that any continued use of the secret programs must be "CAREFULLY monitored."

Is anyone thinking 4th Amendment violation yet?
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 5:13 am EST

report this comment



I will continue to post until his shows up on the most discussed tab. If no one picks up on this topic soon I will start without you.
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 4:54 am EST

report this comment



For all you NON-believers, come on down, lets read this together and see what is REALLY going on.
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 4:51 am EST

report this comment



This warrants discussion. Wake up everyone. Time to start your day.
-- Posted by Say NO to China on Sat, Jul 11, 2009, 4:50 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout