Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report: NYT [Treason Alert]

NYT ^ | By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN

[MindBender26]

WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.

The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.

MORE

[hipaatwo]

I asked the mods to pull it. My son who is 20 and apolitical call the NYTimes and the Dems terrorists now.

[oceanview]

you need to be in a state of declared war to prosecute someone with a gov't security clearance from leaking information?

[MindBender26]

See my #32

[cpdiii]

I think the New York Slimes is going for a two for one hit.

1. First they rehash old news about a surveillance program that is legal and has been going on for years before George W Bush. They will then try to make it seem he is behind this and that it is illegal, which it is not.

2. They hope some of their reporters will be arrested and which point they and all the left will scream that Bush is a Jack Booted Fascist Thug whom is suppressing Free Speech. That title really belongs to John McCain and the Supreme Court relative to The Campaign Finance Reform Bill.

What say you Fintan?

[Malesherbes]

New York City took the biggest hit on 9-11 and may very well take the next one. Meantime, it harbors a newspaper that does everything it can to undermine U.S. security.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I think it's time for some high-powered lawyer to file an actual, honest to goodness class action suit against the New York Times, on behalf of 300 million Americans, for monetary damages - for deliberately endangering our safety and security.

Damages of ... what? 500 billion dollars. To start?

Maybe that would get the message across.

All your profits are belong to We the People of the United States. (Plaintiff)

[oceanview]

its not illegal for the media to publish these stories. its unethical and unpatriotic, but those terms define the american media, so why should they care.

you have to find the people leaking this stuff to them.

[p23185]

The publishing of classified information by recognised media is not illegal.

Don't agree - one cannot publish classified information without the appropriate US Government approval. Whether a law is actually broken I cannot answer, but I guarantee you a US Government Regulation is broken.

[cpdiii]

you need to be in a state of declared war to prosecute someone with a gov't security clearance from leaking information?

That is going to be a hell of shock to all the people in Federal Jail that went there for leaking classified material to the East Block and Israel. Adjust that tinfoil hat the rays are leaking in.

[Brad from Tennessee]

As I recall, there used to be a valley full of radio receiver dishes in West Virginia. I imagine the technology has evolved. These receivers picked up telephone microwave emissions from everywhere then sent the signals to a series of super computers in Fort Belvoir or somewhere like that. The news media would periodically do stories on all this. This was during the Cold War but part of what they monitored was in the U.S.

[jveritas]

And the political mass suicide of liberals and their media whores continues...

[oceanview]

someone else will have to confirm - but I believe mindbender is correct.

[oceanview]

the question mark I put at the end of the sentence was there because I was questioning the assertion of someone else which I believed to be incorrect.

[FreedomCalls]

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 37 > § 793 Prev

§ 793. Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; or

(c) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or

(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

...

(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

[MindBender26]

Trust me on this. I'm a lawyer and former newsie. Publication is not illegal, ie Pentagon Papers. Leaking to the media is very illegal. Publishing is not. First amendment, no prior restraint, etc.

"Regulations" only apply to specific classes of people, Military, contractors with access to classified information, etc.

[cpdiii]

My Bad. Your are one of the good guys.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Remember OJ? Robert Blake?

A class-action suit for monetary damages, is not a criminal trial. It is a civil suit. It is not about criminal law or guilt. It is a question of LEGAL LIABILITY.

Reasonable care. Preponderance of the evidence.

Sky's the limit on damages. Something like this might prompt properly motivated jurors to "send a message".

SUE THE B... I mean Times.

[oceanview]

I hope so!

[McGavin999]

So, what do these morons at the NYT think the word "chatter" applied to? Good grief, did they think the CIA was listening outside the window of terrorists?