Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

NSA: Dozens Of Attacks Averted

Details of claims won’t be released to the public

June 13, 2013

WASHINGTON — The director of the National Security Agency said Wednesday that once-secret surveillance programs disrupted dozens of terrorist attacks, explicitly describing for Congress how the......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(62)

Gooseman

Jun-13-13 12:29 AM

Sean Hannity sure has changed his tune.

The rambunctious Fox News host on Monday lashed into the Obama administration over the revelations of widespread Internet and phone surveillance by the National Security Agency, warning that "anarchy and tyranny will follow."

But back in 2006, when a similar NSA spying scandal was unearthed during President George W. Bush's administration, Hannity wasn't so concerned. He came out as a staunch defender of the NSA then, saying it was "staggering to me we are even debating the use of these techniques in this country even at this time."

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jun-13-13 4:16 AM

Speaking of changing tunes, here’s Senator Barry Obama in December 2005, on the first reauthorization of the Patriot Act:

“This is legislation that puts our own Justice Department above the law. When National Security Letters are issued, they allow federal agents to conduct any search on any American, no matter how extensive or wide-ranging, without ever going before a judge to prove that the search is necessary. They simply need sign-off from a local FBI official. That's all....

“And if someone wants to know why their own government has decided to go on a fishing expedition through every personal record or private document - through library books they've read and phone calls they've made - this legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea; no jury will hear their case.

“This is just plain wrong.”

Then......

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jun-13-13 4:17 AM

what do you know? In 2009 President Barry Oflipflopper SIGNED an EXTENSION of those provisions of the Patriot Act. And has used those provisions enthusiastically ever since.

mmm mmm mmm, Barry W Obush

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jun-13-13 4:42 AM

2011. And when Barry FlipFlopper Obush renewed the Patriot Act in 2011, Dem Senator Wyden warned “I want to deliver a warning this afternoon: When the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry.” Dem Senator Mark Udall agreed, saying “Americans would be alarmed if they knew how this law is being carried out.”

What do you know. Occasionally even Dem Senators are right.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Jun-13-13 4:58 AM

By the way, the next sentence from GoosePlagiarizer’s uncredited Hufferton Post copy-dump is “Media Matters put together a mashup of Hannity’s comments...”

"Progressive" Huff Po copy dumps? tsk tsk. And Huff Po is now shilling for Media Matters? Ugh...

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GETACLUE

Jun-13-13 7:02 AM

Obama SIGNED an EXTENSION not an EXPANSION........"PRISM was born late in GEORGE W BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION, but its bloodline can be traced to the frenzied aftermath of 9/11. It used to be that, when the federal government wanted to read a foreigner's Yahoo or Microsoft emails, it needed a judge's approval. After the attacks, BUSH SECRETLY AUTHORIZED the National Security Agency to get to skip that oversight and read U.S.-based email accounts in real time. When the New York Times revealed the existence of that program, the BUSH ADMINISTRATION appealed to Congress, saying court approval was too arduous. There were too many emails to monitor. Getting warrants for each one took too long."

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dyingov

Jun-13-13 7:26 AM

If both the D's and R's are in on the gig, all is well......

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dyingov

Jun-13-13 7:57 AM

I'm sure the goberment will be directing us to the trials/arrests that resulted from the "dozens" of averted attacks!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Triton

Jun-13-13 8:05 AM

I have no doubt that some of the attacks that have been thwarted are a result of the surveillance system. In that way it is good. The real problem we have now is that we must trust the security forces to protect us and we must trust that if they tramp on some of our rights they do it for the highest reason. In the wake of revelations that the Obama administration misused the power of the IRS to target people who politically disagree with him AND that Obama authorized the actual monitoring of phone calls to reporters to find out who they talk too...well we know that his administration will and has misused government power for ugly political purposes, for political witch hunts. We simply don't trust Obama, nor do we trust the little army of security bureaucrats who are in their positions because they sold their profession to political slime to advance their pay/pension. We have to trust in the government in a democracy for it to work. Obama is no fan of democracy.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GETACLUE

Jun-13-13 8:17 AM

Triton...."In the wake of revelations that the Obama administration misused the power of the IRS to target people who politically disagree with him."

Are you privy to some EVIDENCE that congress should know about because even GRAND INQUISITOR CHAIRMAN ISSA can't produce any to support your or his own claims?

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wonderwhy

Jun-13-13 8:38 AM

Triton, who is 'we'?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dyingov

Jun-13-13 8:59 AM

"In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people themselves. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem. The people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government is a servant of the people, and obliged to its owner, We the People. Many politicians have lost sight of that fact."

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thebudman

Jun-13-13 9:06 AM

Prove it NSA.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thebudman

Jun-13-13 9:09 AM

wonderwhy Jun-13-13 8:38 AM Agree | Disagree

Triton, who is 'we'?

We know YOU are the one "standing in {-{ell up to your neck in burning feces."

Pray for Sarah!

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Gooseman

Jun-13-13 9:19 AM

It is "staggering to me we are even debating the use of these techniques in this country even at this time."

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thebudman

Jun-13-13 9:30 AM

Show us the results NSA.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

idliketoknow

Jun-13-13 9:41 AM

Not sure how I feel about all this. I guess it's like smoking bans. I disagree with them because I think you should be able to allow smoking in your business if you want. However, I could honestly care less because I am not a smoker. I do think this is an infringement on privacy in a big way, but quite honestly I don't care because I have nothing to hide and this will likely never effect me in a negative way.

I think the biggest question is where are they drawing the line.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

idliketoknow

Jun-13-13 9:44 AM

And for the record, I think this administration has already shown us that they have very poor judgement when it comes to drawing lines.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wonderwhy

Jun-13-13 9:52 AM

budboy- grow up........geez

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardwhee

Jun-13-13 10:03 AM

It's gotten to the point where I can't believe anything this Admin. and it's yes men/women tries to feed us. They are like the wind, always blowing from different directions.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thebudman

Jun-13-13 11:38 AM

Ohio Department of Insurance officials announced last week that average premiums in the Buckeye state would soar 88 percent once President Obama's health care law kicks in. The news added fuel to an already raging debate over Obamacare's effect on insurance costs.

Ohio's insurance department disclosed that a total of 14 insurance companies had proposed rates on 214 plans to be offered through the federally run insurance exchange set to open on Oct. 1 and begin providing benefits in January.

"The department's initial analysis of the proposed rates show consumers will have fewer choices and pay much higher premiums for their health insurance starting in 2014," said Ohio's Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor. Specifically, the study showed that the average monthly cost of insurance would rise from $223 to $420.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wonderwhy

Jun-13-13 12:05 PM

gee budboy- you could at least source the right wing washington examiner for your comments and quotes. It is an opinion piece, and you put it here as fact.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Thebudman

Jun-13-13 12:19 PM

"Imagine that your health insurance had a $25,000 deductible. Or imagine that it did not include most office visits, had no prescription coverage, and left you on the hook for up to $13,000 in out-of-pocket expenses for the services it did cover.

Would you consider that a decent policy? Would you even call that insurance? Those are the questions you need to ask yourself this week, as the latest reports of Obamacare “rate shock” circulate.

The reports are coming from Ohio—where, last Thursday, the state Department of Insurance announced that Ohioans buying insurance on their own, rather than through an employer, should brace for premium increases that will average 88 percent next year. It was a much more discouraging report than the one California officials had made two weeks before. And Ohio Lt. Governor Mary Taylor made sure lots of people heard about it. “We have warned of these increases,” Taylor, who also oversees the state Department of Insurance, said. “The Department’s i

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hefner

Jun-13-13 12:24 PM

The problem is you are*******if you do and*******if you don’t. Everyone in government is in this scandalous spying on Americans up to their ears and I really have no problem with it as long as the information they glean is not for dissemination and can only be viewed on a strictly need to know basis. Using the IRS to target political groups or using the NIA to see who a Senator of the opposing party is shacking up with is totally wrong and those who order this type of surveillance should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, regardless from how high up the food chain the order came. I cannot help but wonder if anybody gave Obama a handbook on what a President is supposed to do, apparently not.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hefner

Jun-13-13 12:37 PM

To my mind, Triton's "we" refers to the 73% of Americans, a great many of whom are conservatives, and also included are many liberals who are taking off their ideological blinders realizing that the cool black faced guy they voted for is ill-equipped to be anything beyond a Chicago political hack, and they cannot afford the price, both monetarily and in personal freedoms, that such an idiotic vote is costing them.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 62 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: