Found this interview with Russell Tice, a former NSA/DIA guy that was fired in May of '05 thru Michelle Malkin, and "Democracy Now", with Amy Goodman doing the interview. If you haven't watched it on cable, Democracy Now thinks CNN is part of a GOP/corporate conspiracy. This is not the transcript in its entirety, but I lifted out some interesting comments. I'm not sure what to make of Mr. Tice. I'm not sure he does either...
He basically agrees that the NSA is supposed to be doing the things its doing and as Bush said, that it was a 'good thing to know if Al-Qaeda is dialing your number'. He was never asked to spy on Americans and doesn't know anyone that did. He got fired and doesn't indicate why.
Transcript(my edits) here...
AMY GOODMAN:… can you just describe for us what is the National Security Agency? How does it monitor these communications?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, the National Security Agency is an agency that deals with monitoring communications for the defense of the country.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, you have worked for the National Security Agency. Can you talk about your response to the revelations that the Times…the revelation of the wiretapping of American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, as far as an intelligence officer, especially a SIGINT (Signals Intelligence, rw) officer at N.S.A., we're taught from very early on in our careers that you just do not do this…Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that’s a gospel to a SIGINT officer.
AMY GOODMAN: We talk to Russell Tice, former intelligence agent with the National Security Agency, formerly with the Defense Intelligence Agency, worked with the N.S.A. up until May 2005. Russell Tice, what happened then? What happened in May 2005?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, basically I was given my walking papers and told I was no longer a federal employee. So –
AMY GOODMAN: What would you say to those who say you are speaking out now simply because you are disgruntled?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, I guess that’s a valid argument. You know, I was fired.
AMY GOODMAN: What do you think of the Justice Department launching an investigation into the leak, who leaked the fact that President Bush was spying on American citizens?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, I think this is an attempt to make sure that no intelligence officer ever considers doing this.
AMY GOODMAN: And what do you think of the news that the National Security Agency spying on American citizens without a court order and foreign nationals is now sharing this information with other agencies like, well, the other agency you worked for, the Defense Intelligence Agency?
RUSSELL TICE: …So it’s not unusual for the intelligence community to share information. But when we’re talking about information on the American public, which is a violation of the FISA law, then I think it's even something more to be concerned about.
AMY GOODMAN: Were you ever asked to engage in this?
RUSSELL TICE: No, no...
AMY GOODMAN: What about the telecoms, the telecommunications corporations working with the Bush administration to open up a back door to eavesdropping, to wiretapping?
RUSSELL TICE: If that was done and, you know, I use a big “if” here…
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Russell Tice, former intelligence agent with the National Security Agency, worked at the N.S.A. up until May of 2005. What is data mining?
RUSSELL TICE: Data mining is a means by which you -- you have information, and you go searching for all associated elements of that information in whatever sort of data banks or databases that you put together with information. So if you have a phone number and you want to associate it with, say, a terrorist or something, and you want to associate it with, you know, ‘Who is this terrorist talking to?’ you start doing data on what sort of information or what sort of numbers does that person call or the frequency of time, that sort of thing. And you start basically putting together a bubble chart of, you know, where everybody is.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you expect you are being monitored, surveilled, wiretapped right now?
RUSSELL TICE: Yes, I do.
AMY GOODMAN: President Bush. Russell Tice, you’re with the National Security Agency, or you were until May 2005. If al-Qaeda's calling, the U.S. government wants to know. Your response?
RUSSELL TICE: Well, that's probably a good thing to know.
AMY GOODMAN: Did you support the President, Russell Tice? Did you vote for President Bush?
RUSSELL TICE: I am a Republican. I voted for President Bush both in the last election and the first election where he was up for …it’s not like, you know -- I think you’re going to find a lot of folks that are in the Department of Defense and the intelligence community are apt to be on the conservative side of the fence.
AMY GOODMAN: Russell Tice, did you know anyone within the N.S.A. who refused to spy on Americans, who refused to follow orders?
RUSSELL TICE: No. No, I do not. As far as -- of course, I'm not witting of anyone that was told they will spy on an American...
2 comments:
I was ruthless in my last refutation to your last post. Perhaps I will be a tad nicer in this one. Regardless, must be said...
He basically agrees that the NSA is supposed to be doing the things its doing and as Bush said, that it was a 'good thing to know if Al-Qaeda is dialing your number'. He was never asked to spy on Americans and doesn't know anyone that did. He got fired and doesn't indicate why.
Let me help you here. You left out much, much of the interview. You did include the parts that liberals do agree with (I know some that do disagree with FISA in general - however, I am not one of them), but not the part that liberals disagree with or Republicans (like the self avowed Tice affirmed) disagree with - that is, spying on those that can be reasonable demonstrated are in fact, probably terrorists.
Several things to cover. I will three of them and point out some strawmen in two of your other non-sequitars.
01.The Roll of the NSA...
Tice: ”It (not spying on Americans, warrantless.) is drilled into our head over and over and over again in security briefings, at least twice a year, where you ultimately have to sign a paper that says you have gotten the briefing. Everyone at N.S.A. who's a SIGINT officer knows that you do not do this. (Spying on Americans, warrantless.) Ultimately, so do the leaders of N.S.A., and apparently the leaders of N.S.A. have decided that they were just going to go against the tenets of something that's a gospel to a SIGINT officer.” (i.e. spying on Americans, warrantless.)
Keep this in mind.
02. Without FISA warrants, phone calls, and ultimately satiating the burden of proof...
Tice explains that, ”you know, I mean, think about it, you could have potentially somebody getting the wrong phone call from a terrorist and having him spirited away to some back-alley country to get the rubber hose treatment and who knows what else.” This is why we have a FISA court, even though it pretty much is a rubber stamp for whatever administration has been elected. Which, of course, only makes Bush’s non-use of FISA that much more suspicious - since the court has only said “no” 4 to 5 times since its inception since Carter’s administration.
03. The Burden of Proof.
Fundamental to American Justice is that we are innocent first, otherwise we are all guilty and by the way of association, without warrants, now terrorists. Tice points out, that ” What did the President know? What was the President told about this? It's just -- there's just too many variables out there that we don't know yet. And, ultimately, I think Congress needs to find out those answers. If the President was fed a bill of goods in this matter, then that's something that has to be addressed. Or if the President himself knew every aspect of what's going on, if this was some sort of vacuum cleaner deal, then it is ultimately, I would think, the President himself that needs to be held responsible for what's going on here.”
If the POTUS is innocent of breaking the law, then he’s got nothing to fear in the upcoming house investigation into this matter. However, he’s already admitted that he did break the Constitution in this matter. Equivocating Clinton to Bush, or Carter, does not clear Bush’s name, it only compounds his quilt (and theirs). That is, it must be fixed.
RE: TICE’s “confusion”?
This is largely based upon the way the NSA works. Hell the CIA for that matter. Its really no secret. Tice explains, ”it's called compartmentalization ... each person knows to keep their nose out of the other person's business, because everything's compartmentalized, and you're only allowed to work on what you have a need to know to work on.” So, what the scale of this operation is, is unknown. What is known, that there was no retro-active, post-surveillance request for warrants submitted to FISA. Obviously, this is what Tice is referring too.
RE: Why he was fired.
Tice was fired because he raised concerns over this program’s legality. He even that he could be seen as “jaded” (or disgruntled) because of the policy. He stated that, ”You shall report suspicions of espionage,' but when they retaliate you for doing so, you pretty much have no recourse. I think a lot of people don't realize that.“
And that’s what he did. And when he reported what this Administration was doing, he was fired.
//Suspect Device
//Milwaukee
suspexdvce at yahoo
For complete interview read: http://www.alternet.org/rights/30387
Perhaps you should re-read the 4th Amendment. The operative term is 'unreasonable'. Ever had to take a drug test for a job? No warrant there. You can't get much more private than your own urine. Its been ruled legal, evidently not unreasonable, and its constitutional. Also, I can 'reasonably' expect someone to tap my phone if I'm a recipient of a call from UBL, or if my address is on a database from a computer captured in Aghanistan, especially during time of war.
While you're at it, re-read the case law which explicitly concurs that similar wiretaps did not fall under FISA jurisdiction. That is to say, because the communications either ended up with or originated with known terrorists, it was not a domestic survellience issue, and therefore wholly within the president's powers as outlined in Article II.
As to the transcript itself: I prefaced it with a disclaimer that I did NOT post it verbatim. I lifted out what I thought was of interest. The fact that Mr. Tice was on a program like Democracy Now pretty well tells me that the MSM, hardly a pro-Bush bunch wanted to talk to him. Wonder why?
Speaking of lifting out. The compartmentalization you referred to was refuted earlier in the interview when Mr. Tice advised that intelligence agencies would in fact put the individual pieces together in concert with one another. No one says anything to anyone else at the watercooler?
Post a Comment