Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How many al Qaeda have they captured from their "wiretapping"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:56 AM
Original message
How many al Qaeda have they captured from their "wiretapping"?
And did they arrest those in this country at the other end of the phone call? If they have listened in to thousands, perhaps millions of calls, surely they have caught at least one person? Does anyone know what they have reaped in the number of arrests from this circumventing of the law? Surely there are some?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. NONE I've heard of, but they snared some vicious Quakers! -eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClayZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. And some VEGANS! It's hard work!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindPilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. Questions like that
embolden the enemy and demoralize our troops. Why do you hate America?

There have been no terrorist attacks on American soil since the wiretapping begin. Clearly the policy is working. stay the course. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. Probably ZERO
The only fish they caught was some crazy nut who wanted to cut down the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCowsCameHome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. 0.
But I'll bet lots of other folks have been listened to in the meantime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. This requires two giant leaps of faith
1. That the NSA is actually capable of doing anything.

2. That they would know who to wire tap and what to listen for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pbear81 Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. who to wire tap
They get info (eg, phone numbers) from captures abroad

They monitor the foreign numbers

When a US number is contacted from one of the monitored numbers, they intercept the call - "hot pursuit"

Question: If you were in charge of preventing the next terror attack here at home, would you intercept such calls, or would you ignore them? The call is happening in real time, hence no chance for warrant.
By the way, hot pursuit has always been legit grounds for warrantless search (the constitution protects us from "unreasonable" search).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. In such a circumstance, do they not have 72 hours ?
to get a warrant? Or are they still in "hot pursuit" after 72 hours? Sounds like an OJ chase?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pbear81 Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. if the orginal intercept
turns up something that indicates a US person is actively plotting against the US, and further surveillance is prudent, that's when they'd go for a warrant. this process involves multiple lawyers and lots of paperwork, eating up days or weeks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Where did you hear that BS ?
On Rush Limbaugh??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. After all of this, you actually believe that they are capable
Edited on Thu Jan-26-06 02:02 PM by The_Casual_Observer
of a legitimate "hot pursuit"? On what past history of accomplishment do you base your faith that those cubical dwellers would ever be in "hot pursuit" of anything but another donut?

Most recently, another group of genius intelligence cubical people were responsible for killing a batch of pakistani women and kids using and RC plane packed with explosives. Make no mistake, this is the best they can do. If they could possibly do better, they would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. None Nada Zilch. NT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. This raises an intriguing point...
Since George the Torturer authorized wiretapping BEFORE 9/11, we can assume he was spying on all those calls coming in and out of the US by the 9/11 terrorists who were living in San Diego and those who were attending flight school in Florida, and etc. etc.

So, why didn't he act on the information gleaned from this spying? Considering he let all the bin Ladens in the US go right after 9/11 without them being questioned, and that 15 of the 19 attackers were Saudi, and that the bin Laden family and the Bush family were close business associates, I'd hazard to guess he did nothing with the information, and will even go so far as to say that since he didn't do anything when told of the attacks by Andy Card, he must have known about the attacks beforehand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fairandunbalanced Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. only suspects
Not one single wiretap has lead to anything substantial, and with everyone being a suspect, well except Bush and His cronies, there is no end in site to the practice of spying and then of course permanent detention without a hearing of course. Its not Al Quaeda they are really after, its about control. Let me assure you that big brother is doing a lot more than watching now! G W Bush made it clear years ago when the war machine started bombing, your either with them or you are the enemy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phoebe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
13. they did intercept calls from Atta/terrorists prior to 9/11 but denied it
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=235819

notice that the nature of the calls have never been made public.

Bush saying they need to spy on terrorists to keep us safe now is laughable when they could have stopped Atta pre-9/11..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pbear81 Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. The way I heard it,
some communications that were intercepted just before 9/11 could not be reported to domestic law enforcement due to the "wall" the Patriot Act later took down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phoebe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. What about the whistleblowers who have confirmed that they passed
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 12:33 PM by phoebe
along the information and yet were stonewalled all along the chain of command by their superiors? So then why the stonewalling if the situation was SO dire? And WHY deny the calls even took place? This whole NSA situation stinks to high heaven.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
16. I'm sure they've had a lot of ARRESTS. The pertinent question is:
how many CONVICTIONS have they gotten, using evidence obtained from these wiretaps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pbear81 Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-26-06 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. prosecutions are not the primary goal,
prevention of attacks is. Further surveillance, with appropriate warrants, would be necessary to build a case that would stand up in court. But those precedures are not effective at prevention, only at putting bad guys in jail after they wreak havoc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phoebe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. If prevention of attacks was the primary goal, why deny the pre-9/11 calls
Edited on Fri Jan-27-06 12:32 PM by phoebe
took place despite evidence to the contrary? Why stonewall the ones who reported the calls? Why no further investigation allowed? Don't forget, this was the DIRECTOR of the NSA denying that these calls occurred..and why would Condoleezza Rice throw away the report if prevention was the goal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-27-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
21. well they capture al Qaeda's #2 197 times at last count
but I don't think any of those were from an illegal wiretap

in fact, I think the correct answer is ZERO


but they did steal two national elections since they started the illegal wiretaps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC