• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pentagon Admits Spying on Peace Activists on American Soil

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have heard many reasons from some in this forum about how our government ought to be able to spy on Americans right here in America, and their main vague justification has been that, groups which could possibly support terrorist activity should be spied on. The January 30th issue of Newsweek debunks that spin with statements from Pentagon officials showing that they have been spying on dissidents of the Iraq war who are American citizens, are on American soil, have no connections whatsoever to terrorism, have no history whatsoever of any kind of violence, and whose only crime is to actively campaign against the activities of our government, which they view as immoral. The article also quotes some Pentagon leaders who state that what they are doing has gone too far.

One such group the Pentagon spied upon was an organization right here in Houston, which held a demonstration in front of Haliburton headquarters. The demonstration was not disruptive, and only consisted of giving Haliburton employees free peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in order to call attention to Haliburton's price gouging of food and other supplies in Iraq. The Pentagon made a determination that this was a threat to national security, and put the group under its TALON surveilance program.

Make no mistake. Now matter what Big Brother tells you, you can damn well be certain, that if you openly disagree with Big Brother's policies, Big Brother WILL be watching you. Unitarian presidency, my ass. It sure as hell is an imperial one, no matter which euphemism of the day they use to describe it.

Article is here.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10965509/site/newsweek
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
How is watching a public demonstration and writing a report about it and filing it away "spying" on American citizens? They were making a spectacle out of themselves.

"It isn't clear how many groups and individuals were snagged by CIFA's dragnet."

ROFL DRAGNET, they were protesting outside a major defense contractors door about it's business with the military and that's called getting out a DRAGNET?

"The presentation, which Arkin provided to NEWSWEEK, shows that CIFA analysts had access to law-enforcement reports"

Well those are mostly public documents, just go over to The Smoking Gun.

and sensitive military and U.S. intelligence documents.
OH MY GOD they had access to their own documents!

But the organization also gleaned data from "open source Internet monitoring." In other words, they surfed the Web."
Those dastardly government spys are SURFING THE WEB, let's throw them ALL in jail!

"That may have been how the Pentagon came to be so interested in a small gathering outside Halliburton. On June 23, 2004, a few days before the Halliburton protest, an ad for the event appeared on houston.indymedia.org, a Web site for lefty Texas activists. "Stop the war profiteers," read the posting. "Bring out the kids, relatives, Dick Cheney, and your favorite corporate pigs at the trough as we will provide food for free."

Now doesn't that just show you have good our spys are. Look how they ferreted this out and probably used super-computers to put it together. What deep undecover this caper was.

""It's very interesting that the U.S. military sees a domestic peace group as a threat," says Paul Lefrak, a librarian who organized the protest."

Yeah no more a threat than thos WTO protest I guess.

Just what the heck do you think we would be doing?
 
Last edited:

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
It's never a question of "Is the original poster using scare tactics?"...

The answer to that has become more and more clear with every new thread...

The new question is "How is the original poster using scare tactics?"...

And away we go...

From the article...

A Defense document shows that Army analysts wrote a report on the Halliburton protest and stored it in CIFA's database.
OMG!...A report!...Those bastards!...

It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention—
Which means there could very well be a reasonable & legitimate reason why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention...That information has not been made public...

Here's a concept...Can anyone name ALL of the protestors in the protest?...Were they ALL Americans?...Were any of them under surveillance due to previous concerns?...Was there a "Tim McVeigh" in attandance?...

although organizer Parkin had previously been arrested while demonstrating at ExxonMobil headquarters (the charges were dropped).
And this shouldn't raise eyebrows?...The article clearly doen't not state that this is the only reason...they are just speculating...

But there are now questions about whether CIFA exceeded its authority and conducted unauthorized spying on innocent people and organizations.
There's that word again..."questions"...

Notice how the article uses "questions", but the original poster has the "answers"?...

If there was anything in this article that is considered a "definite", then this word...and indeed, the whole sentence, should NOT be part of the article...

But whaddya know...It is...

A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained.
"May have"...Could also mean "may NOT have"...I would call this one of those "questions"...

Also, notice the word "retained"...It does NOT mention that the "information on U.S. citizens and groups" should not have been gotten in the first place...It was only that the info shouldn't have been "retained"...

The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject.
"Could be"...Could've also wrote "might NOT be"...I would call this one of those "questions"...

Let me ask the person who claims this for more info...

I'm sorry...I can't...The source is unnamed...

This part of the article is VERY disturbing...

It isn't clear how many groups and individuals were snagged by CIFA's dragnet. Details about the program, including its size and budget, are classified. In December, NBC News obtained a 400-page compilation of reports that detailed a portion of TALON's surveillance efforts.
Funny how the details are classified, but NBC obtained a compilation of reports...

Isn't that what's called a "leak"?...Aren't there laws against this?...

Stinger did a wonderful job with the other stuff...So I'll just have fun with the original postor's miscarriage of logical determination...

danarhea said:
I have heard many reasons from some in this forum about how our government ought to be able to spy on Americans right here in America, and their main vague justification has been that, groups which could possibly support terrorist activity should be spied on.
If there are credible and legitimate reasons for doing so...

Imagine if an American was so pi$$ed at his/her own country that they have said to their friends that they should blow up a Federal building, and the next day brought 2 tons of fertilizer and rented a U-Haul truck, and that friend contacts the authorities, should they say, "He/She's an American!...We can't do any surveillance on them!"...:roll:

danarhea said:
The January 30th issue of Newsweek debunks that spin with statements from Pentagon officials showing that they have been spying on dissidents of the Iraq war who are American citizens, are on American soil, have no connections whatsoever to terrorism, have no history whatsoever of any kind of violence, and whose only crime is to actively campaign against the activities of our government, which they view as immoral.
Where does it say "they have no connections whatsoever to terrorism"?...I can conclude that the article implies that they have no connections whatsoever to terrorism that we know of...once again...The pentagon has NOT released their reasons for the surveillance...Do I need to repost your own article for you?

It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention
"Guilty until proven innocent" reigns supreme...:roll:

danarhea said:
The article also quotes some Pentagon leaders who state that what they are doing has gone too far.
No they don't...They question it...

danarhea said:
One such group the Pentagon spied upon was an organization right here in Houston, which held a demonstration in front of Haliburton headquarters. The demonstration was not disruptive, and only consisted of giving Haliburton employees free peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in order to call attention to Haliburton's price gouging of food and other supplies in Iraq. The Pentagon made a determination that this was a threat to national security, and put the group under its TALON surveilance program.
The Pentagon made no such determinations public, so for you to say this is nothing more than speculation...The Pentagon may have had 1, 5, or 50 legitimate concerns that are not public...I highly doubt even you believe that "giving Haliburton employees free peanut butter and jelly sandwiches" was one of them...You can't be that dumb...you just can't be...

danarhea said:
Make no mistake.
Why be like you?

danarhea said:
Now matter what Big Brother tells you, you can damn well be certain, that if you openly disagree with Big Brother's policies, Big Brother WILL be watching you. Unitarian presidency, my ass. It sure as hell is an imperial one, no matter which euphemism of the day they use to describe it.
And then the Bush attack...Almost thought you could get through a thread without one...

What was I thinking?...:doh
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Arkin says a close reading of internal CIFA documents suggests the agency may be expanding its Internet monitoring, and wants to be as surreptitious as possible. CIFA has contracted to buy "identity masking" software that would allow the agency to create phony Web identities and let them appear to be located in foreign countries, according to a copy of the contract with Computer Sciences Corp. (The firm declined to comment.)
Identity masking software? :lol: :lol: I can't believe they bought something to do what most American teenagers do everyday for free...
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
scottyz said:
Identity masking software? :lol: :lol: I can't believe they bought something to do what most American teenagers do everyday for free...
I was thinking the very same thing when I read that...

I also find it asinine that people have a problem with the Government using surveillance on Americans when there is plenty of software out there that does the very same thing without restrictions...
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Haven't read the article to which the original poster refers as yet, but isn't the activity to which he refers that same mandate of protecting government installations, significant contractor's installations, etc., that he referred to in another post? Didn't this activity come about at least partly as a result of buildings blown up and people killed at least partly under the cover of or as part of demonstrations back in the late '60s and early '70s?

How do we not make ourselves aware of the nature of demonstrations and the intent of those demonstrating if we do not observe them? How do we reassure ourselves as to their benign nature if we don't become familiar with them? We assume that they are innocent of any wrong doing until judged guilty for some unlawful act. But does that mean we shouldn't be alert, does that mean that we shouldn't have the equivalent of a "Neighborhood Watch"?
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
cnredd said:
I was thinking the very same thing when I read that...

I also find it asinine that people have a problem with the Government using surveillance on Americans when there is plenty of software out there that does the very same thing without restrictions...
Asinine yes, but understandable. Given the brash attempts to create controversy throughout the Bush presidency, this doesn't surprise me at all. Their partisan jealousy has created a monster. They will stop at nothing to regain political power. I hope he keeps on spying. Whatever it takes to bring down terrorists and their evil activity. Redd, your dismantling of the thread on post #3 is brilliant.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
If someone finds that a poster is full of BS, I wonder why they take such care in dissecting almost every sentence (although it might be every sentence) of the post and discrediting it. If it's so NOT credible, why give it that much attention? Hmmmmmmm :thinking
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
If someone finds that a poster is full of BS, I wonder why they take such care in dissecting almost every sentence (although it might be every sentence) of the post and discrediting it. If it's so NOT credible, why give it that much attention? Hmmmmmmm :thinking
Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message. He must not know what TALON is. Here is something in TALON. In short, our government is now using the military, in addition to the NSA, to spy on those who disagree with administration policy.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
danarhea said:
Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message.
He did not attack you in any way whatsosever, dan. He called you no names. He didn;t insult your intelligence, nothing. He discreditied the post and the assertions within. No need to get your feelings hurt.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
KCConservative said:
He did not attack you in any way whatsosever, dan. He called you no names. He didn;t insult your intelligence, nothing. He discreditied the post and the assertions within. No need to get your feelings hurt.
How does saying, "Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message" somehow equal someone's feelings getting hurt?

I have been attacked by multiple posters and it doesn't hurt my feelings. Somehow I doubt that it hurt danarhea's feelings. If he was truly hurt, he would stop posting or stop initiating posts. JMO
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
How does saying, "Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message" somehow equal someone's feelings getting hurt?

I have been attacked by multiple posters and it doesn't hurt my feelings. Somehow I doubt that it hurt danarhea's feelings. If he was truly hurt, he would stop posting or stop initiating posts. JMO
Perhaps you're right about that. I have no idea whether his feelings were hurt. I should have said, "Stop lying, dana. Redd didn't attack you."
 

KidRocks

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
16
Location
right here
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Anyone else notice mthe striking similarities between the Bush administration and the old style USSR Communist Party? It's like they are borrowing a page from the KGB playbook. The KGB used to spy on their own people all the time all in the name of homeland security too, remember?

The KGB Communist Party would do anything to hold on to power much like the President Bush's Republican Party of today and very much like Saddams old Republican-Guard.

Yes boys and girls, the Bush Regime has tasted power, thus his Republican Party has used 9/11 to the hilt to hold on to power come 2006, 2008 and only God knows how long they will try to usurp that power or what means they will use to hold on to that power.

President Bush is not going to play by the rules anymore, he doesn't have to, 9/11 tells him so and he is armed with the "Patriot-Act".

Beware America... Wake up America!
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
KidRocks said:
Anyone else notice mthe striking similarities between the Bush administration and the old style USSR Communist Party? It's like they are borrowing a page from the KGB playbook. The KGB used to spy on their own people all the time all in the name of homeland security too, remember?

The KGB Communist Party would do anything to hold on to power much like the President Bush's Republican Party of today and very much like Saddams old Republican-Guard.

Yes boys and girls, the Bush Regime has tasted power, thus his Republican Party has used 9/11 to the hilt to hold on to power come 2006, 2008 and only God knows how long they will try to usurp that power or what means they will use to hold on to that power.

President Bush is not going to play by the rules anymore, he doesn't have to, 9/11 tells him so and he is armed with the "Patriot-Act".

Beware America... Wake up America!
Taken straight from the Michael Moore webpage. Sounds like KidRocks has something to hide.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
KCConservative said:
Taken straight from the Michael Moore webpage. Sounds like KidRocks has something to hide.
Got a link?
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
KCConservative said:
Perhaps you're right about that. I have no idea whether his feelings were hurt. I should have said, "Stop lying, dana. Redd didn't attack you."
It's about time you acknowledged that I am right! ;)
 

KidRocks

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
16
Location
right here
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
KCConservative said:
Taken straight from the Michael Moore webpage. Sounds like KidRocks has something to hide.

Thanks, to think that Michael Moore and I and the original Founding-Fathers of America think alike is awesome.

God Bless the Michael Moores of America! God Bless the original Founding Fathers of America!

Great Americans! True Americans!

Armed with the "Bill of Rights" we shall take back America!

The "Constitution" shall prevail over the "Patriot-Act"!

God Bless America!
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
KidRocks said:
Anyone else notice mthe striking similarities between the Bush administration and the old style USSR Communist Party? It's like they are borrowing a page from the KGB playbook. The KGB used to spy on their own people all the time all in the name of homeland security too, remember?

The KGB Communist Party would do anything to hold on to power much like the President Bush's Republican Party of today and very much like Saddams old Republican-Guard.

Yes boys and girls, the Bush Regime has tasted power, thus his Republican Party has used 9/11 to the hilt to hold on to power come 2006, 2008 and only God knows how long they will try to usurp that power or what means they will use to hold on to that power.

President Bush is not going to play by the rules anymore, he doesn't have to, 9/11 tells him so and he is armed with the "Patriot-Act".

Beware America... Wake up America!
As Lord Acton said in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/288200.html

This quote has stood the test of time. Remember what happened to the Nixon Administration when it thought it was untouchable when it came to power? May the same thing happen to this administration.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
danarhea said:
Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message.
Where were you attacked? All I've seen is a point by point rebuttle of the story which is a silly in it's accusations.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stinger said:
Where were you attacked? All I've seen is a point by point rebuttle of the story which is a silly in it's accusations.
Does it really matter, Stinger? First, not every circumstance has one conclusion. What you perceive to be the case may not be someone else's perception. Personally, I agree with danarhea's perception. Second, you want to argue with danarhea about whether he perceives that he was attacked? Geez Louise. :roll:
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
KCConservative said:
A link to KidRocks and what he is hiding? Dunno. Ask him.
A link to michael moores website where it says what Kidrock said.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
aps said:
If someone finds that a poster is full of BS, I wonder why they take such care in dissecting almost every sentence (although it might be every sentence) of the post and discrediting it. If it's so NOT credible, why give it that much attention? Hmmmmmmm :thinking
danarhea said:
Because his aim is to personally attack the messenger instead of the message. He must not know what TALON is. Here is something in TALON. In short, our government is now using the military, in addition to the NSA, to spy on those who disagree with administration policy.
I find this two-part discussion amusing...

Notice how aps questions MY intent(which means she's attacking the messenger instead of the message), and gets a reply that "I" am the one attacking the messenger and not the message...

Very nice aps...Instead of reading my rebuttal and analyzing the message itself, you decide to go after me and my motivation for doing so...

Which is the very same thing I get accused of...hypocracy runs wild....

But...I will explain...I'm just that kinda guy...:cool:

When a Nazi comes to this website and starts a thread saying the Holocaust never happened...

What do you say to yourself?...

A) "I will look over the information provided and draw my own conclusions.

B) "Agenda-driven crap"

I hope you understand my assumption when I'd say that you went for "B"...

Congratulations...You've just "considered the source"...

Same thing here(No...I not saying anyone is a Nazi)....

Just like someone who continually starts threads and writes posts saying 911 was an inside job, or someone who starts threads and write posts saying that the world is controlled by Zionism and the world banks, you start to realize that the original poster isn't concerned about putting a square peg into a square hole...They're concerned about putting a square peg into a round hole, even if the force of a hammer is necessary...

There is one difference indeed...The 911/World Bank stuff is obvious...I could read over the articles and sources and dissect them intimately to show the inadequacies and outright lies to the forum...

But why?...

Almost everyone here knows that stuff is crap...It would be unnecessay to show the forum why...they already know...

But when it comes to partisan hackery and partybashing, the agenda is NOT so obvious all of the time...

That's the reason and motivation...Sometimes you have to peel back the layers to see the agenda clearly...That's what I've done...

Let me throw a question back atchya....

If YOU aren't concerned about articles and threads that are misleading, agenda-driven, and outright lies....

Why are you HERE?...:confused:

Did you show up NOT to question things?...NOT to debate issues?...NOT to analize what people post?

The reason for this forum is discussion...But that discussion should be HONEST discussion...don't you agree?...

Why should I be given such a hard time for pointing out dishonesty when pointing it out gives the forum members a clearer prspective of the threads and posts?

I'll repost one such point of dishonesty from this thread...

From the original poster's own words...Read the whole paragraph first, then notice the bolded words...

danarhea said:
The demonstration was not disruptive, and only consisted of giving Haliburton employees free peanut butter and jelly sandwiches in order to call attention to Haliburton's price gouging of food and other supplies in Iraq. The Pentagon made a determination that this was a threat to national security, and put the group under its TALON surveilance program.
Now look at what the actual article says...

It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention—although organizer Parkin had previously been arrested while demonstrating at ExxonMobil headquarters (the charges were dropped).
So the Pentagon has NOT given a public determination, but the original poster says they did...AND the reason was because they were giving out peanut butter and jelly sandwiches...

Do you not find this dumb?...Do you not find this dishonest?...Do you believe the original poster wants honest debate when throwing stuff like this out for public consumption?

And this is just ONE point...I have shown many...

So aps...To answer your question as to WHY I give so much attention to it when it's so NOT credible(paraphrasing your original question), the answer is simple...

To show the forum the dishonesty so they can draw their own conclusions and have honest debate once the true facts are presented...

Thank you for your concern...:2wave:
 

Vandeervecken

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
744
Reaction score
1
Location
Midland MI USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The Pentagon is the military. The military is prevented legally from a law enforcement use in the US (Out side of military reserves.)

This clearly is in violation of that.
 
Top Bottom