9/11 changed everything

October 13th, 2007 | Posted by Smithers at 11:00 pm in Politics |

9/11 was such a big ass deal that it even changed some stuff before the actual attack even took place.

Wired.com:

Startling statements from former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio’s defense documents alleging the National Security Agency began building a massive call records database seven months before 9/11 aren’t the only accusations that the controversial program predated the attacks of 9/11.

According to court documents unveiled this week, former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio clearly wanted to argue in court that the NSA retaliated against his company after he turned down a NSA request on February 27, 2001 that he thought was illegal.

That’s right. The warrentless wiretapping program that was so important to put into place following the attacks of 9/11 were actually put into place by the NSA and major tel-coms (with the exception of Qwest) seven months before the attack took place.

Observe how effective this program was in protecting the United States in these seven months leading up to 9/11.

Now the tel-coms want legal immunity from being prosecuted for turning over private data to the government without a warrant. Maybe an investigation as to what kind of data the NSA was collecting before 9/11 should be conducted before any kind of immunity deal is offered?

  1. 3 Responses to “9/11 changed everything”

  2. By burnt at 11:38 pm on Oct 13, 2007 | ReplyReply directly to this specific comment

    So, where do you suppose our senators are wrt the senate version of the FISA bill and these new revelations? Let’s see, Norm Coleman former lawyer in the State Attorney General’s office, and Amy Klobuchar former Hennepin County District Attorney. Will they stand for the rule of law or will they vote to grant retroactive immunity for the telcos? Hmm, I’m not holding my breath.

  3. By Tuffy at 11:50 am on Oct 14, 2007 | ReplyReply directly to this specific comment

    No immunity.

    The Geneva conventions do not protect soldiers who carry out order they know or should have known to be illegal. Why should corporations be any different?

    These corporations were co-conspirators in what appears to be significant violation of U.S. law and should be held just as accountable as those who ordered such measures.

  4. By Steven at 4:35 pm on Oct 14, 2007 | ReplyReply directly to this specific comment

    Wow.

Post a Comment

Available Tags: Hyperlink <a href="">, Bold <b>, Italics <i>, Strike <strike>, Underline <u>. Don't forget to turn it off </example>.