Talk:NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–2007)/Archive 3

message: Dates of Historical NSA Planning, Policy, Infrastructure, Technology or Personnel upgrade significance.
The NSA history traces its origins back to as early as WWI and Navy domination of COMINT to the thirties. In WWII cryptological and language analysis led to the establishment of the Signals Intelligence Service (SIS) in 1942 out of COMINT Army SSA and Navy OP-20-G. The SIS became the Signal Intelligence Division (SID) which became the Signal Security Service (SSS) in 1943 and the Army Security Agency (ASA) in 1945. Rivalry between Army OSS and Navy G2 eventually led to the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) and to the inclusion of the Air Force and representatives from the State Department, The Board of Economic Warfare, later the Foreign Economic Administration and the Coordinator of Information later the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). In 1944 The Army Navy Radio Intelligence Committee became the Army Navy Communication Intelligence Coordinating Committee.(ANCICC)In 1945 this became the Army Navy Communications Intelligence Board. (ANCIB). Long story short intelligence agencies continued to proliferate as shown by the increasing emphasis of Executive orders on Security and Intelligence issues and in October of 1952 a Directive of President Trumana confirmed that Intelligence Collecion was a national Priority and by Parallel Directive of the the National Security Council entitled National Security Council Directive Number 9 the Director NSA became a full voting member.
Executive Orders
Executive Order 9546 Inspection by the Federal Security Agency of Statistical Transcript Punch Cards Prepared From Individual Income Tax Returns Signed: May 1, 1945 Federal Register page and date: 10 FR 4685, May 2, 1945
Executive Order 9931 Amendment of Executive Order No. 9905, Designating the Membership of the National Security Resources Board Signed: February 19, 1948 Federal Register page and date: 13 FR 763, February 20, 1948 Amends: EO 9905, November 13, 1947 
Executive Order 10100 Regulations Relating to the Granting of Certain Allowances by the Director of Central Intelligence Signed: January 28, 1950 Federal Register page and date: 15 FR 499, January 31, 1950 Revoked by: EO 10903, January 9, 1961 See: EO 10011, October 22, 1948 
Executive Order 10111 Establishing a Seal for the Central Intelligence Agency Signed: February 17, 1950 Federal Register page and date: 15 FR 909, February 21, 1950
Executive Order 10207 Establishing the President's Commission on Internal Security and Individual Rights  Signed: January 23, 1951 Federal Register page and date: 16 FR 709, January 26, 1951 
Revoked by: EO 10305, November 14, 1951 
Executive Order 10290 Prescribing Regulations Establishing Minimum Standards for the Classification, Transmission, and Handling, by Department and Agencies of the Executive Branch, of Official Information Which Requires Safeguarding in the Interest of the Security of the United States Signed: September 24, 1951 Federal Register page and date: 16 FR 9795, September 27, 1951 
Revoked by: EO 10501, November 5, 1953 See: EO 9835, March 21, 1947; EO 10816, May 7, 1959; EO 10964, September 20, 1961 
 
Executive Order 10300 Providing for the Administration of the Mutual Security Act of 1951 and Related Statutes Signed: November 1, 1951 Federal Register page and date: 16 FR 11203, November 3, 1951 Amends: EO 10159, September 8, 1950 Revokes: EO 10099, January 27, 1950 Amended by: EO 10368, June 30, 1952 Superseded by: EO 10476, August 1, 1953 (in part) Revoked by: EO 10458, June 1, 1953 (in part); EO 12553, February 25, 1986 Note: The authority of this Executive order was repealed by Public Law 665 (68 Stat. 832; 22 U.S.C. 1557). 
Executive Order 10305 Revoking Executive Order No. 10207 of January 23, 1951, Establishing the President's Commission on Internal Security and Individual Rights Signed: November 14, 1951 
Federal Register page and date: 16 FR 11667, November 17, 1951 Revokes: EO 10207, January 23, 1951 
Executive Order 10338 Coordination Procedures Under Section 507 of the Mutual Security Act of 1951 Signed: April 4, 1952 Federal Register page and date: 17 FR 3009, April 8, 1952 
Revokes: EO 9857, May 22, 1947; EO 9862, May 31, 1947; EO 9864, May 31, 1947; EO 9914, December 26, 1947; EO 9944, April 9, 1948; EO 9960, May 19, 1948; EO 10208, January 25, 1951; EO 10259, June 27, 1951 Superseded by: EO 10476, August 1, 1953 See: EO 10062, June 6, 1949; EO 10063, June 13, 1949; EO 10144, July 21, 1950 ; EO 10368, June 30, 1952 
Executive Order 10368 Amendment of Executive Order No. 10300, Entitled "Providing for the Administration of the Mutual Security Act of 1951 and Related Statues "Signed: June 30, 1952 
Federal Register page and date: 17 FR 5929, July 2, 1952 Amends: EO 10159, September 8, 1950; EO 10300, November 1, 1951 Revoked by: EO 10458, June 1, 1953 (in part); EO 12553, February 25, 1986 
See: EO 10338, April 5, 1952 
Executive Order 10387 Specification of Laws From Which Certain Functions Authorized by the Mutual Security Act of 1951, as Amended, Shall be Exempt Signed: August 25, 1952 Federal Register page and date: 17 FR 7799, August 27, 1952 Supersedes: EO 9943, April 9, 1948 Superseded by: EO 10519, March 5, 1954 
Executive Order 10421 Providing for the Physical Security of Facilities Important to the National Defense Signed: December 31, 1952 Federal Register page and date: 18 FR 57, January 3, 1953 
Amended by: EO 10438, March 13, 1953; EO 10773, July 1, 1958; EO 11051, September 27, 1962; EO 12148, July 20, 1979 Revoked by: EO 12656, November 18, 1988 See: EO 11725, June 27, 1973 
Executive Orders, Public Statements, News Reports about the NSA, Planning for upgrades required to comply with Planning and Government Contracts to facilitate Policy changes, Infrastructure developments and Technology and Personnel upgrades document the progression from surveilence of Signals and Radio to Surveillance of telephone communications analog, digital, voicemail and cellphone, FAX, satellite recconaisance of transfered signals, EMF surveilance, internet surveilance of email and browzing habits and now data mining.Sea level 19:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You left out Executive Order 12333 - section 2.11 seems to be now interpreted to mean somewhat the opposite of what it says. Michael Hayden likes section 1.14(c) which says NSA directs the FBI. Metarhyme 23:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NSA History

message: The article is too long. The discussion is way too long. Archive talk and spin off Legal analysis? Metarhyme 01:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, how about spinning off all the legal stuff i.e. Legal challenges and Legal issues into Legality of warrantless surveillance or similar? We can keep a  here, of course, with a brief summary. Since the conversion to <ref> is currently underway, I suppose that waiting until that is complete is probably a wise move, or things will just really hairy! They'll be hairy anyway, mind, but less hairy than they would otherwise be. -Splashtalk 02:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If several editors are motivated to duke it out with Sea level, then moving material to Legality of warrantless surveillance could work. How about Suitable units for measure of pyramid passages otherwise? Metarhyme 23:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: Federal Street's replaced legal issues with this: Metarhyme 06:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reverting back: this is most definitely inferior to what was in the version. It is full of POV assertions like "Its very troubling to some Americans that people are targeted for reasons of ideology. Political views that it might be suspected would offer aid and comfort to the enemy by opposing the president and showing a lack of solidarity in time of war are now considered reasonable grounds for surveillance." - this is not well written. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal POV 

message: Metarhyme notes that the article is being updated to reflect how the legal status is affected by a changing administration posture. Anyone following this issue is probably well aware of the fact that the President, Vice President, Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, The State Department, General Hayden, Negroponte and many other administration officials and members of Congress not to mention innumerable commentators have been issuing statements that affect both the status of the issue and the public perception of it. 
Reinforced by public polling which indicates that where it has been shown that the spying was on ordinary Americans and without probable cause, most Americans now support impeachment for the president followed by public trials and appropriate sanctions, the consensus has come down firmly that some action needs to be taken to clarify that this type of behavior is neither legal nor acceptable. 
Wire taps are not the same technology as data mining followed up by the covert operations of other government agencies after the data collected has been fed into the system. Spying on Quakers or Halliburton protesters, who have always been American citizens and never left the country or called overseas because their ideology makes them likely opponents of administration policy is a bit different than spying on al Qaeda operatives who live overseas. 
Present extensions of claimed authority to go so far as to review internet blogs for possibly disloyal or seditious statements, moniter the email of politicians and the media and the finances of banks and the stock market because some international corporations that make charitable or political contributions are suspected of money laundering, and arresting people for wearing a tshirt with a slogan in a public place are all troubling to Americans.
On the other hand, at this moment the President is in a position of considerable power with his party controlling all three branches of government and may indeed be able to make the law be whatever he claims it is as was attempted with the signing statement issued for the McCain torture bill.Federal Street 12:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, well. Your edit removed a whole lot of information that was extremely useful to the article, and IMO seems to be an argument that the whole surveillance issue is bad. While it may be, this is your POV, and contrary to WP:NPOV. I have reverted you. Please don't make wholesale revisions like this without discussion on the talk page first. Many editors before you made a considerable effort in their edits, having their edits wiped out by someone else like this is discouraging to them, and in this case decreases the quality of the article. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:00, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Events