un article pour Truthout<\/a> du 13 janvier une question troublante dans le cadre du scandale des \u00e9coutes de communications d’Am\u00e9ricains par la NSA. Il semble en effet qu’un ordre, implicite ou pas c’est selon, d’effectuer certaines \u00e9coutes \u00e9lectroniques de communication de citoyens am\u00e9ricains ait \u00e9t\u00e9 donn\u00e9 par l’administration GW peu apr\u00e8s l’entr\u00e9e en fonction de Bush, avant l’attaque du 11 septembre. GW Bush a toujours justifi\u00e9 ces \u00e9coutes par l’attaque du 11 septembre et ses cons\u00e9quences (et, au niveau de ce qu’il juge \u00eatre de la l\u00e9galit\u00e9 de ses \u00e9coutes, par les War Powers vot\u00e9s par le Congr\u00e8s apr\u00e8s 9\/11 et \u00e0 cause de 9\/11).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tJason Leopold \u00e9tudie l’affaire du point de vue l\u00e9gal, cherchant notamment \u00e0 renforcer le constat de l’ill\u00e9galit\u00e9 des \u00e9coutes du fait de ces \u00e9coutes pr\u00e9-9\/11. Il signale que le fait des \u00e9coutes pr\u00e9-9\/11 appara\u00eet mentionn\u00e9 dans le livre de James Risen, le journaliste \u00e0 la base de l’article du New York Times<\/em> du 17 d\u00e9cembre 2005 qui a fait \u00e9clater l’affaire: \u00ab James Risen, author of the book State of War’ and credited with first breaking the story about the NSA’s domestic surveillance operations, said President Bush personally authorized a change in the agency’s long-standing policies shortly after he was sworn in in 2001.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bb The president personally and directly authorized new operations, like the NSA’s domestic surveillance program, that almost certainly would never have been approved under normal circumstances and that raised serious legal or political questions, Risen wrote in the book. Because of the fevered climate created throughout the government by the president and his senior advisers, Bush sent signals of what he wanted done, without explicit presidential orders and the most ambitious got the message.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tJason Leopold signale d’autres pr\u00e9cisions, notamment des t\u00e9moignages de professionnels des t\u00e9l\u00e9communications: \u00ab According to the online magazine Slate, an unnamed official in the telecom industry said NSA’s efforts to obtain call details go back to early 2001, predating the 9\/11 attacks and the president’s now celebrated secret executive order. The source reports that the NSA approached U.S. carriers and asked for their cooperation in a data-mining’ operation, which might eventually cull millions’ of individual calls and e-mails.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tUne question int\u00e9ressante, que n’aborde pas directement Leopold, est celle de savoir pourquoi l’administration GW a ordonn\u00e9 (sugg\u00e9r\u00e9 conviendrait mieux) de telles \u00e9coutes peu apr\u00e8s son entr\u00e9e en fonction et avant l’attaque du 11 septembre. Ces sp\u00e9culations ont toutes les chances de renforcer les soup\u00e7ons de ceux qui jugent que l’attaque du 11 septembre n’est pas survenue comme une compl\u00e8te surprise pour l’administration, et, au-del\u00e0, de renforcer les hypoth\u00e8ses et th\u00e9ories de complots qui sont d\u00e9velopp\u00e9es autour de cette attaque.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 15 janvier 2006 \u00e0 06H00<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jason Leopold analyse dans un article pour Truthout du 13 janvier une question troublante dans le cadre du scandale des \u00e9coutes de communications d’Am\u00e9ricains par la NSA. Il semble en effet qu’un ordre, implicite ou pas c’est selon, d’effectuer certaines \u00e9coutes \u00e9lectroniques de communication de citoyens am\u00e9ricains ait \u00e9t\u00e9 donn\u00e9 par l’administration GW peu apr\u00e8s… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[354,370,4926,4915,4916,4981,4982],"class_list":["post-67179","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-354","tag-370","tag-complot","tag-ecoutes","tag-illegales","tag-leopold","tag-risen"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67179","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67179"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67179\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67179"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67179"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67179"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}