http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562668777335653.html

Quick Summary
Here's how it happened: In 2008, the Iranian government contracted Nokia Siemens Networks, among others, to help update its communications infrastructure, predictably requesting power to monitor and control internet traffic. With the government's full monopoly on the industry and poor human rights record in full view, Nokia Siemens Networks obliged, installing a cutting-edge "monitoring center", which the WSJ calls one of the "most sophisticated" in the world.

Obviously Nokia and Siemens couldn't foreseen this exact outcome, but honestly, what did they expect?

So if texazzpete inc. were to be offered such a lucrative contract you would decline.

But George W. Bush monitored ALL telephone calls, email and internet traffic for years under his illegal spy program. Bush may have taught them how to do this.

RichyBlacK:

But George W. Bush monitored ALL telephone calls, email and internet traffic for years under his illegal spy program. Bush may have taught them how to do this.

How can it be illegal when Congress approved of it. By the way, that was for a country at war seeking ways to monitor attacks by illegal combatants. Is Iran at war with its citizens? I just wonder for you sometimes Richy!

Tayo-D:

How can it be illegal when Congress approved of it. By the way, that was for a country at war seeking ways to monitor attacks by illegal combatants. Is Iran at war with its citizens? I just wonder for you sometimes Richy!

Did they tell you Iranian congress or whateer did not approve that kind of network. Maybe you want the Bush Govt to approve/disprove before they can carry it out. The same congress also approved waterboarding which is a very "Good Human Right Record". They way you guys talk of this human right record as if theere is 100% human right record anywhere in this world.

Iran is also at war,"Diplomatic War" which might lead to proper war i care is not taken.

presido1:

Did they tell you Iranian congress or whateer did not approve that kind of network. Maybe you want the Bush Govt to approve/disprove before they can carry it out. The same congress also approved waterboarding which is a very "Good Human Right Record". They way you guys talk of this human right record as if theere is 100% human right record anywhere in this world.

Iran is also at war,"Diplomatic War" which might lead to proper war i care is not taken.

I can see to what extent you are ready to defend the indefensible. How does an attempt to intercept AlQuaeda's communication compare to this? Please educate me, abeg!

presido1:

Did they tell you Iranian congress or whateer did not approve that kind of network. Maybe you want the Bush Govt to approve/disprove before they can carry it out. The same congress also approved waterboarding which is a very "Good Human Right Record". They way you guys talk of this human right record as if theere is 100% human right record anywhere in this world.

Iran is also at war,"Diplomatic War" which might lead to proper war i care is not taken.

Diplomatic war with its citizens? Are you serious?!

Tayo-D:

I can see to what extent you are ready to defend the indefensible. How does an attempt to intercept AlQuaeda's communication compare to this? Please educate me, abeg!

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5987804&page=1,
Maybe Adrienne Kinne is Osama's daughter or terrorist. Always defending anything bad from US but quick to condemn Iran/others when they copy they do same.

Tayo-D:

Diplomatic war with its citizens? Are you serious?!

Diplomatic war with the west.

@Presido1,

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5987804&page=1,
Maybe Adrienne Kinne is Osama's daughter or terrorist. Always defending anything bad from US but quick to condemn Iran/others when they copy they do same.

Some people are bound to abuse the system, no doubt. Just like many were acused for using the system to eavesdrop on the spouses they suspect may be cheating on them. These represent the aberration and not the State policy. I thought you are smart enough to know the difference.

Diplomatic war with the west.

Which West. You guys are always looking for a boogyman. How many people from the West were on the street of Tehran protesting? Is Facebook or Twitter the West? Just like somone first claimed it was the Western Media. When his folly was revealed, he put the blame on the West. I'm not sure who is learning from the other, you or Khomeni.

Tayo D

How can it be illegal when Congress approved of it. By the way, that was for a country at war seeking ways to monitor attacks by illegal combatants. Is Iran at war with its citizens? I just wonder for you sometimes Richy!

Congress did not approve of it. Bush later sought for retroactive approval. A little bit of honesty cannot make you like Obama or you should at least acknowledge that are there some other guys on this forum whose political inclinations do not obscure them from reading the fact.

Tayo-D:

How can it be illegal when Congress approved of it. By the way, that was for a country at war seeking ways to monitor attacks by illegal combatants. Is Iran at war with its citizens? I just wonder for you sometimes Richy!

US was at war with about 19 suicide bombers or what?

The extent you go do defend anything US or Israel in spite of the facts on ground is becoming embarrassing.

This is highly disappointing coming from an educated person. You could just ignore the faults of your loved countries but to defend those faults even when the countries themselves have admitted to wrong doing is funny.

Tayo-D:

Which West. You guys are always looking for a boogyman. How many people from the West were on the street of Tehran protesting? Is Facebook or Twitter the West? Just like somone first claimed it was the Western Media. When his folly was revealed, he put the blame on the West. I'm not sure who is learning from the other, you or Khomeni.

When did Diplomatic war turn to street protest? Don't let Anti-Iran becloud your sense of reasoning dude.

Afam:

US was at war with about 19 suicide bombers or what?

have you ever herad of the war on terror? Again, only a rhetorical questions is good enough for you here.

adconline:

Congress did not approve of it. Bush later sought for retroactive approval. A little bit of honesty cannot make you like Obama or you should at least acknowledge that are there some other guys on this forum whose political inclinations do not obscure them from reading the fact.

Are you for real? So funny how you guys try to rewrite history.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20126385/
CAMP DAVID, Md. - President Bush on Sunday signed into law an expansion of the government’s power to eavesdrop on foreign terror suspects without the need for warrants.

The law, approved by the Senate and the House just before Congress adjourned for its summer break, was deemed a priority by Bush and his chief intelligence officials.

Bush signed the bill into law on Sunday afternoon at his retreat at Camp David, Md.

“When our intelligence professionals have the legal tools to gather information about the intentions of our enemies, America is safer,” Bush said. “And when these same legal tools also protect the civil liberties of Americans, then we can have the confidence to know that we can preserve our freedoms while making America safer.”

The administration said the measure is needed to speed the National Security Agency’s ability to intercept phone calls, e-mails and other communications involving foreign nationals “reasonably believed to be outside the United States.”

The law is designed to capture communications that pass through the United States.

Civil liberties groups and many Democrats say it goes too far, possibly enabling the government to wiretap U.S. residents communicating with overseas parties without adequate oversight from courts or Congress.

The new law updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and it will expire in six months unless Congress renews it. Bush wants deeper, permanent changes.

“We must remember that our work is not done,” Bush prodded. “This bill is a temporary, narrowly focused statute to deal with the most immediate shortcomings in the law.”

@presido1,

When did Diplomatic war turn to street protest? Don't let Anti-Iran becloud your sense of reasoning dude.

You are not making sense here. You said Iran is engaged in a diplomatic war. So are the street protesters in Iran the diplomats waging war aginst Iran? I can see your sense of reasoning is now beclouded by your love for the Ayatollahs!

Tayo-D:

have you ever herad of the war on terror? Again, only a rhetorical questions is good enough for you here.

Yes, I have heard of it. That was a popular phrase being used by Bush to refer to what he thinks is a war.

That Bush used that phrase doesn't make it have any meaning just as a lot of lies he told the world before invading Iraq amounted to nothing but a senseless lies by a clueless, blood thirsty and confused US president.

So, what Bush thinks is now your foundation for debate? Wonderful.

Just for the sake of argument if you believe that the war on terror justified the response by Bush and the gang then you should be ok with Ahmedinejad's response as regards "War on Western Imperialism".

Afam:

Yes, I have heard of it. That was a popular phrase being used by Bush to refer to what he thinks is a war.

So it was just a law enforement issue baa? Only Bush thought it was a war and yet congress has been funding same war even under Obama. Only Bush thinks its a war and yet many nations contributed troops to fight terror. I can see the only reality you live in is the one you've made up in your mind. Please persist in it if it makes you happy.

Just for the sake of argument if you believe that the war on terror justified the response by Bush and the gang then you should be ok with Ahmedinejad's response as regards "War on Western Imperialism".

I don't have a problem if he wants to fight the West. Question is how many of those on the streets of Tehran are from the West? How many of those protesters are diplomats as someone else put it?

Afam:

Yes, I have heard of it. That was a popular phrase being used by Bush to refer to what he thinks is a war.

That Bush used that phrase doesn't make it have any meaning just as a lot of lies he told the world before invading Iraq amounted to nothing but a senseless lies by a clueless, blood thirsty and confused US president.

So, what Bush thinks is now your foundation for debate? Wonderful.

Just for the sake of argument if you believe that the war on terror justified the response by Bush and the gang then you should be ok with Ahmedinejad's response as regards "War on Western Imperialism".

I was actually thinking that as well

Just to chip in, the same technology is used by the British and American governments. . .so I heard on BBC news last night.

Tayo-D:

So it was just a law enforement issue baa? Only Bush thought it was a war and yet congress has been funding same war even under Obama. Only Bush thinks its a war and yet many nations contributed troops to fight terror. I can see the only reality you live in is the one you've made up in your mind. Please persist in it if it makes you happy.

There have been consequences of the lie that you call war on terror from Spain to US and to Britain so there is no point in explaining them again.

Tayo-D:

I don't have a problem if he wants to fight the West. Question is how many of those on the streets of Tehran are from the West?  How many of those protesters are diplomats as someone else put it?

The protesters don't have to be from the West to carry out any West sponsored protests (assuming it is a fact that the West supporting the protesters). This should be easy for you to understand.

Ikomi made the comments below, read it and learn from it because the same thing happened in Afghanistan and Iraq where citizens from those countries were in US and after invading the countries these guys suddenly became either the president or the major power broker. These are facts even though I know you don't give a damn about them.

In 1953 when President Mosadek had a plan to take away Iran's oil from American Comapnies, and stop them from making excess profit from it, at the expense of Iranians,  the then American govt. paid rogues and thugs to stage protest, in other that the army would have a reason to unseat Mosadek. The plan was successful, Mosadek was thrown out of power and the Shah of Iran who was in Exile in America went back to Iran and became the President.

Please Somebody should help me out with this Topic,

Above I am New Student !!!


Thx.

Tayo _D
_{Are you for real? So funny how you guys try to rewrite history.}
You are the one rewriting history. How can you expand something that it is not being used. Bush had started using this measure until it was made known by washing post. He sought for further expansion of FISA. The reason why congress didnt approve of was that it was never introduced as a legislation before Bush and co started using it. If it was so why were communication companies and individuals that participated given retroactive immunity?

@adconline,

The Patriot Act already gave the Executive powers to carry out wire-tapping for the sole purpose of preventing attacks on America. Granted, everyone is concerned that such powers can be abused and was indeed abused in the past.

While Franklin Roosevelt and Richard Nixon among others permitted abuse of such powers during wartime, no one has accused the Bush Adiminstration of collecting such intelligence aimed at itspolitical enemies.

The Patriot Act was in force before FISA.

I wonder whether these Obamabots realise warantless wiretapping is still going on as we speak.

4 Play:

I wonder whether these Obamabots realise warantless wiretapping is still going on as we speak.

that's true. the whole Obama is a liberal talk was all propaganda. he is more of a centrist than an ACLU lackie

Sadly in these days when PROFIT for shareholders is the sole target of multinationals,Businesses are at the mercy of goverments and can't afford to be on the wrong side of the ruling elite.

If nokia or siemens had rejected or declined to help,there'll be other companies willing to step in albeit from china.

bawomolo:

that's true. the whole Obama is a liberal talk was all propaganda. he is more of a centrist than an ACLU lackie

I don't think it was propaganda. It so just happens that when one wakes up to reality, common sense kicks in. And common sense will always drive you towards the Right of the political divide. He is only centrist now for political expediency.

I'm trusting that one day when information hits you squarely, you will abandon the virtual reality of the Left and join camp with the Right. There is hope for you my guy.  Anyone to the Right of RichyBlack still has hope.  

@POST. . .

I know there is a law in US requiring that the sale of any dual purpose or multi purpose use technology to foreign governments must first be reviewed and approved by the government before the sale can go through. Nokia and Siemens are both European companies. . .and doesn't the EU have a similar law on books that require review of exchange or sale of proprietary technology?

Nokia and Siemens do not in anyway help suppress free speech in my opinion. Any mobile operator/information technology company would tell you that installing an information network for a user - in this case a state. They always have the ability to control what ever comes in and goes out as default.

It would be foolish of Iran to request of Nokia and Siemens of such services, without asking for the option to monitor, disrupt, shape and block what ever they want.

Perhaps the question we should be asking is if Nokia and Siemens should do business with them. And from where I am standing, there is nothing stopping Nokia and Siemens from doing so.

UK have the GHCQ which literally have the best of the best and Creme-dela creme of the "You name it" working there. The have loads of satellites, hackers, computer wizards, etc. These folks can listen to anything from anywhere. They can get into any computer and they can do exactly what Iran is doing via the services supplied by Nokia and Semens. . . Only that they are more advanced.

During the terrorist attack in the UK, all aspect of our communication was shifted. The traffic was shifted in such a way that preference was given to emergency services. e.t.c.  The point is, most nation have the ability to regulate their internet, airwaves etc.


Here is the GHCQ official website.
http://www.gchq.gov.uk/