Slashdot Mirror
Two Groups File Domestic Spying Lawsuits
An anonymous reader writes "The Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU both recently filed lawsuits, in New York and Detroit respectively, claiming that President Bush's electronic eavsdropping program is illegal and exceeds his constitutional powers. From the article: 'The Detroit [ACLU] lawsuit, which names the National Security Agency and its director, said the program has impaired plaintiffs' ability to gather information from sources abroad as they try to locate witnesses, represent clients, do research or engage in advocacy.'
Unless of course, it's the ability to carry out prayer or other religioius expression during meetings or on government property. Then the ACLU is indeed forcing government (courts) to take your rights away. Before I'm called some evil Christian, I am a pagan and ACLU does concern me, alot.
Now then, where the F was the ACLU when the Clinton Admin was conducting physical searches without warrants? Where was the ACLU during the Clinton Admin when they were doing 100% domestic phone taps in Federal Projects? Where was the ACLU during the Ruby Ridge or Waco? Where was ACLU when Echelon (talk about lack of search warrants and a invasion of privacy) was uncovered? Oh silly me, that was a Democrat in the White House and it was us silly conservatives complaining. This is clearly a "Get Bush!" thing.
Back on subject, if the thought that ~36 authorizations of international phone calls were tapped after significant concern about terrorism was called in bothers you, then you have some bigger issues. This is about international intelligence gathering and not the US Gov using "poisoned fruit" evidence in a criminal trial of a US citizen.
Dammy
Are you going to drag Carter, Regan, and Clinton in as well? Afterall, it was Carter that started the precident.
The days of "it's not the facts of the case of the seriousness of the charge" are over. You will no longer be able to flail around in a spaztic attempts to attack those that disagree with you, and get away with it. The public is no longer buying it, no matter how many times you repeat the BS and lies. Roberts and Alito are in, and within the next 3 years, we'll another Justice put in as well, so it also spells the end of Judicial Activism. Awww, now you have to use the Legislature to enact your crack-pot laws... aww too bad, following the Constitution sucks for you, don't it. (HA)
A) The FISA court itself states that the actions of the NSA in this matter are legal
B) If they are not, then you better get ready for lawsuits against Carter, Regan, and Clinton, as they acted in the exact same manner when they were in office. Afterall, it was Carter that first created the precident and the others followed in his foot steps.
You continued failed attemps to discredit Bush have always failed and will continue to fail. Unlike Clinton, nobody has broken the law so you aren't going to get your Impeachment here. Just, please, move on to your next failed attempt; its reallly starting to get amusing.
(you guys must like failure... we duh, I'm sorry, i forgot you *are* Liberals, I guess it comes with the territory.)
It should be pointed out that illegal domestic spying is just the tip of the iceberg (And remember, Bush recently said that it's not even illegal "because I say it isn't".
According to "List Of Bush's Impeachable Offenses" at http://www.bushstole04.com/list_of_bush.htm:
- George W. Bush is guilty of 9/11. Rock solid conclusive evidence: http://torrentchannel.com/
- Bush stole the 2004 election by computer fraud,
- Bush lied about w.m.d.'s,
- downing street memo,
- katrina,
- illegal war against iraq, http://en.xiando.org/The_US_invasion_and_occupati
o n_of_Iraq
- media complicity
When viewed objectively from a historical perspective in light of all the evidence that is available on the Internet, George W. Bush fits the descriptions "guilty of treason" and "dictator". There is more than enough evidence to convict him for crimes against both US law and humanity in general freely available on the Internet, yet he is not even impeached and remains in office.9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
So... it's OK to authorize the warrantless search of an American citizen, as long as you think he's a spy, but it's not OK to wiretap a call to a known Al Quaeda phone number in Iran?
I find it intensely interesting that people will defend the warrantless search and seizure of an American citizen by the Clinton administration, yet will villify the recording of phone conversations of people who have known links to terrorist organizations.
C'mon...
This is, once again, the far left end of the Democratic party trying to force legislation through the courts. If any Democratic Representative or Senator proposed legislation that actually limited the abilities of the President to keep American citizens safe, they'd lose the next election. If, however, they sic the ACLU on the President, they can then wait to see how the courts rule, and take their campaign stance from the result.
... elipses...
Someone needs to mod the parent down
And, surprisingly, my life continues to go on. Huh.
That's just flaming, plain and simple
Yeah, so? Thanks to the christians, we suffered through a thousand year dark age where freedom, expression and education were stifled and persecuted. Sounds very familiar to what they're trying to do today. Had the Romans flamed the christians a little better (with real flames), the world would be a much better place today.
And I'd like to think Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Donald Knuth (suck on that one, computer geeks), Gödel, Cantor
Aside from the typesetter there, everyone else was from ages past where they also believed in other superstions like throwing salt over your shoulder and avoiding black cats. They had no choice but to join the prevailing cult. They were indoctrinated at an early age. All cults find that's a great way to lock hold of someone for life.
nearly every U.S. president (there has to be at least one that you agree is/was intelligent), W. D. Phillips, and the list goes on and on. I chose those whom most people on Slashdot would undoubtedly consider intelligent men. Additionally, each lived during the 20th century, so they could have easily rejected Christianity without persecution.
That's simply not true. There has never been a time in the US where any president could reject christianity and remain a politician. And, no, I haven't been impressed by the intelligence of any president so far. They're all representative of the people of the US, and therefore not intelligent.
As to the others, how many actively participate in their church functions? I know plenty of self-proclaimed "christians" who have been to their church about as often as the local rabbi. I'm talking about the REAL christians. The ones who picket bookstores and send money to oral roberts. The ones who actively seek to bring about another age of ignorance and fear. The ones who made a big deal about Janet Jackson's boob. The ones who are all for removing a woman's right to choose to have an abortion (not everyone believes in their god, but everyone should follow his tenets, huh?) The ones who then are against providing assistance to the poor or giving out condoms or even sex education in the schools. The ones perpetuating "the war on drugs" despite the evidence of their last failed prohibition showing such a tactic is futile. The ones who stand, weekly, on the corner in front of our local Wally-world shouting at every car that drives by how they're going to hell. The ones who never even READ the book they pretend to base their lives on (go ahead, ask 'em how many of the authors of the new testament actually MET jesus, or even were his contemporaries). The ones who are members of the KKK (a christian organization). The one who believe "under god" should be in the pledge of allegience because "it's always been in there" (representative of their ignorance). And, my favorite, the morons who think jesus was WHITE! Here's a clue, folks: jesus looked more like Osama Bin Laden than Willem Dafoe.
The other people are not christians. They're people trying to avoid being harrassed. christians have way too much freedom these days, and it needs to stop. They're free to practice their little cult in their own homes and churches, but their crap needs to STAY THERE. Take the crucifixes that are visible from the street down (I don't want my kids exposed to such violent and ignorant images). Get rid of anything even close to religious ceremony from ALL government operations (such as having the 10 commandments on display in the courthouses). And, keep their evil little asses off the street protesting and picketing things that don't match up with their demented view of the world (in other worlds, get out of in front of the strip clubs and porn shops!).
Let's also not forget that thanks to christianity, we now have a much higher sexual repression, leading to more rapes and viole
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
I don't think that anybody has suggested allowing government officials to preach in an official capacity, aside from military chaplains, whose job is to do just that. (Are there any atheist chaplains? There should be.) The situation I'm concerned with is where somebody (who may or may not be a government official) says something like "I think that somebody should pray before every city council meeting" and then some government official (who may or may not be the same person) says "OK, go ahead." That's no different from somebody saying "I think that our elementary school kids should sing a song before every city council meeting" or "I think that we should go around the room and say our favorite color before every city council meeting." It becomes religious bigotry when somebody says "no, that's an act of a religion I don't agree with, so you can't do it".
It is. I made a mistake by omitting the word "unfairly" before "promote or oppose". If a government doesn't give equal time to different groups that want to pray during a public event, or if it prohibits prayer because of its religious nature, then it's unfair. If government says "it's irrelevant to the purpose of this meeting, let's get back to business" then it's being fair.
Correct, and I believe that to be the case in practice as well as in theory.
Speaking strictly, you're correct; however, speaking strictly, "lack of religion" does not exist. Everybody has one form of religion or another.
In its loosest sense, 'lack of religion' certainly is a religion. The belief that organized religions are not true is a religious belief, yet it is often characterized as "lack of religion". Similarly, the belief that the natural world is all that ever was is a religious belief. Everybody has religious beliefs about the existence or not of the supernatural. Making secular humanism the state religion is just as bad as making Catholicism the state religion.
What part of "or anyone else's property who is cool with it" didn't you comprehend?
The issue is whether PUBLIC PROPERTY funded by taxpayer money should be used to promote a specific religion.
The Constitution says the government will not act to favor any specific religion. The Founders were people who for the most part were not denominational Christians and were well aware of the insidious nature of the Christian religion and its emphasis on joining state and religion for its own benefit. In fact, that's were Christianity began - first in Israel where Judaism was part and parcel of the state, and then in Rome when Paul, a Roman double agent, established his con game of a religion and then future Bishops managed to get it recognized by the state under Constantine, and then proceeded to try to dominate European politics for the next thousand years.
Evanglism is outlawed? You really are a moron, aren't you? Or perhaps another Christian Zionist who is perfectly well aware to the degree in which this country has been perverted into a near theocracy but continues to pull the old hoary "Christians are being persecuted by liberals" horseshit in order to make yourselves look like the underdogs.
You're gonna be underdogs, asshole. We Transhumans promise you that. As Aleister Crowley used to say, "The Christians to the lions."
You want to pray, better start praying we Transhumans don't get the tech we need to crush your asses in the next twenty, thirty years.
You want a Rapture? We're gonna give you a "Rupture" instead...
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!