Slashdot Mirror
NSA Spying Comes Under Attack
maotx writes "The NSA's no-longer-secret surveillance program came under a two-pronged attack this week on both political and legal fronts. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania threatens to cut funding to NSA's spying program if President Bush's administration does not come clean on how it works. Separately, two hearing dates have been set for a lawsuit that seeks to prove that AT&T illegally cooperated with the NSA and violated federal wiretapping laws in doing so. Sen. Specter emphasized that he doesn't want the issue to fade into the background, saying that he'd like to see 'public concern and public indignation build up.'"
The public doesn't care. They have their Idol, they have their gas guzzingly SUV. What do they care that the president is the one breathing heavy on the other end of the line.
Personal liberties? What are those?
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
So if Arlen Specter ran with George Bush as his Vice President, would they be Bush 'n Specter?
Sen. Specter emphasized that he doesn't want the issue to fade into the background, saying that he'd like to see 'public concern and public indignation build up.'
Sadly, like most things in the US, all that will build up is public apathy. This is the same apathy we see every year with laughingly low voter turnouts. Many people in America are perfectly happy not knowing what is going on and sadly enough have no clue the NSA has been spying on Americans. Those who do know are often perfectly happy to say, "They are only listening to the terrorist. They are just trying to keep up safe."
The majority of people in America are too stupid to know what this means or just do not care what it implies. If they feel a bit safer, they are more then glad to hand over every last civil liberty, until we are nothing more then a military state. Our country has come a long way since Ben Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
And we should care, why, exactly?
Because a senator is making a little noise to the public, increasing awareness, and pointing out how that what the NSA, ATT, and the Bush Administration did quite possible violates our Constitution?
Who cares if it is election time or not? Just as long as progress is being made.
I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
The constitution was designed to protect us from the mob rule of people that simply don't care about being spyed on as they "have nothing to hide." If it was up to "the people" we'd get rid of most of the bill of rights and our natural freedoms. Politicians pandering to the people got us into this mess, I suspect pandering to them now isn't going to help. Sometimes defending constitutional principle demands standing up against the people, but few dare tell the electorate what they need to hear because they are too busy telling them what they want to hear.
Because the President violated his oath of office?
He swore to uphold and defend the Constitution. Allowing domestic wiretaps without a warrant is a violation of said oath.
And the warrants would have been easy to obtain, including the fact that they're available up to 72 hours after the fact.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Whenever I hear or see a quote from Senator Specter I am always filled with a little pride that he's from Pennsylvania. He's the only politician in Congress I've any respect for.
Nah...heavy breathing has been outsourced to India.
We should care because even biased people with an obvious agenda can be right sometimes.
A political posture by a RINO Senator in an election year.
Specter isn't do for re-election this year, unless I missed something. And I will admit I am a bit lazy today, but why do you think he is a RINO? I seriously do not hope it is solely based on the fact that he is opposing something that our control-everything president started.
As for your second point, I am not a huge fan of the EFF most days, but I really think you are a bit off there too. Since I used up my mod points, can someone please mod the parent Troll or Flamebait please?
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
The only way the attitudes will change is if impeachment is successful and heads roll along the line. Til then, the mouth-breathers will continue to support this administration and their crimes.
Blowjobs & hiding it from your wife (and the public) or raping civil liberties, massive debt, illegal wars and profiteering - Which do you think is more of an impeachable offense?
They watch stuff and record it.
Do I get a consulting fee?
Because your rights as a citizen of the United States of America should always have a higher priority than your loyalty to any political party. Always.
This sig intentionally left blank.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/02/09/AR2006020901415.html
Last paragraph:
"The president should have all the tools he needs to fight terrorism," Specter said, "but we also want to maintain our civil liberties." Now there is a perfect expression of patriotic, post-Sept. 11 thinking."
Since we aren't allowed to see all the laws governing the behaviour of the NSA, why should we assume that their spying is illegal?
Bigger Issues? How about:
This government says it can seize US citizens and subject them to secret military tribunals.
This government says it can make you not a citizen by simple declaration without evidence.
This government says it can rape, torture and murder suspected terrorists.
Now add all that up: Any US President can say you are a terrorist, kidnap your whole family in the middle of the night, and have your kids raped to death in front of your wife to make her tell where you are hiding. And Gonzalez will say it's all legal, if anyone ever finds out about it.
That's the Novus Ordo Seculorum of George W. Bush and his Congress. As Orwell predicted, a hobnailed boot stamping on a human face. Do you right-wingers seriously want to grant total power to whoever's in the White House? What about if it's your evil arch-nemesis Hillary, or some Kennedy apparatchik?
Mod Parent Up.
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the 'wiretapping' isn't actually 'phone wiretapping.' It's going to be something else. What? Who knows.
Why?
circumstanstial evidence:
1) It was references as "communications." That could be friggin anything.
2) internal legal opinion saying spying method was legal when wiretapping already has well established rules. importance? Someone is probably splitting hairs, but getting such an opinion probably means they found a loophole. i.e. it's not a phone or something minor like that.
3) how it's played out in the press: "Bush is spying illegally" "No we're not" "Yes you are, your wiretapping" "What we're doing is legal and we're not going to tell you about it for technical reasons that might give it away." "So you are wiretapping" "Uh, guess you caught us, blah blah blah" importance? It may or may not be wiretapping, but the administration is happy to let everyone argue that it is. Can everyone say 'diversion?'
I have my guesses what it could be, but I'm staying mum. Why? Because it might actually be legal and doing some good and if I guess right, the eye of Sauron starts lookin' my way out of spite. Unlikely, but not worth it.
So in conclusion, uh, you didn't read anything. It was all a dream....
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Because the second the election is over, it's back to business as usual. NO ONE should get credit for election season posturing.
This is not always true and in fact, I'm willing to say it probably hardly ever happens. If a politician wants to keep his job and be relected the next time around, he better do what he says he is going to do. Or at least make it look like he is trying.
I'm a virgo and on Slashdot. Coincidence? Yes.
If he's doing this BECAUSE it is election year, all the more power to our system. Having regular elections is a vital part of a working democracy. This would be a great example of that.
Sorry, but this whole thing was put to rest months ago, when the FISA court panel ruled that there was no violation of any such kind.
So...they used a mixture of lime and water, often with whiting, size, or glue to describe the situation.
What?
Too bad we can't cut funding for all "black" projects in the Department of Defense while we're at it.
Please help metamoderate.
until he retracted his comments. cutting the purse strings would be a nice way to force this little police state program into the light. god, let's hope the democrats win a majority in the fall. the republican party is out of control.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Here's a senario.
Osama emails an intermediary to correspond information that's of interest to US national security. That intermidiary forwards it to a sleeper in the US. That now puts this correpsondance under the jurisdiction of required warrants under the FISA court right? The argument of rapid response is covered by the fact that such spying can occur post-occurance when deemed appropriate.
That all sounds quite reasonable and puts to question why the administration felt it necesary to circumvent such proceedures.
However, here's another senario.
Osama emails his buddies about the kick ass humus in the old neighborhood. He CC's 1000 random spam US email addresses. One of the go betweens of the email forwards it yet again with another 1000 random US email addresses and so on and so forth. Is this outrage over warrantless spying circumventing the logic of current technology? When FISA was established to spy on possible Soviet interests within the US in 1978 we were in a totally different technological environment. It was an era of land line based communication. Call the Bush presidency what you will but I think it's a large mistake to cripple the speed of intelligence agencies in the name of a Bush witch hunt. Should some other president in the future expect the NSA to submit 10000 warrants due to one email string, even after the fact? If congress authorizes war (and make no mistake that there is no difference according to the courts between declaring war and authorizing use of force), should intelligence agencies be able to monitor anything and everything coming out of that country regardless of where the destination may be?
Seriously dude - '24' is a SHOW on the Fox network. It's not real.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Specter is in the 2nd year of his term. It's Rick Santorum's seat that's up for re-election this year.
This sig intentionally left blank.
How is it that every time one of these "NSA Surveillance" articles pops up, nobody chimes in about FISA Court? (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)
All you tinfoil hat people need to read this pdf document.
Some talking points:
Page 3: "In so doing, the Court of Review recognized that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, "as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."
More Page 3: ""perhaps most crucially, the executive branch not only has superior expertise in the area of foreign intelligence, it is also constitutionally designated as the pre-eminent authority in foreign affairs. The President and his deputies are charged by the constitution with the conduct of the foreign policy of the United States"
Page 4: In addition, substantial authority indicates that the President has inherent constitutional authority over the gathering of foreign intelligence--authority that Congress may not circumscribe. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review suggested that, even after FISA, the President possesses inherent constitutional Authority that FISA could not limit.
The list of quotes goes on
So, for all you people wondering why the hell nobody has got any legal dirt on all these 'illegal activities', you need to read your history book. Its come up before, FISA court shot the president down, FISA court of review shot FISA court down, and the Supreme Court Won't even hear the case because its been settled already. This is all democratic dragging through the mud.
/rant off
You can find thousands of links in Google. Just do searches for
"Ehsanul Islam Sadequee"
"Yaser Esam Hamdi"
and
"abu gharib"
Russ Feingold of Wisconsin. The one Senator to vote against the Patriot Act. The Senator to call for the censure of Bush over the whole wiretapping thing in the first place. If anyone's the One Good Senator, it's Feingold.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
It's not about rights. It's about duty. Duty to the Constitution and duty to the children. The problem is that so many people are concerned about getting theirs (their rights, their share, their piece of the pie) that they forget their duties...
Haven't you seen 24? Jack Bauer does this kind of thing *every week*!
Well there is rendition. That takes care of the torture question.
Then there is the Patriot Act II which proposes stripping away citizenship
What else do you wan to know?
Lying under oath about getting a blowjob, or raping civil liberties, massive debt, illegal wars, profiteering, warrantless wiretaps, etc etc.
Regardless, President Bush's activities are illegal, immoral, and unethical.
:(){
The Democrats would have to take the House for impeachment proceedings to occur. They would have to take the House and 2/3 of the Senate for a conviction to occur. Even then, of course, it's no guarantee. Of course, there might be a few Republicans who would impeach/convict. More likely, there are several Democrats who wouldn't. At least not yet.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Except the one court specifically set up to determine the legality of this type of wiretapping has already declared it a defacto power of the Presidency, and therefore out of their domain. Everything after that ruling was made is just showboating.
Google this phrase: "we take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."
If anything, Bush has shown more restraint in his use of this so-called war times power. Previous Presidents, including as recently as Clinton, used this type of implied Constitutional authorzation for everything from searching suspected spies homes to drug raids on inner city neighbourhoods. Very few of their actions, if any, could be directly linked to any external military action being taken by the country at the time.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
In that hypothetical situation, you'd only need 1 warrant, not 10,000 (and not 1,000,000, either). For several situations, warrants can cover multiple locations. OTOH, IANAL.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Perhaps you're right that the administration's only goal is to fight terrorism. Sadly, that doesn't mean those will be the only effects. Precedents are being set down that will be available for use by future administrations.
It's all about trust. You may trust the current administration, but do you trust an unchecked government in general? Would you trust your brother to install a closed circuit television to watch your house while you're away? Probably, but what happens when your brother is replaced by the perverted old man who lives next door? Still so trusting?
Perhaps, just perhaps, it would be best not to install that camera afterall.
Specter has a history of pretending to be interested in holding Bush's feet to the fire, but he never follows through with any substance. Its a good way to let the Republican leadership know that they need to toss some concessions his way on other issues, and at the same time a way to shape a nice "moderate" image. Effective politics? Sure. Substance? Not so much.
You're absolutely right. Arlen Specter and all of those d*** Republicans are just trying to make Bush look bad. Time to vote in some Democrats who'll support our president.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Hear, hear! Won't someone think of the children? To hell with the old people...
Seriously, what the hell do kids have to do with constitutional rights, other than not having any until they're eighteen years old?
Not to add to the flames, but the fact that Bush hasn't used his new US_God powers to destroy free speech is not very heartening. It was Lenin who set up most of the arsenal which Stalin used to dictate the USSR. I would suggest that Bush really wants to do good. I do not, however, like his tactics.
If I understand Dirac correctly, his meaning is this: there is no God, and Dirac is his Prophet. -Pauli
IF (big if) it wasn't illegal, then the NY Times needs a slap from the courts that is big enough to put them out of business.
http://www.hawknest.com/
This November we shall be kicking out Santorum instead.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
Been to the pumps lately?
Sorry, I smoked my last sig
Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, many presidents have abused the IRS, Clinton and The Wife had FBI files, and yet we're all still free to shoot off our mouths and read subversive lit, so I doubt anything that's been done in the name of fighting the GWoT will be harmful. If you're really worried about precedents, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform has done more to silence political speech than the PATRIOT act could ever do!
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
But I've had a Prius since 2001, so I'm not too bothered by high gas prices.
I was home sick from work yesterday and watched C-SPAN for a while. Do you know what they were debating yesterday on the Senate floor? Things like whether or not to spend $15 million on an ad campaign to encourage eating seafood. Call me crazy, but I think a Senator knowing the details of a program that may or may not be violating the constitution before committing more of my tax money to pay for it is at least as important as seafood commercials.
This space intentionally left blank.
dude... i think you're malfunctioning.
I believe that I'm unable as a citizen to decide if such programs are "better for the country", or that my elected representatives are able to on my behalf- if even their existence is a total secret.
The USA spends more on military/defense than almost any other nation in the world, both in total, per capita, and percentage-wise (of total budget.) I believe in some regards we're higher than China, North Korea, etc. I do fully believe that money would be much better spent on infrastructure and social causes.
Please help metamoderate.
Do you really think the usa is better off than it was 5 years ago ?
Do you really think that th eusa is heading in the correct direction ?
Do you really think goverment should have absolute power ?
Reading through your posting history leads me to belive you are a right winger.
Can you please post your first and last name and social security number so I can look into this more ?
Are you quite sure about that? Have you been paying attention to the comparative treatment at the hands of the IRS of more liberal California churches vs. conservative Ohio churches? If you haven't, you might not want to be so sure about that, although I'd be more inclined to attribute it to the kind of people appointed by the kind of people appointed by Bush (repitition intended), rather than thinking Bush directly ordered it. But that doesn't leave his hands totally clean in my book.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
Yeah, those dastardly anti-Bush Republican committee chairs. Always out to destroy the President and embarrass his party at all costs, particularly in an election year.
Never a better time to donate or join.
you had me at #!
The more realistic scenario is that everything was planned out in another country before the future terrorists came to America. They then come here and live under their own names, get driver's licenses, and are even listed in the white pages. Despite not making any efforts to hide, the CIA fails to find these wanted men for nearly a year.
This is exactly what happened on September 11th. NONE of this spying would have prevented it. FISA was set up in response to the executive branch of the government abusing its powers and spying on political opponents. Hundreds of thousands of patriots have died to protect the freedoms which the constitution gives us. Personally, I am not willing to give them up in favor of a fascist police state just because it has a small chance of dropping our death rate by 0.00001%.
It's not an accident that the bill of rights doesn't make exceptions for periods of war (or anything else).
First you get your ass smacked by the government for being a monopoly. The, a super-secret branch comes in and tells you that you must cooperate or . You do so, then another branch of the government walks in and says "THAT'S ILLEGAL!".
I bet AT&T/SBC's collective head is spinning. Talk about taking it from both ends.
It's humorous to see a big corporation in the same situation millions of Americans find themselves in every day when it comes to government stupidty - completely helpless.
Its about him bashing the current administration.
Dont fool yourself into thinking otherwize.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
So I googled IRS California churches Ohio churches and got:
Looks like the IRS is trying to be even-handed, so I don't understand your point.
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
"All I have to change this country is one voice, one vote, and a little bit of money. Mr. _______, I feel that you are not listening to, or representing, my concerns faithfully. My vote, and the little bit of money I have will go towards the one who does. You have until November 7, 2006 to correct this oversight on your part, and I look forward to reading about your actions (not your words) in the newspapers to come.
Signed,
Another is that Senator Arlen Specter (R-YesItIsAllAboutMe) is, in fact, posturing. He's thumping his proverbial chest, posing for the cameras, currying favor with GWB's opponents because of Bush's low approval numbers.
Another is that Specter knows there is nothing hinky going on with the NSA stuff, that it's all within the President's Constitutional authority, and wants to have that shown in a public forum -- a forum which, by pure coincidence, would feature Senator Specter prominently.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
Yeah, but sometimes I wish Jack's method of truth extraction was real...as in really practiced by others, even if only in other popular TV shows. For example, an episode in Season 1 of Lost when Charlie shot and killed the islander who kidnapped him and the pregnant woman. That man had info they all needed desperately, and yet Charlie unloads a couple rounds into his chest while he's about to be interogated by the rescuers.
No, damn it...shoot him in the leg! And if he doesn't talk, shoot him in the other leg!
The NSA's no-longer-secret surveillance program came under a two-pronged attack this week on both political and legal fronts. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania threatens to cut funding to NSA's spying program if President Bush's administration does not come clean on how it works. Separately, two hearing dates have been set for a lawsuit that seeks to prove that AT&T illegally cooperated with the NSA and violated federal wiretapping laws in doing so. Sen. Specter emphasized that he doesn't want the issue to fade into the background, saying that he'd like to see 'public concern and public indignation build up.'"
Translation from Washington speak: Sen. Specter delayed real action on the President's illegal spying program again, citing lack of public concern and public indignation. "I've got my finger in the wind, but I can't tell which way it's blowing," the Senator said.
Don't expect Specter to go anywhere with this inquiry unless he is dragged there kicking and screaming. He's just threatening to threaten to be a threat.
Thank the EFF for suing AT&T. It could take a long time (remember SCO v. IBM?) but at least someone could get arrested. The fine for FISA violations is up to $10000 per violation, so AT&T might be in for the punishment of a life time for colluding with the illegal program.
Q: What did the comedian say to the crowd?
A: If I knew, this joke would be funny.
I thought your original request for cites was remarkably intelligent, and I wouldn't have modded you down for it myself.
But now you've stated that I was "making things up". That's false. Everything I said was based on public statements made by Bush administration officials or official US government reports.
Mind you, allegations that uniformed US soldiers raped children to make their mothers reveal the locations of their terrorist-suspect fathers are unproven. But I didn't say that they were proven, I said if the executive branch thinks they can arbitrarily declare US citizens terrorists without burden of proof (Jose Padilla case) and terrorists aren't subject to prohibitions against torture (statements by Gonzalez, Bush, and Rumsfeld) then obviously by simple logic the President feels he can do whatever he wants to a US citizen without due process, and equally obviously the people assigned to do this stuff are rapists and murderers (Rumsfeld, public statements on content of Abu Ghraib CD) who are willing to knowingly abuse innocents (Dilawar, Bagram report).
You said "If there is a case of the American government taking an American citizen out of his home, revoking his citizenship, torturing and murdering him. I want to know. I'll be the first one in line to crucify someone..." but I never said there was any such case. What I said was this government is trying to set up the conditions for this to happen.
Do you disagree, now that you've independently researched the Padilla and Dilawar cases and looked up Gonzalez's memo on the Geneva convention? Please tell us all if you come to another conclusion... after you complete your study of the data, of course - we're going to want cites!
I've posted several politically conservative opinions on Slashdot and none of them have ever gotten above 0 whereas the left-leaning replies were all modded up. I've shrugged it off as proof that Left can't compete so they suppress debate.
That worldview was seriously challenged when my latest posting got a 1! But now things are back to normal as it just got modded back to 0 (100% overrated).
What with the Right running just about everything here in the U.S., I guess Slashdot is just about the last bastion remaining for the frustrated and intolerant Left.
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
The NSA does not spy on people. There is no spying going on here. None. You must have gotten bad information. Um swamp gas? Weather balloons? If it helps, just keep in mind that an intelligence agency is still filled with federal workers. All of the standard stereotypes can apply.
Wiretap the Congressmen, the real criminals :)
This government says it can seize US citizens and subject them to secret military tribunals.
Yes
This government says it can make you not a citizen by simple declaration without evidence.
No. I have never heard of this, in any case. As far as I can tell it is manufactured. The only thing similar is one particular case where someone agreed to give up their citizenship as part of a release deal. The government didn't have the power to take it.
This government says it can rape, torture and murder suspected terrorists.
I will give you torture, in particular, with regards to rendition. The government has never, in any document, nor any thing I have ever seen.. nor any evidence I have ever seen.. in any case I have ever seen.. said it can rape anyone. Claims of some members of the military doing it (without proof), doesn't constitute "the government OK". Murder... the only cases I have seen were of misconduct by US troops that were punished under the code of military justice. I see no evidence, whatsoever, of administation support for that conduct.
As far as I can tell, at least half of your points, leading to your doomsday scenario, were made up and baseless.
3 Nights ago I heard on CNN that Bush was looking into running for a 3rd term! Talk about the pit of your stomach turning stone cold.
Your "quoting out of context" system is working too.
:)
Typical liberal ploy.
You do know this site can be accessed by people from around the world, and some of them even get mod-points?
In much of Europe, and propably other places, the US 'Left' would be considered quite far to the right. While the US 'Right'... Dunno how much further right they would be shifted, there's really not *that* much difference between the two.
- These characters were randomly selected.
I see a lot of people who ask for evidence that such things as toture kidnappings by government agencies, etc. exist. But seems to me that things like this require the question "Why not?" instead? Why wouldn't they toture a person they perceive to be the enemy or scapegoat of their own cause in a place from which information is unlikely to leave? One should ask for evidence to prove that it doesn't not exist, not vice versa.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
You misheard him.
He swore to withold and defenstrate the Constitution.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Conservatives are the people alarmed by this administration's willingness to disregard traditional values and re-interpret the constitution.
It's the biggest power grab since Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, and it offends real conservatives.
Liberals are just pissed off that they aren't the ones doing it, they've always been in favor of trying new ways - that's why we call 'em liberals.
You know, this could revolutionize how politics are done...
Wow, you read fast. It took me a week to read the Bagram report. Longer for the Abu Ghraib one... I couldn't even look up the Gonzalez memo as fast as you got through all that!
I hope you realise that just the points you conceded are enough to make my point anyway - that there are far more important issues surrounding this government's beliefs and behaviours than some probably-legal-anyway NSA spying.
My advice is to join the Republican party and stock up on ammunition.
This government says it can make you not a citizen by simple declaration without evidence.
No. I have never heard of this, in any case. As far as I can tell it is manufactured.
Read Section 501 of Patriot Act II. If, as seems to be the case, you're too lazy, the meat of it is that the government can decide your conduct means you are a supporter of terrorism and, as such, an enemy combatant who can be expatriated. Once expatriated then the rest of the Bill of Rights doesn't apply and it's Guantanamo for you.
Face it, your right-wing heroes are scum who've managed to subvert the entire Constitution.
It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
You do realize that the Patriot Act II hasn't been passed, right? Yes it's a very scary proposed bill.. but it doesn't belong in a conversation about what the US government can do... since the US government can't do it... Second of all, talking about my "right-wing" heroes when I voted for both Kerry and Clinton is a bit presumptious, isn't it? Maybe you know something I don't.
But the IRS seems to be pretty much blowing off the petitioning in Ohio, apparently letting the conservatives there endorse to their hearts' contents. They actually took action in the cases of the liberal ones.
Note that your linked story is dated Feb. 28; googling without "California" (or a second "churches") in the terms brings up this much more recent article, they're still waiting for the IRS to do anything there, even after a second complaint. And the Ohio case involves much more direct campaign help, such as letting the campaign use their facilities and holding "political activities" in the church, assuming the clergy aren't wrong about that bit. The California church just preached a sermon about whether Jesus would endorse pre-emptive war, and how the candidates view the matter.
The cases are not equivalent.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
Let's be reaonable here. A proposal, even a "good" one, has only a chance to pass when the majority of the ones voting is in favor.
Now, if I KNOW my proposal has no snowball in hell chance, I can propose whatever I want. I could propose to freeze funding on military, if I feel the general population is against more weapons while I know that the majority of the congress is in favor of spending for guns. Even if I want to buy more artillery myself.
That way I get good press (remember, elections in Fall), people will believe that I'm the "good" guy, the voting itself isn't covered in the news and everything stays the same.
Except that the general population thinks that I (or "we", as in, "my party") wants to do what they want. While doing what we want.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Yes, everyone should stop bitching and moaning until we have as few rights as North Koreans. Then it's ok if people start acting like drama queens.
And since I presume you don't do anything illegal in your home, you won't mind if the government places a camera in there, right?
It will just be some civil servant or whatever watching the video of you in your house. Once they see you're not doing anything illegal, they probably won't pay attention much anyway.
It's also the first time in years of commenting I've ever been moderated as "flamebait"! Though I think I got "troll" once.
- AJ
That's a rather grim way of looking at things.
Very realistic, I might add...
Do you mean people who exercise?
I'm thinking about it, therefore I might be.
Can the president open up snail mail without a warrant, presumably without notifying anyone (assuming that they could duplicate the actual letter the mail is in)? I'll bet you a lot more people would have a problem with the president doing that (though it is essentially the same exact thing).
Recently I had my first ever trip to the US (work related) and got to see two very different parts of the country. I had some time in LA (including Hollywood and Santa Monica) and then quite a bit more time in New England (mostly CT, but one day in Boston as well).
The above quote seems quite accurate for my experience in New England, but definitely not for LA. Having lived in both Europe and Australia, I'd just LA people as the least friendly people I've met anywhere so far. Rude, arrogant and generally just very unpleasant. Stark contrast to Boston, which is a city I managed to fall in love with in the space of just one day.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
I'm a rational anarchist so I don't care if you lean left or right. Although you sound like a paranoid leftie, I'll accept that you're a Conservative.
Now that we've addressed your point, are you going to answer mine from several posts ago?
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
There were several "No" votes in the House, IIRC.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
Yeah... pity about that First Amendment thing; if it weren't for that they could put lots of newspapers out of business. Then they could do whatever they want and nobody would be around to call them on it.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Too bad that didn't stop them from re-electing him.
Liberals are just pissed off that they aren't the ones doing it, they've always been in favor of trying new ways - that's why we call 'em liberals.
I'm a liberal, and I don't want to see the Constitution infringed by Bush or anybody else. One thing the American Right has been very good at is reducing their opponents to caricatures -- that is likely why your idea of what liberals stand for is so negative and cartoon-like. Keep in mind that "liberal" and "Democrat" are not anywhere close to synonymous.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
>why should we assume that their spying is illegal?
Because they didn't submit to the (minimal!) oversight of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
This government says it can rape, torture and murder suspected terrorists.
Last I heard, the power to strip American citizenship by fiat was still only a proposal
This government says it can seize US citizensbut military tribunals have been reserved for non-citizens.
It is legal for british intelligence to spy on americans and for the NSA to spy on the brits. Who says it isn't the MI7 that is occupying ATT's secret closets?
Yeah you can tell the nerds from their failure to read sarcasm, however slight, right?
"You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
It has nothing to do with 1st ad.
If it was illegal, which is prob is, then they are in the clear, completely, just look at the Pentagon Papers case...
But if it was legal then it's treason..
http://www.hawknest.com/
Care to explain why it's treason?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
I'm just trying to state what is the recoqnized legal view of this issue. As it is the FISA court that was set up as a form of oversight for possible Presidental power abuse, and they seem to agree with the legality of the Presidents authorization of NSA wiretaps of international communications, then the case is pretty much open and closed.
...".
But if you want to deal in hypotheticals, you may want to insert the key words to your example "Can the president open up snail mail from a suspected terrorist to an associate inside the United States without a warrant
You'll still get people who fall on both sides of the issue, but at least it's closer to NSA example than any generic snail mail example. As far as I am aware, no one, even those against the wiretapping, have presented any evidence that it is not being executed as has been reported by the government, that being the taps are restricted to communications between known terrorists outside of the US to people inside.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Why should we complain?
We finally have a government that listens to us!
Flamebait and Troll mods are often a sort of backhanded compliment.
Anyway, hmmmm you axed: I'm afraid I haven't a clue. His actions are not predictable or even sane. The immediate goal, obviously, is the keep the price of Texas oil high, but that doesn't really explain his disregard for traditional American freedoms or his love for Saudi fundamentalists.
Your other statements make me think we don't have a lot of viewpoint in common. I pretty much stopped slamming Clinton when he left office; I don't understand the obsession. And I don't think it's actually possible to wage war on a technique, so to me the "war on terrorism" is just another insane Bushism.
I'd very much like to see a "war on the people who attacked us" (and I'd even settle for a "war on the people who funded the attacks") but since the Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia and the UAE are George Bush's friends and business partners, I guess that won't happen.
"Oil is a drug producing madness" -Anacharis of Scythia, ~590 BC
Didn't Bush & Co. argue in Rumsfeld