Slashdot Mirror


Obama Administration Defends Warrantless Wiretapping

a whoabot writes "The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the Obama administration has stepped in to defend AT&T in the case over their participation in the warrantless wiretapping program started by Bush. The Obama administration argues that that continuation of the case will lead to the disclosure of important 'state secrets.' The Electronic Frontier Foundation has described the action as an 'embrace' of the Bush policy." Update: 04/07 15:18 GMT by T : Glenn Greenwald of Salon has up an analysis of this move, including excerpts from the actual brief filed. Excerpt: "This brief and this case are exclusively the Obama DOJ's, and the ample time that elapsed — almost three full months — makes clear that it was fully considered by Obama officials."

6 of 788 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Biggest disappointment thusfar by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I didn't vote for Obama. I voted Libertarian. If you want to end the corruption and game playing with business, you should too. "But why should I waste my vote?" Is it really a waste? Democrat/Republican parties are two sides of the same coin. Vote for them and you vote to continue the game. We have seen attempts at change from within, and each time they are silenced quickly. In Obama's case, I can't say whether or not he was sincere, but his promises and attitudes changed VERY quickly once he got into office.

    This is more than disappointment. It's our death.

  2. Re:Does this by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Preface: I didn't vote for Obama, and I didn't vote for Bush. I also have never voted for any other American president, party, or political idea. I'm not an American, and I don't live in the USA.

    My point:

    Well, honestly, we can give him the benefit of the doubt, in that state secrets might actually be revealed if the case continues.

    However, this does not mean that Obama is not being a moron.

    There's a reason courts have the ability to seal records. If something that truly needs to be kept secret comes out in the court case, the judge reviews it, then orders the records for that particular part of the case sealed. It doesn't go into court records, doesn't show up on websites later, and in general, stays between those who heard it in the courtroom, with the threat of contempt of court charges if anybody ever says anything about it.

    So, Obama is either an idiot who doesn't realize the above is possible, or he's a corrupt jerk, little or no better than Bush.

    Either way, he shouldn't be running your country.

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  3. Re:The Only Change You Can Believe In by vsingh165 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is just so much more ammo for the "Please don't vote for either R or D!" argument.

    Choosing the lesser of two evils is not a good policy. "Throwing away" your vote on a third party is always decried as the best way to let the other guy in. No, no, no, you need to vote for whichever (R or D) is closer to your views or else all your doing is letting the other one, that you really hate, in.

    Can we agree that their both evil yet?

    Can we make 2012 a third party year? Please?

    Signed by me, a cynical brit that would love to see actual change on either side of the atlantic.

    Can we please make 2012 a no party year? Candidates should be themselves rather than cloak themselves in stupid pointless ideologies.

  4. Defending Obama by tjstork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You know, as a Republican, I suppose I could take the cheap shot and say, "Hah, there you go, see, he's not really any different after all."

    But...

    Bashing Obama for doing something supposedly conservative is just silly. Conservatives bashing Obama for doing something conservative is even sillier still. If it was so right for Bush to wiretap, then, shouldn't conservatives be defending Obama at least on this issue? If it was so wrong for Bush to wiretap, well, conservatives, where were you for eight years?

    The thing is, one could make the argument that Obama is defending Bush on warrantless wiretapping not necessarily because he plans on doing it himself, but because he wants to spare the USA the damage from some foreign policy implication of what Bush did.

    If you look at his overall record, Obama is acting like the dyed in the wool hardcore liberal that he is. Come on, Obama has spent his last European trip apologizing for everything the USA has ever done - a typical liberal thing to do. Do you think Bush would ever apologize for American foreign policy? Don't think so.

    --
    This is my sig.
  5. Re:The Only Change You Can Believe In by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Obama's also done a lot of bad. Or, rather, Tim Geithner has. And it's just gonna get more interesting from here.

    I gotta say I got a kick out of the political game that the White House was playing a few weeks ago -- trying to link the GOP to Rush Limbaugh. That came right out of the West Wing, courtesy of Axelrod and Plouffe. I seem to recall Democrats complaining at the top of their lungs when the GOP used these types of tactics (say by linking every Democrat to Al Sharpton, Michael Moore or Sean Penn), so where's the outrage now that one of their own is engaged in the same behavior?

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  6. Re:Biggest disappointment thusfar by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But it's nice that you guys on the fringe right have a party to vote for.

    Funny, when I argue libertarian positions on conservative sites, I get called "fringe left".

    "Before 9-11 I was a conservative. After 9-11 I'm a radical liberal... and my opinions haven't changed." - Jeffery McLean

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!