In defending Attorney General Alberto Gonzales against perjury claims, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell made the first public acknowledgment that President Bush authorized a series of secret surveillance activities under a single executive order in late 2001, the Washington Post reported. In a letter to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., McConnell didn’t say what these "intelligence activities" included, other than that one of them was the warrantless surveillance of e-mails and phone calls that Bush confirmed in December 2005.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
88 Comments
I found a microphone under my bed, between the cushions of my couch, under the toilet, and under my phone. The BUsh admin foujd I was secretly tearing off the labels of mattresses, and set the cia after me.
It’s more than just mattress labels son. And more than the CIA. Stay put, we’re on our way…
I’m wonder what part of “Terrorist Surveillance Program” the Left doesn’t understand that their paranoia becomes of frenzied state of constant whining.
You can’t break the constitution no matter how scary you make the cause.
GWB didn’t read my e-mail. George can’t read.
“Kansas The Traitor” speaks:”terrorist” { code for those who resist being murdered }.
It’s more than just mattress labels son. And more than the CIA. Stay put, we’re on our way…
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 01:09 PM
:)
We may never know the true depth of the spying on Americans. I’m thinking it must put hoover to shame!
The only hope I have is that the next congress if we elect enough dems, and the presidency going back to normal…is a full investigation of all the things this administration had done to undermine the freedoms we Americans expect. I can’t take any more of right wing bull. I need someone to make me proud to be American again.
I just hope they aren’t bugging me. I’d hate to be responsible for some poor intelligence analyst’s going out of his mind trying to make sense of my phone calls and e-mails.
“is a full investigation of all the things this administration had done to undermine the freedoms we Americans expect.”
Which freedom were you deprived of?
christiantalibanformerlyknownaslittlejohn
Privacy? Did you not read the heading?
So, Political Mom’s emails were read? Her phone bugged? She was followed? Put on a nofly list?
Again, specifically, what freedoms were denied her specifically?Or you?
that sure sounds like nathan, doesnt it?
Couldnt be. He NEVER approved of gay marriage.
It’s impossible to know who was tapped or who’s email was read. But the president has already admitted to tapping and email poking. Are you assured you weren’t tapped? How can you be sure?
Are you assured you weren’t tapped? How can you be sure?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 03:34 PM
I have nothing to hide.
Perhaps some paranoia exists among all the pot smokers out their hiding their contacts.
You do know that the FBI has a program called Predator that can sniff your email if they have you under an investigation.
I have nothing to hide.
Perhaps some paranoia exists among all the pot smokers out their hiding their contacts.
Posted by: Kansas | August 01, 2007 at 03:38 PM
You have nothing to hide. Please post your full name, address, phone numbers, IP address, router make and model, and you oerating system with version number.
I am sure you are right. The government has plenty of time to tap into and listen in on every conversation and read every email.
As I recall, the calls tapped were those originating from overseas, and from known or suspected terrorist numbers, to us numbers. I did not receive any such. did you?
While I am opposed to Bush, and believe he should use the FISA court, I am not paranoid either.
And I still want to know what freedoms or rights of YOURS specifically were violated.
After lying and covering up, then trying to redirect… and you believe this…
“As I recall, the calls tapped were those originating from overseas, and from known or suspected terrorist numbers, to us numbers.”
The government has acres of intelligence gathering equipment under Ft Huachuca. There doesn’t need to be a human ear attached to each phone call nor eyes to each email.
Obviously privacy is not that much of a concern of yours.
I already told you. Can you not read? And it doesn’t come down to a case by case issue either. Bush broke the constitution. End of story.
And I still want to know what freedoms or rights of YOURS specifically were violated.
Posted by: chritiantalibanformerlyknownaslittlejohn | August 01, 2007 at 03:42 PM
Still no answer. Waiting…..
You have nothing to hide. Please post your full name, address, phone numbers, IP address, router make and model, and you oerating system with version number.
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 03:41 PM
Nothing to hide from Government investigators not every crazed “script kiddie” on the Internet who wants to hack my computer.
As usual Sol, you make another impotent argument.
christiantalibanformerlyknownaslittlejohn
Tell me specifically which of your constitutional rights has not been violated. Then prove it.
Ok you two, here it is. The government has admitted to at LEAST tapping calls and viewing emails. All warrantlessly. So a constitutional right was abandoned.
You can argue semantics till the cows come home. Won’t change that fact.
The question I have for both of you two is just how many other rights will you so willingly give up?
Tell me specifically which of your constitutional rights has not been violated. Then prove it.
Posted by: XXX | August 01, 2007 at 03:56 PM
TO my knowledge, none of my constitutional rights have been violated. It is impossible to prove, and you know it. To prove a negative is impossible
That is different than saying your constitutional rights Have been violated. I merely wanted some facts to to along with the paranoid assumption
So in having nothing to hide from the government Kansas, you willingly give up your right to privacy. Any gov’t flunky can read your mail, email, and listen in to your phone calls. That’s just hunky dorey with you?
Outstanding.
christiantalibanformerlyknownaslittlejohn
Bush says he signed NSA wiretap order
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/
Can you read?
I haven’t lost any rights.
No G-Man has come to arrest me.
There haven’t been any unmarked vans parked outside my house.==========================
“Tell me specifically which of your constitutional rights has not been violated. Then prove it.”
Posted by: XXX | August 01, 2007 at 03:56 PM
Okay XXX. Tell me specifically how many times goats are roped and name the people that rope them.
Ok you two, here it is. The government has admitted to at LEAST tapping calls and viewing emails. All warrantlessly. So a constitutional right was abandoned.
You can argue semantics till the cows come home. Won’t change that fact.
The question I have for both of you two is just how many other rights will you so willingly give up?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 03:56 PM
I give up far fewer rights than most. At least willingly. However, I have no inkling, facts, or presumptions that I have had my rights violated. Were others violated? Possibly. Probably. Nationwide concern? NO. Tgoday, in some city, somebody’s rights are being violated by the police. does that make your rights violated? Only collectively. ANd I refuse to be part of a collective
Bush says he signed NSA wiretap order
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/
Can you read?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 04:00 PM
And this violated YOUR rights?
“He acknowledged during the address that he allowed the NSA “to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations.”"
And this affected you how?
So in having nothing to hide from the government Kansas, you willingly give up your right to privacy. Any gov’t flunky can read your mail, email, and listen in to your phone calls. That’s just hunky dorey with you?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 03:59 PM
I wouldn’t think that a Government contracting specialist working at Fort Riley would have access to such equipment to spy on me.
Or perhaps you are worried about the guy on the Bulldozer paid by the government who dozes big piles into little piles has a satellite link with some crypto equipment on his dozer.
Maybe it’s the census taker who knocks on your door and tosses a few listening devices inside your house while your not looking.
There’s nothing to see in my emails or computer that is interesting.
Of course, I’m not a conspiracy driven like some.
Are you hiding essential “Bigfoot” investigations on your computer Sol? Perhaps Sasquatch could be considered Taliban because of that long beard. You might be careful, could be a DIA agent listening to you right now as you email your daily Yeti files to abominable dot com.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/04/14/HNpatriot_1.html
LJ–
Did RepubliKhansas ask this same question the same way a while back?
Hmmm . . .
Anyway, “You’re never going to have the day come when Congress passes a law that says, ‘okay, starting now, we’re a police state, and law enforcement has every power we can think of,’” added Susan Chamberlin, Cato’s director of government affairs. “Instead, what we see is incremental upward adjustments in the power of law enforcement and the power of our military such that somebody born in the United States last week is born into a considerably less free, and arguably not more safe, United States than his parents.”
The Cato Institute has questioned the law’s impact on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, protecting citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing due process. Dempsey suggested that Congress needs to ask more questions of such legislation, including a Patriot II Act reportedly being drafted in the U.S. Department of Justice. “Whenever a new proposal comes forward, we need to ask the question, ‘how is this going to make us safer?’” he added. “It’s incredible how little this question was asked in the fall of 2001, when this telephone book-sized legislation was presented. What in here would have prevented 9/11?”
Lynch suggested Congress, instead of expanding law enforcement powers, should pump up the U.S. civil defense system, including passing out the smallpox vaccine to the general public, rethink the nation’s “cozy” relationship with Saudi Arabia and work on better coordination between police and fire departments.
“The things that we call our civil liberties are not what is wrong with our society,” Dempsey added. “Not only do they not hinder our antiterrorism programs, but actually respect for civil liberties, a concept of checks and balances — these are the things that help us develop an effective counterterrorism program.”
*****
LJ asks us to prove how a super-secret gov’t spying program has hurt us individually.
The burden of proof is on the gov’t to show that it DOESN’T violate our privacy.
There are also the inconvenient examples of people getting “disappeared” to be tortured for a few months, only to later be released without an apology:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/06/cia.rendition/index.html
CNN) — A suit was filed Tuesday in the United States on behalf of a German man who alleges he was kidnapped and tortured by U.S. agents for five months in 2004. The suit charges the man was mistakenly suspected of being an associate of the 9/11 hijackers.
Khaled Masri, a 42-year-old man of Lebanese decent, claims that he was taken on New Year’s Eve 2003 by CIA operatives from his vacation in Macedonia to a prison in Afghanistan.
While he was detained he was beaten and subjected to inhuman conditions, according to the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.
“For me the issue is I want to know why they did this to me and how it ever came about,” Masri said in German via video conference from Stuttgart, Germany. His lawyers said he was denied entry to the United States on Saturday at the international airport in Atlanta, Georgia. “And I want an official excuse,” he said, according to a translator.
*****
How many others have been treated like Khaled Masri? How many Americans?
We don’t know for sure because a nascent police-state need not tell its citizens anything . . .
Puts on Twilight Zone music for the Capn and points to Capn’s tin foil hat and lead lined underwear.
When both the ACLU and the CATO Institute oppose something, you know it’s got to be bad.
Kansas doesn’t do anything except sit and post on the WEBlog all day.
Must be great to be a social parasite living off the work of others . . .
Keep walking on by.
LJ says he refuses to be “part of a collective.”
Really.
Funny thing for a FIREFIGHTER to say, since my taxes and those of our “collective” pay his salary.
No collective = no wage for LJ.
I’m getting a strong suspicion that the real LJ is going to come back on in a few days and say that his nic was stolen.
Sorry, CapnAmerica. I don;t get paid a salary. I serve my community as a volunteer firefigher, as has been stated more than once. And the part about the collective was, well never mind. It didn;t work. I understand your point. This President, any President, in times of war, or peace, is not above the Constitution. He serves it, not the other way around. However, this incessant paranoia about “my rights have been violated” is nothing more than that. Paranoia and hype.
And, with some (most?) of the program still classified, you’d know that how?
I can;t positively know anything tht is classified and I don;t have access to, can I? However, given the out for blood shark attack mentality of certain democrats, given the I hate Bush mentality of at least many journalists, bloggers, etc., if there was any EVIDENCE of anything more, don;t you think you’d know it? Or is that part of the conspiracy?
I think it strange that people who won’t sign their names on a WEBlog have no compunction about having gov’t listen to their phone conversations or access their e-mail accounts.
We don’t know how we’re being harmed by this kind of invasive surveillence.
I think it strange that people who won’t sign their names on a WEBlog have no compunction about having gov’t listen to their phone conversations or access their e-mail accounts.
We don’t know how we’re being harmed by this kind of invasive surveillence.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 01, 2007 at 04:44 PM
I’m not paranoid about the Government like you are CapnTinFoil.
And I said before, there is a big difference release personal information on the Internet to tens of millions of people and some unknown program that the Government operates.
Of course you know this, but you keep posting it anyway, proving to the world you are a bigger paranoid fool than everyone thinks you are.
You don;t even know IF you are being harmed. You just assume so. I can equally assume I am not. With that said, note upthread. I stated that this President, and all others, should follow the Constitution. In times of war, and times of peace. While I have no desire for the government to read my email, or tap my phone, I have no reason to believe that they are. That it happened somewhere, to someone, does not make it so.
Kansas claims it is “not paranoid” about the government.
So it supports gun registration then, right?
Kansas claims it is “not paranoid” about the government.
So it supports gun registration then, right?
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 01, 2007 at 04:54 PM
When you can’t make your point, do as CapnTinfoil does, make an irrelevant argument and hope that the “chicken little” syndrome will infect the process.
Actually, I think the question is Relevant, Kanas. Why don;t you answer it?
Thanks, LJ.
I mean isn’t that the right-winger’s big worry?
That once they register their guns, the gov’t will be able to come and confiscate them?
I’m comfortable with registering my car or my gun with the gov’t.
I’m not comfortable with illegal spying in violation of the fourth amendment of the constitution.
I’m not comfortable with illegal spying in violation of the fourth amendment of the constitution.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 01, 2007 at 05:08 PM
neither an I. My argument however, was twofold
1) what specific rights of SolDevVB or Poltical Moms’s was violated and how?
2) BY some, the ILLEGAL activity, in VIOLATION of the constitution, is a daily thing. Maybe. But before yelling the sky is falling, eveidence of the fact should be required. Especially since basically the intonations are coming from those who instinctivelywant to see this adminstration come down, and thus, have an agenda, which inm y opinion, is not about my protections, but
advancing their agenda
This should clearly settle whether the Bush admin’s warrantless searches should be allowed/continued:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Let’s take a trip down LJ’s blissfully ignorant path for moment.
LJ, every prisoner in every jail in every state. None of them have violated my rights and none of them have committed a crime against me. So why aren’t they freed? I mean nothing happened to ME!!!
Get over yourself LJ. When privacy rights are overlooked, everyone is impacted. Are you too narrow minded to understand that or has the GOP told you to ignore privacy violations?
Hey LJ, since privacy is of no concern to you, why don’t you give me your IP addy and tell me what OS you are running. Do you have a web cam? I’d LOVE to see your house.
Shouldn’t be a problem right? I mean you seem to have no issues with the government tapping into your communications.
What part of the linked story do the Dems not understand about the
TERRORIST Surveillance Program.
Please note how TERRORIST is capitalized.
“In a letter to Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), McConnell wrote that the executive order following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks included “a number of . . . intelligence activities” and that a name routinely used by the administration — the Terrorist Surveillance Program — applied only to “one particular aspect of these activities, and nothing more.”"
Because they have magic decoder rings that SHOW them who the terrorists are.
They back doored an illegal program and you want to put all your faith in the title of the program.
Whhhooooeeeeee republican!!! Hey, I’ve got a real nice GOP approved bridge out in El Paso I’d like to sell you.
Let’s see, Terrorists after 911.
Let’s narrow it down shall we and this is from a Layman’s point of view:
How about building an algorithm. You should be familiar with algorithms Sol, it’s what you claim to do for a living – you know – programming-pseudo code- algorithm – the ability to program something out by means of logic in a known language.
-Muslims-Muslims who have had travel to and from countries with known Al Qaeda encampments.-Muslims who have had communications to areas where known Al Qaeda or factions are known to be.-Muslims who received or sent funds from or to known Al Qaeda locations-Muslims in the database of passports and Visas of the U.S. and other countries as suspected terrorists.-Muslims who open declared themselves as members of Al Qaeda from domestic and foreign sources.-Muslims who were caught on video,photographs or other media overseas consorting with Al Qaeda and residing in the U.S.
It’s not that hard Sol to figure out. Now the means and methods to get this information is extremely difficult, but obtainable.
People of interest you know.
And before all you bleeding heart Libs get all bent out of shape, one of the main requirements to enter Al Qaeda is that you be a Muslim – so I don’t want to hear it.
Well then you should have no problem at all giving me the sum of all male caucasian Muslims between the ages of 22 and 42 currently practicing their faith in the United States.
After all, they ARE persons of interest.
When you’re done with that one, why don’t you add up all the ones who are not openly Muslim.
And before all you bleeding heart Libs get all bent out of shape, one of the main requirements to enter Al Qaeda is that you be a Muslim – so I don’t want to hear it.
Posted by: Kansas
Since when do you know the criteria for joining Al Queda? Are you ‘with us or against us’ as our beloved emperor George asks? I thought you were a devoted Bush supporter?
How come you seem to know all there is about Al Queda – is there something you’re hiding Kansas?
Oh yeah, and once again, after back dooring the program and doing what they knew was illegal, you still blindly follow them and believe that all they are doing is listening to ‘persons of interest’.
So about that bridge, George Bush himself helped drive the last rivet. Want to talk price yet?
Bleeding heart libs is supposed to be a put-down? I guess I could call Conservative Republicans blood sucking, tight-assed, homophobic religious righties but I wouldn’t want to offend anyone.
kate,name the Al Qaeda members who are not Muslim. I’ll wait.
==============No, Sol – you failed to read down the algorithm list. If the answer is no to any of the questions, then the investigation is stopped.
If Ben Smith, caucasian, now Muhammed Khalafi has never left the U.S., never calls anyone outside of the U.S., is not associated with any terrorist group of any kind and lives in upper California in a community primarily consisting of Hispanic and Native Americans, then i doubt he would be monitored.
Of course you probably realized that, the moment you wrote down your idiotic statement.
Or maybe you didn’t.
Awww fred, I thought you claimed to be a Christian. Now what kind of statement is that?
There’s a HUGE difference between being a Christian and being part of the religious right.
“I just heard that smoking pot increases the risk of schizophrenia by 40%. We may have the answer to the rampant paranoia circulating through some of our regulars.”
The only hope I have is that the next congress if we elect enough dems, and the presidency going back to normal…is a full investigation of all the things this administration had done to undermine the freedoms we Americans expect. I can’t take any more of right wing bull. I need someone to make me proud to be American again.
Posted by: political_mom | August 01, 2007 at 03:19 PM
It makes me feel real warm and fuzzy to know that we are going to elect a new congress and prez in order to ‘investigate the Bush administration’ so we can be proud to be Americans again.
Why don’t we just give the terrorist a key to the front door while we are at it? Lets make sure while we are at it that no terrorist loses his ‘civil rights’ guaranteed by OUR constitution. I am working on my burka now. I hope I have time to finish it.
Puts on Twilight Zone music for the Capn and points to Capn’s tin foil hat and lead lined underwear.
Posted by: Kansas | August 01, 2007 at 04:10 PM
I’d rather wear both those than the poopy diapers that Republicans like to sit while they masturbate.
Got a woman yet Kansas?
oops, sit in or sit on?
Sollie,”You have nothing to hide. Please post your full name, address, phone numbers, IP address, router make and model, and you oerating system with version number.”
I may have nothing to hide, but I’m sure as hell not going to make it easy for them to invade my privacy! I treasure each and every one of our constitutional rights, and history shows that if we allow the government to abrogate even one of them, we will never get it back. I’m not about to allow some timid souls turn the land of the free and the home of the brave into a bunch of snivelling cowards who would allow the government to inspect their assholes just because of an orange alert! That’s not the country I’m a citizen of!
“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, First Inaugural Address, Mar. 4, 193332nd president of US (1882 – 1945)”
There will always be terrorists. Always have been, always will.
I am not about to set idly by and let my freedoms slowly erode for a meager feeling of ’safety’ from terrorism. My freedoms, and those espoused in the US Constitution are more important than any measure of safety that can be gained by taking any of those freedoms away.
What else are they mining, my guess would be bank info.,priveleged communications with lawyers, legal filings, credit card purchases, library records, and maybe tax records (always good to know who’s cheating). Edgar Hoover must be eating his heart out!
And, of course travel iteneraries.
1) what specific rights of SolDevVB or Poltical Moms’s was violated and how?
Posted by: littlejohn | August 01, 2007 at 05:13 PM
=====================
L J — Do these words have no meaning to you on this issue???
“No man is an island, entire of itself…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”John Donne
some of you took exception to my stance yesterday, so I will answer point by point the best i can
L J — Do these words have no meaning to you on this issue???
“No man is an island, entire of itself…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”John Donne
Posted by: Chas. | August 02, 2007 at 07:23 AM
As a volunteer firefighter and emt, I pretty much live my life by that. As to the current proposition, my question was”How were YOUR rights violated?. Obviously, they weren’t. as nobody could answer in the affirmative. They only THINK they might be.Second, the Constitution states a a gaurantee against UNREASONABLE searches, etc. Now, if an overseas call is generated from a known or suspected terrorist to my house, I would think that it would be REASONABLE to listen in on that conversation. SO far, that is the only portion of this EO that has been disclosed. SO FAR, I see no problem
——————————-
I’m not comfortable with illegal spying in violation of the fourth amendment of the constitution.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 01, 2007 at 05:08 PM
As I stated:
” that this President, and all others, should follow the Constitution.
Posted by: christiantalibanyadayadayada | August 01, 2007 at 04:50 PM
I am not about to set idly by and let my freedoms slowly erode for a meager feeling of ’safety’ from terrorism. My freedoms, and those espoused in the US Constitution are more important than any measure of safety that can be gained by taking any of those freedoms away.
Posted by: brian | August 01, 2007 at 10:13 PM
And what freedom has been taken away? One in reality, or one that you are afraid might be taken away.And truth be told, your freedoms are being taken away everyday. Or sold away. Your choice of terminology
“I treasure each and every one of our constitutional rights, and history shows that if we allow the government to abrogate even one of them, we will never get it back.”
Yeah. Sure. Now, again, which Constitutional right of yours was violated? or are you just guessing?ANd again, my position is:
that this President, and all others, should follow the Constitution.
Posted by: christiantalibanyadayadayada | August 01, 2007 at 04:50 PM
Oh yeah, and once again, after back dooring the program and doing what they knew was illegal, you still blindly follow them and believe that all they are doing is listening to ‘persons of interest’.
So about that bridge, George Bush himself helped drive the last rivet. Want to talk price yet?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 06:46 PM
Ummm. I am no follower of BUsh. Bush is a moron. I have stated this over and over on this blog.I have also stated that I was against the invasion of Iraq from the outset. I have also said that AG should go, and possibley by propsecuted, that Libby should be doing time, and on and on. WHy you choose to paint me with Blindly following push I don;lt know. Perhaps your own paranoia.—————————
Let’s take a trip down LJ’s blissfully ignorant path for moment.
“LJ, every prisoner in every jail in every state. None of them have violated my rights and none of them have committed a crime against me. So why aren’t they freed? I mean nothing happened to ME!!!”
Because they have been tried and found guilty in a court of law? And the TSP? OR BUSH? But I will give you a point for a halfway decent analogy. And perhaps even concede the point.
“Get over yourself LJ. When privacy rights are overlooked, everyone is impacted. Are you too narrow minded to understand that or has the GOP told you to ignore privacy violations?”
Partisan politics. My point exactly in this post:
) BY some, the ILLEGAL activity, in VIOLATION of the constitution, is a daily thing. Maybe. But before yelling the sky is falling, eveidence of the fact should be required. Especially since basically the intonations are coming from those who instinctivelywant to see this adminstration come down, and thus, have an agenda, which inm y opinion, is not about my protections, but
advancing their agenda
Posted by: littlejohn | August 01, 2007 at 05:13 PM
———–Hey LJ, since privacy is of no concern to you, why don’t you give me your IP addy and tell me what OS you are running. Do you have a web cam? I’d LOVE to see your house.
Shouldn’t be a problem right? I mean you seem to have no issues with the government tapping into your communications.
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 06:19 PM
Are you fng serious???? First of all, you are not the government, and thusly, have absolutely no interest, other than manevolence, in my information. Second, if the government wants that informaiton, they already have it. Third, once again, for the hard of hearing,that this President, and all others, should follow the Constitution.
Finally, out of my question:What specific rights of YOURS was violated? You get:
“you seem to have no issues with the government tapping into your communications”
Unfortunately, that is something I never said. Once again, see note on Presidents following the COnstitution
My last, however, is a question.
Your fears seems to be on what the governmenet MIGHT do because it is a SECRET EO, so should all surveillance methods should be made public so that you are unafraid?
Posted by: SolDevVB | August 01, 2007 at 06:11 PM
After finding out despite the admins. claims, America has condoned torture, and illegal detentions, why should we not fear what else the administration is doing in secret?
LJ,
Any law abiding organization in this government needs a warrant to invade a person’s or group’s privacy. That privacy being telephone calls and or emails.
I hope you understand this right and the term –illegal search and seizure. If not, the google is a wonderful tool.
This government has ADMITTED to illegal searches – wiretaps and emails – sans a warrant. They have broken the constitutional right to privacy. Do you not understand this?
Did they do it to me? Never know for sure. Did they do it to you? Never know for sure. Now, here is the cookie. DID THEY DO IT TO SOMEONE? Yes. And they have admitted so.
Why do you not understand this? Why do you not see this administration as violating the right to privacy? For claiming to not support Bush, you sure as hell support him violating the constitution. With what you type – “Once again, see note on Presidents following the Constitution” and — “Now, if an overseas call is generated from a known or suspected terrorist to my house, I would think that it would be REASONABLE to listen in on that conversation.” You STILL have to have a warrant. What part of that is hard to understand? They have invaded privacy and broken the constitutional guarantee.
Apparently, it is difficult to understand for many. Please read the following for varying opinions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy
Any you know what, I don;t support Bush. I did. Voted for him twice. Can’t tell if it was a mistake because the other parties candidate was so poor. Should he be impeached? If you got the goods, go for it. I got no problem with that. Is he an idiot? Of the highest measure. Is the the power mad machevillian wizard he is painted? Or is he the stumblebum idiot painted? Can’t be both you know. I just asked simple questions and got no answers.
Is the TSP constitutional? I guess it depends on you you ask. A judge ordered them to cease and desist. fine by me. Oh, but she was found to be a scretary/treasurer of one of the plaintiffs (ACLU). Ooops. don’t care if she was a member, but as an officer, she should have stepped aside. Hint of propriety, you know. part of the judicial code of ethics
So it boils down to – If it doesn’t happen to me, then it is OK. You sound more and more like Bush every day.
Sol-
Did you even read the freaking link?
Did I ever say “If it doesn;t happen to me, then it is OK.”
“Should he be impeached? If you got the goods, go for it. I got no problem with that. Is he an idiot? Of the highest measure. “Posted by: lj | August 02, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Yeah, that sounds like Bush.
****************************************1) what specific rights of SolDevVB or Poltical Moms’s was violated and how?
2) BY some, the ILLEGAL activity, in VIOLATION of the constitution, is a daily thing. Maybe. But before yelling the sky is falling, eveidence of the fact should be required. Especially since basically the intonations are coming from those who instinctivelywant to see this adminstration come down, and thus, have an agenda, which inm y opinion, is not about my protections, but
advancing their agenda****************************************
Posted by: littlejohn | August 01, 2007 at 05:13 PM
****************************************
1) If it doesn’t happen to me, then it does not matter. Plain as day LJ
2) Evidence. How about the administration admitting to doing so. I think a confession is the most sought after evidence a prosecutor could hope for. Even with this, you ask for evidence.
On the first, I will just have to disagree with you about what I mean.
on the second, the administration never admitted violating the constitution, they admitted to the activity. Whether or not the program was constitutional is open for debate, apparently. Again, read the link.
LJ,
I did read the link. The decision was overturned on those grounds. The ACLU et al could not prove that –it happened to them- so the judge overturned the decision without ruling on the constitutionality of the ‘action’.
“It didn’t happen to me”
And you seem to be stating from above that since “what specific rights of SolDevVB or Poltical Moms’s was violated and how?” can not be cited with examples then “It didn’t happen to me” so no harm no foul. If that is incorrect, please explain what you meant.
lj,So what if I have no standing myself to bring a case?The Gov’t admitted breaking the law, so Someone must have standing.
Because I cannot show that my rights have been violated does not mean they have not. The nature of the phone and email systems would mean that many, many people’s data would have to be ‘mined’. Was my data part of that, who knows. Could it have been? Most certainly. Can I prove it either way? Of course not. Does that make it OK? No way.
“So what if I have no standing myself to bring a case?”
Then you have no case. you have to prove that YOU were damged to sue anyone, including the government. Your point is?
“The Gov’t admitted breaking the law, so Someone must have standing.”
Once again, they did not admit to breaking the law. They admitted to the spy program, which in their view, which is another debate, was not illegal
So, I think my privacy rights have been violated by the National Libertarian Party. Can I prove it? no. Doesn’t mean they haven;t, does it?
Making a claim that your rights have been violated needs to be backed up with proof. If you want to make a claim that bush and company broke the law, that is a different claim. One that you should take to law enforcement and the legislature. Again,
you must be specific. Generic claims are worthless
Right, using LJ’s logic, if someone fires a gun at his house over and over, but doesn’t actually hit anything or hurt anybody, it’s not actually harming him in any way.
Oh, and if that gun-firing nut DID shoot LJ down? . . . Well, what do I care?
I refuse to be part of a “collective.”
And if that gun-firing madman DID shoot LJ down, I shouldn’t care because
1. I refuse to be part of a “collective” and
2. he might be a terrorist who should be shot down.
As long as it doesn’t affect me personally, let the gov’t do whatever it wants, right, my fellow inDUHvidualists?
Snarky comments aside, isn’t it odd that BushCo feels this spying program is so important.
If you’re a terrorist, do you use cell phones or e-mail? I don’t think so.
So who does? Why, that would be the rest of us . . .
People like Democrats running for political office against Republicans, people like political activists who want to stage protests against carefully scripted Bush press events, people like potential BIG donors who just need to played the right way.
The burden of proof is on the government to show that it is NOT spying on us. It’s not on us to show that it is.
Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to The Constitution.
lj,”"I treasure each and every one of our constitutional rights, and history shows that if we allow the government to abrogate even one of them, we will never get it back.”
Yeah. Sure. Now, again, which Constitutional right of yours was violated? or are you just guessing?”
I’m old enough to remember J. Edgar Hoover’s illegal wiretaps and bugs, and his use of them to blackmail anybody who disagreed with him. I also remember his agents planting falsified evidence to convict and imprison innocent people.Our Costitution was designed with checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power by any branch of government. When the executive branch claims, as it has, that it will perform searches, seizures and arrests in complete secrecy and without judicial oversight, and without probable cause or evidence, it has trashed the Constitution and taken our country several steps sown the road to the fascist dictatorship plotted by grandpa Prescott Bush!
Hi,Dear
Just found an amazing site.
Wanna get free ringtones now? Any phone and carrier supported. Download Now For Free. Tons of Music. Millions of MP3’s.
Come on in: http://www.ringtone-i.net
Best Regards,!