I've been telling you people they're spying on us! (1046 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: 0.28 on 52 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Cuberat (View user info) at 2005-12-16 11:53:48 EST
(Commentary follows news story)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051216/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_nsa;_ylt=AmVKfcN9KYISjOAf3XuNVRHB4FkB;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
NEW YORK - The National Security Agency has eavesdropped, without warrants, on as many 500 people inside the United States at any given time since 2002, The New York Times reported Friday.
That year, following the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States, the Times reported.
Before the program began, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations. Overseas, 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time.
The Times said reporters interviewed nearly a dozen current and former administration officials about the program and granted them anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.
Government officials credited the new program with uncovering several terrorist plots, including one by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting al-Qaida by planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, the report said.
But some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said. Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions.
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the group's initial reaction to the disclosure was "shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law."
Asked about the administration's contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn't comment until it sees some evidence. "They've veiled these powers in secrecy so there's no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight."
The Bush administration had briefed congressional leaders about the program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.
Aides to National Intelligence Director John Negroponte and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to comment Thursday night.
The Times said it delayed publication of the report for a year because the White House said it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. The Times said it omitted information from the story that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists.
Earlier this week, NBC News reported it had obtained a document generated by an obscure Pentagon agency that analyzes intelligence reports on suspicious domestic activity. The 400-page document included at least 20 references to U.S. citizens, plus information on anti-war meetings and protests.
The Pentagon said Wednesday that Stephen Cambone, the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, had ordered a full review of the system for handling such information to ensure that it complies with Pentagon policies and federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesn't this seem even a little bit sinister to the rest of you?
If you ask me, this is a clear violation of the rights of citizens and residents of these United States. Furthermore, if you all haven't already realized that the neo-conservative regime is trying to take away your rights and economically enslave you - this should be a huge wake up call.
Let me begin by enumerating the various rights that are being infringed upon. Liberals will already know these, but I realize that most conservatives forget about any amendments in the Bill of Rights except for the second one, so here goes:
Amendement 1:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Now honestly, this kind of thing is an interference of freedom of speech. Think about it - in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, in Third World Military Dictatorships, how did/do they keep people from speaking out against the government? Fear and Spying.
Through spying on the population, the government knows who is against what it is doing. They then take action against these individuals, eliminating any of its opposition. Furthermore, as it becomes more apparent that the government is spying on the population and taking actions against those who oppose its views/policies, it creates fear in the population, which then serves to stifle further free speech.
Additionally, this article goes on to enumerate that the government is spying on anti-war protestors. These are persons who have peaceably assembled and are petitioning the government to hear their views (and the views of those who support them) and address the grievance of an unjust and unpopular war. By the same methods I enumerated above, the government can (and does) use this to stifle these rights.
Amendment 4:
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.
This one is a no-brainer. I don't care what you say about terrorism, or the need to protect ourselves from it. Even if you truly believe the Bush Administration's charade about the terrorists hating our freedom and way of life, (which I don't for one second) why would you want to give up that way of life to stop the terrorists? Wouldn't that just be letting them win?
Furthermore, we are guaranteed the right not to have to worry about the government spying on us without probable cause and a court issued warrant, by the fourth amendment. Obviously some of our elected officials seem to think this can be overlooked. This cannot be taken away from us without amending the constitution yet again to overturn this amendment.
Benjamin Franklin once said, "Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." This sentiment couldn't be farther from the truth. This country was founded on the inalienable rights of the people. We have fought a revolutionary war, a civil war and two world wars, as well as numerous other conflicts both armed and unarmed to preserve these rights. There are Americans entombed both here and in foreign lands who died defending these rights. It is not for us to allow our government to now take them from us. It is time that we stand up let them know we are not going to allow them to usurp these or any other of our rights and freedoms.
"If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending, if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained - we must fight!" -Patrick Henry
It is in this spirit that I urge all of you to open your eyes. Take an interest in politics and current events in this country. Press for true and complete facts from our media - not just the sound bytes, government spoon-fed bullshit and entertainment "fluff" they try to pass off on us. Demand behavior from our elected and appointed officials that is upstanding, ethical, and most of all in the best interest of the citizenry that they represent!
Most of all, I urge each and every one of you to vote. Between now and next November most of us will be electing state and local officials, and next November we will be electing our Representatives in Congress. I implore all of you to think long and hard about what is best for all of us as citizens of this great nation. Look past your bank account and how much taxes you pay. Vote not with your religious beliefs, which may or may not be shared by the rest of us. Vote the American common good - preservation of the rights and liberties which this nation was founded upon.
You can do this by voting for anyone but the Republican Party. The "Grand Old Party" has proven that they believe in nothing but their own greed and self-righteousness. They have pandered to religious fanatics, xenophobes, the super-wealthy, and corporations. They do not represent the common man and woman in America, and infact want nothing more than to enslave each one of us much as the old world monarchs, colonial empires, nazis, and soviets have done before them.
It's your wake up call america. I just hope you hear it.
User Reviews
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2006-03-28 07:40:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I want a chi-town strip club post
Submitted by no_one (user info) at 2006-02-28 14:45:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
It is key to vote, and to pay attention to what's going on. passiveness and unconditional acceptance are all to rampant in this nation.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-01-10 21:11:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I hate that I missed this one.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-12-23 08:33:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
this almost reads like a daniel carver rant against black people
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-23 08:11:53 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
http://newsbusters.org/node/3298#obvious
Perhaps you'd like to take a few moments to gather yourselves and figure out which of your stories are correct and which stories are politically motivated fabrications.
COURT SAYS U.S. SPY AGENCY CAN TAP OVERSEAS MESSAGES
By DAVID BURNHAM, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES (NYT) 1051 words Published: November 7, 1982
A Federal appeals court has ruled that the National Security Agency may lawfully intercept messages between United States citizens and people overseas, even if there is no cause to believe the Americans are foreign agents, and then provide summaries of these messages to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Because the National Security Agency is among the largest and most secretive intelligence agencies and because millions of electronic messages enter and leave the United States each day, lawyers familiar with the intelligence agency consider the decision to mark a significant increase in the legal authority of the Government to keep track of its citizens.
Reverses 1979 Ruling
The Oct. 21 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit involves the Government's surveillance of a Michiganborn lawyer, Abdeen Jabara, who for many years has represented Arab-American citizens and alien residents in court. Some of his clients had been investigated by the F.B.I.
Mr. Jabara sued the F.B.I, and the National Security Agency, and in 1979 Federal District Judge Ralph M. Freeman ruled that the agency's acquisition of several of Mr. Jabara's overseas messages violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free of ''unreasonable searches and seizures.'' Last month's decision reverses that ruling.
In earlier court proceedings, the F.B.I. acknowledged that it then disseminated the information to 17 other law-enforcement or intelligence agencies and three foreign governments.
The opinion of the three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals held, ''The simple fact remains that the N.S.A. lawfully acquired Jabara's messages.''
The court ruled further that the lawyer's Fourth Amendment rights ''were not violated when summaries of his overseas telegraphic messages'' were furnished to the investigative bureau ''irrespective of whether there was reasonable cause to believe that he was a foreign agent.''
Yep, there is no liberal bias in the media.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-21 09:07:03 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval
Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"
WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."
--Google it if you want, nothing bush did was new.
As far as "spying" on political groups, if someone was in ELF (a terrorist environmental group) and they were also heavily involved in Greenpeace, should the FBI not investigat them there just because Greenpeace itself isn't violent? These groups don't exist in a vaccuum.
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2005-12-18 20:36:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either."
-Benjamin Franklin
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 16:41:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Do that.
Leave the country, stop crying wolf.
You are the retarted son of america.
I am guessing you didn't pay for your own college.
you are an idiot
---------------------
Let's have another nazi state.
The Patriot Act is just that. Think I'm crying wolf? Read it.
They can come into your house, call you a threat to national security because you made some post on the net saying how "GEORGE BUSH SHOULD BE ASSASSINTATED IMMEDIATELY, NSA, PRAISE OSAMA BIN LADEN", and detain you INDEFINITELY.
They can now LEGALLY make you disappear. If someone in power doesn't like what you say, they don't even need, according the the Bush administration, to seek the opinion of a judge. What Bush is trying to do with our country is twisted. Any intelligent person should be able to see the end of this road he's proposing to carry us down.
Indo, you obviously don't WANT people to see it.
I wouldn't doubt if you were on the Bush payroll yourself, with all the bullshit you spew on this website.
Fuck you, you fucking fascist.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-17 04:32:57 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 04:01:48 (#)
Ranking: 2
That's it. I'm moving out of this country ASAP.
You can all rot in hell.
-------------
Do that.
Leave the country, stop crying wolf.
You are the retarted son of america.
I am guessing you didn't pay for your own college.
you are an idiot
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 04:01:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
That's it. I'm moving out of this country ASAP.
You can all rot in hell.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:58:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by ScottPeterson (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:46:23 (#)
Ranking: 1
Remove Bush and you got Cheney.
-----------------
We've already GOT Cheney!
Who the hell do you think is pulling the strings in this administration???
Bush is just there on the strength of name recognition...because he's an easy commercial. We was marketable because Americans are too lazy to listen to debates and understand them long enough to see that both Kerry and Gore would have made 20 times better presidents than this nitwit.
"BUT KERRY DOESN'T HAVE A PLAN!!!"
Yea, and now I'm laughing my fucking ass off as everyday it becomes more and more evident that Bush's ONLY 'plan' is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Not to mention putting American troops in harm's way for an oil pipeline under the guise of 'fighting terrorism', no 'toppling Saddam', no 'restoring freedom and democracy to Iraq'.
He doesn't give tow fucks about our safety unless it effects his own family's bottom line and those of his oil buddies.
But Bush has the good ol' boy thing going, and he somehow appeals to the stupid and weak of mind. I just don't fucking get it.
It makes me mad just thinking about it, so I'm done here.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:50:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:29:22 (#)
Ranking: 0
I hereby crown you The King Of Cut And Paste.
Now, go forth and multiply.
------------------
And if it were up to you, Bob, we'd all join the fucking Marines and be a pack of sheep to whatever faction wanted to take over.
So fucking what if it's a cut and paste? This is one of those times I personally don't care if he got it off the back of a goddamn cereal box. These are just the first steps toward the end of US Democracy, and a state run by the wealthy elite. I don't think this is really the time to try to distract people with pettiness, but knowing where you stand politically as a result of your military brainwashing, I'm not a bit surprised.
All you morons want to say, "but it was this way WAY before any of this ever happened." Even if that's so, does that make it more right? Does that mean we should speak out less?
I'd rather take my chances with the so-called 'terrorists' than become a fucking police state where Big Brother is no longer a matter of fiction, but a reality in this country, and in the name of 'safety' and 'security' he can, under the umbrella of the law, impose himself on our personal lives when and where he chooses, for whatever reasons he chooses to create.
I'm sick of you idiots who, in some twisted course of false logic, can even TRY to righteously argue that this is a good thing.
You have forgotten what America was supposed to be all about. You've lost sight of it.
What the hell is wrong with you?
What the hell is wrong with all of us?
Submitted by ScottPeterson (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:46:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Remove Bush and you got Cheney.
That's the man who brings his own *AWAC (with *fighter escorts) everytime he goes to his cabin
in Wyoming. *In the air directly above 24/7
On the ground he brings an array of 8' to 18' 'Sat' dishes fully staffed with information
officers...along with a US troop complement to assist the secret service.
It seems to me he does not trust the combined assets and efforts of the entire ARMY/NAVY/
MARINE/AIR FORCE/COAST GUARD and BORDER PATROLS of the United States of America, even though
he's in the middle of the country AND in the middle of no where, there.
Delusions of grandeur?...or paranoid?...my $'s on: a sought after man by many .
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:21:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This is a good post.
Don't listen to the idiots who say otherwise.
I didn't used to be as political, but Bush changed all that for me. He is the most idiotic and blatantly underhanded president we've ever had. His entire administration is one big fucking clown orgy. And he needs to be dealt with...
...one way or another.
Eavesdrop on THAT, NSA!
That's right. Your president needs his fucking head blown off!
If we're too fucking fat, lazy, and apathetic to get off the couch and create some kind of movement, maybe some intrepid person could just do us all a favor.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-17 03:07:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Bush needs to be impeached.
The people should see him for the fraud he is by now, surely.
Right?
RIGHT!?!?!
Submitted by ScottPeterson (user info) at 2005-12-17 02:32:09 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
Satelite Phone
Pay Phone
Library Computer
Un-Employment Office Computer
Fed-Ex
Dead Drop
The list is too long for Criminals who want to circumvent...whatever.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2005-12-16 19:43:00 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
No Comment
Submitted by fluff (user info) at 2005-12-16 17:05:25 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
remember big tony?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 15:22:02 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 14:41:14 (#)
Ranking: 0
Indoninja -
Jose Padilla never renounced his citizenship. In order to do so under US Law, you would have to: a) affirmatively renounce your citizenship in an affidavit before a US consular officer domesticallly or abroad, b) enlist in the armed services of another nation. Jose never did either of these.
As such, he should be afforded the rights of any other US citizen, including a speedy and public trial, the right to face your accusers, etc. He shouldn't be classified as an enemy combatant. If they want to fry his ass so badly, indict him and put him on trial!
Furthermore, I am not some nut living in my parents basement. I happen to work for a world renound business firm. I refuse to divulge more for obvious reasons. However, I know from seeing it happen that people are dismissed due to their political beliefs. Of course other excuses are used rather than "you're a business hating liberal" which is why so few lawsuits are made public. Downsizing...you really didnt think that that was only done for economic reasons did you? You are rather naive if you think this isn't done...or maybe you just work at Burger King insted of the business world.
---------------------------------------
as far as Jose Padilla, they are implying he joined AlQueda, it does get grey there, becaue it isn't really the armed service of another nation, but it is a military group that is anti US.
You do realize that roughly 50% of the country is democratic and against the war? I find it hard to believe everyone in your "business world" is republican and those that aren't are afraid to speak out.
Downsizing is done for political beliefs? I am sorry I don't think your company is that renound if they downsize people because of their beliefs instead of their performance. Every company I have worked for has some sort of evaluation criteria. The only one where I had to worry about downsizing did it strictly on who was lowest on these evaluations. Are you telling me in your company and in "the business world" people can choose someone with political beliefs against theirs on a whim? There aren't "so few lawsuits" about it, there are almost none. Do you know how easy it would be to win something like this, and if not win at least make news about it?
As far as the Burger king comment, I will let it slide, what I said was just as bad. But I paid for college myself and within three years of graduating I was making over 100k, I know what the real world is like. I find it hard to believe anyone who has a real job is that worried about their political beliefs being known.
Do you think companies are in cahoots with the Govt looking at names of people who went to anti war rallies so they can fire them?
I would agree that someone who was very outspoken about his politics might be first to go in downsizing, but only if it interfered with his work and the working relationship in the office, but this goes for right wing and left wing people equally. You are out of your mind if you think we are in some kind of McCarthy red scare situation where people who don't support W are fired.
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 14:41:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Indoninja -
Jose Padilla never renounced his citizenship. In order to do so under US Law, you would have to: a) affirmatively renounce your citizenship in an affidavit before a US consular officer domesticallly or abroad, b) enlist in the armed services of another nation. Jose never did either of these.
As such, he should be afforded the rights of any other US citizen, including a speedy and public trial, the right to face your accusers, etc. He shouldn't be classified as an enemy combatant. If they want to fry his ass so badly, indict him and put him on trial!
Furthermore, I am not some nut living in my parents basement. I happen to work for a world renound business firm. I refuse to divulge more for obvious reasons. However, I know from seeing it happen that people are dismissed due to their political beliefs. Of course other excuses are used rather than "you're a business hating liberal" which is why so few lawsuits are made public. Downsizing...you really didnt think that that was only done for economic reasons did you? You are rather naive if you think this isn't done...or maybe you just work at Burger King insted of the business world.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:13:11 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:44:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
RamJetMax - I have nothing to hide really, except for the fact that I am a liberal and card carrying Democrat. (I acknowledge that the Dems aren't exactly the best choice right now either, but they are the best hope for unseating the current administration.) I am actually born and raised in the USA, but my ancestry is Polish, and knowing my people's history of being oppressed and enslaved, I happen to be rather sensitive to the signs of oppression and tyranny.
-----------------------------------------
SO what you are telling me is that neither you or anyone you know, or anyone you can find a news story about has lost their job because of this oppression.
Neither you or anyone you know, or anyone you can find a news story about has been silenced bacause of this oppression (Jose has vocal supporters and it is in the courts).
But since your great grandparents speak polish you feel comfortable comparing the US to communist Russia, and Nazi Germany?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:05:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:01:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
You have a good point about our reinstatement of civil liberties post-WWII. (You also failed to mention that many of our curtailments of civil liberties during wartime have been later found unconstitutional) However, we have also seen how difficult it is to get our government to reverse many of its policies. It is also exponentially more difficult to reverse policy the longer it has been in place. Furthermore, the less and less our populace questions the actions of our government, the less and less likely it is that these things will be overturned.
--------------------------
The petriot act expires on its own, it needs to be reapproved, so there goes your argument about difficulty of reversing policy.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:03:41 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:44:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Indoninja - you obviously don't work in any kind of financial or business role. In the business world, everyday people are "let go" because their political and/or social views are leaked or become apparent. Additionally, many people are afraid to attend political rallies or anti-war protests because they know that the government and other institutions are monitoring these events.
-------------------------
Bullshit. Name one person who was let go of because of their political views. The ACLU would be all over that in a fucking heartbeat. Name one person who lost their job for attending a peace rally?
Where do you work where you are afraid to go to a anti war rally? Do you even work, or do you live in your parents basement out of fear the govt is watching you?
As far as Jose Padilla "The U.S. administration describes him as an illegal enemy combatant, arguing that he is not entitled to protection under the Geneva Convention because, under article 4.1.2 of the Third Geneva Convention, lawful combatants of militias and volunteer corps must have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war."
If you travel to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq to train as a terrorist I think youu should be heald as an enemy combatant, and by taking part in such training you renounce your citizenship. But the courts disagreed with me, and he was to be turned over to a civilian jail, this is now being appealed. The fatc remains that due process is in place and this has notheing to do with the evesdropping you mentioned before.
Submitted by Barnymeinhoff (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:02:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
fortunately I had the full support of my family and the church and was able to ass rape the lesbian deamon out of my sister before she hit the 3rd grade.
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:01:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Teephphah - I can't comment on the guy and the forthcoming book. I used this article because it is from the AP and I feel reasonably confident that the AP is a neutral and factual new source. I wouldn't put an article from an inherently liberal source on here and try to convince people with it, for obvious reasons.
You have a good point about our reinstatement of civil liberties post-WWII. (You also failed to mention that many of our curtailments of civil liberties during wartime have been later found unconstitutional) However, we have also seen how difficult it is to get our government to reverse many of its policies. It is also exponentially more difficult to reverse policy the longer it has been in place. Furthermore, the less and less our populace questions the actions of our government, the less and less likely it is that these things will be overturned.
Submitted by randomhero83 (user info) at 2005-12-16 13:00:25 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Barnymeinhoff (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:58:13 (#)
Ranking: 2
be the example much?
______________________
Sorry to dissapoint moron.
Still have your lesbian sister locked in the closet, do you?
Submitted by Barnymeinhoff (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:58:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
be the example much?
Submitted by randomhero83 (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:47:35 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
Submitted by Barnymeinhoff (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:32:53 (#)
Ranking: 2
Anyone who isn't concerned about this is being very short sighted, I dont care who you are you will have something to hide whether you know it or not.
You're sisters a lesbian.
You smoke dope.
You have teh Aids.
You have an interest in guns and malitias (spell??)
You shop for fair trade.
You support Amnesty.
you have left wing leanings.
you have right wing leanings.
____________________________________
Why should anyone hide that fact that their sister's a lesbian? Or if they prefer one political party over another? Or that they like guns?
Smoking dope? Thats (unfortunately) illegal anyway. So fuck off.
Have AIDS? Please tell a doctor so you don't cause an epidemic, or infect a loved one.
Support Amnesty? Who gives a shit...
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:44:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Ok, here goes:
BLITZKREIG_BOB - I don't have the time or inclination to go through all of your posts, but I'll bet that you have "cut and pasted" something into one of your posts before. I placed the article in my post because my post was directly related to the article. Why don't you read the commentary I posted along with it you illiterate shit.
Indoninja - you obviously don't work in any kind of financial or business role. In the business world, everyday people are "let go" because their political and/or social views are leaked or become apparent. Additionally, many people are afraid to attend political rallies or anti-war protests because they know that the government and other institutions are monitoring these events.
Additionally, I present Jose Padilla, a US Citizen who was held without an indictment or trial for years by US authorities, and who the administration wanted to put before a military tribunal instead of a court of law. How can we let things like this go?
RamJetMax - I have nothing to hide really, except for the fact that I am a liberal and card carrying Democrat. (I acknowledge that the Dems aren't exactly the best choice right now either, but they are the best hope for unseating the current administration.) I am actually born and raised in the USA, but my ancestry is Polish, and knowing my people's history of being oppressed and enslaved, I happen to be rather sensitive to the signs of oppression and tyranny.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:40:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
You should also probably mention that the guy who wrote the article, who nobly put off publishing his piece for a year, also just-so-happens to have a book about this very topic coming out soon. $$$$$$$$$
(Or, so says the right-wing spin machine.)
You bring up the quote about people not caring because they were not communist, jew or whatever, insinuating that we need to learn from the past. Well, there are several things we can learn from the past, one of those things is that, as in the case of Japanese Internment Camps during World War II, SOMETIMES, during a war, civil liberties are restricted, BUT THEY ARE RETURNED when the conflict is over.
Submitted by randomhero83 (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:40:17 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
THE WORLD IS CHANGING. You've been warned.
Seriously though, it is. It's no longer the era of puppy and ice cream cones. With every new alliance, war, civil riot, and act of government passed, the world changes (not just in America). You now have two choices, you can either accept or reject them.
Over time, everyones definition of 'freedom' will change.
If I were to tell a man in the 1920's what America would be like 80 years from now, he'd shit himself. And not just because of the fact that I'd be from the future either...
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:39:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I smoke dope, I hope I can cope or I'll be swinging from a rope with the pope or a couple of slopes.
Submitted by Barnymeinhoff (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:32:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Anyone who isn't concerned about this is being very short sighted, I dont care who you are you will have something to hide whether you know it or not.
You're sisters a lesbian.
You smoke dope.
You have teh Aids.
You have an interest in guns and malitias (spell??)
You shop for fair trade.
You support Amnesty.
you have left wing leanings.
you have right wing leanings.
from the looks of things at the moment an E-mail conversation with someone who once met the cousin of a terrorist can get you a free private jet ride with the CIA, there will be a stop over in London before you are wisked away to a windowless cell in egypt where you will have an electric cattle prod applied to your genitals for two years in the name of national security.
the war on terror is a fucking lie, a distraction from the last desperate death throws of capatilist society. The only concern is how many people will have to die with it.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:30:59 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:25:45 (#)
Ranking: 0
Those of you who seem to think this is no big deal if you are not "planning on doing something wrong" should heed the following quote. It is attributed to Martin Niemoller, a protestant minister in Germany under the Nazis:
When the Nazis arrested the Communists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Social Democrat.
When they arrested the trade unionists,
I said nothing; afterall, I was not a trade unionist.
When they arrested the Jews, I said nothing; after all, I was not a Jew.
When they arrested me, there was no longer anyone who could protest.
As someone has already said in the reviews, when the people at the top want something done, they will expand the definitions to make it fit. We need to stop them somewhere.
------------------------------
Who has been arrested?
Who has been locked up?
Are people not protesting?
I understand your concern, but the comparison holds no water at all.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:30:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:29:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I hereby crown you The King Of Cut And Paste.
Now, go forth and multiply.
Submitted by RamJetMax (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:28:32 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
What do you have to hide?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:28:32 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Additionally, this article goes on to enumerate that the government is spying on anti-war protestors. These are persons who have peaceably assembled and are petitioning the government to hear their views (and the views of those who support them) and address the grievance of an unjust and unpopular war. By the same methods I enumerated above, the government can (and does) use this to stifle these rights.
--------------------------------
Whose rights have been stifled. Name one person who has not been allowed to speak or gather because of info the Govt has collected? Once that happens yuo can make comparisons to Nazi Germany.
Ok they have info on anti war protestors. If you were running a mosque that was illegaly raising money for terrorist groups, or even trying to raise money for legitimate charities in the middle east, where the money was funneled into terrorists, do you think you would be pro war or anti war?
Do you think terrorist sympathizers are pro or anti war?
If you are trying to monitor middle eastern terrorist and the groups that support them, they WILL run in some of the same circles as anti war groups.
I will have a problem with this once I see someone lose a job, be thrown in jail, or somehow persecuted. I think they probably went to far here, and guess what something is being done about it. If it was like communist russia as you said, do you think it would be published?
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:25:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Those of you who seem to think this is no big deal if you are not "planning on doing something wrong" should heed the following quote. It is attributed to Martin Niemoller, a protestant minister in Germany under the Nazis:
When the Nazis arrested the Communists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Social Democrat.
When they arrested the trade unionists,
I said nothing; afterall, I was not a trade unionist.
When they arrested the Jews, I said nothing; after all, I was not a Jew.
When they arrested me, there was no longer anyone who could protest.
As someone has already said in the reviews, when the people at the top want something done, they will expand the definitions to make it fit. We need to stop them somewhere.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:24:28 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I CAN PASTE FROM A MASS EMAIL THAT I GOT FROM MOVEON.ORG.
Well, at least you gave us some variety on the tripe that you pasted.
Submitted by Avals (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:22:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"This sentiment couldn't be farther from the truth." You don't ... you don't actually have any idea what this expression means, do you?
That said, I think it's pretty clear by now that America is no longer the bastion of freedom.
Also, people who say that you only need to worry about this stuff if you're a terrorist are fucking morons who have no understanding of the concepts of Democracy and essential liberties.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:22:22 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
LOOK AT ME!
I CAN PASTE A NEWS ARTICLE!
...AND VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CONSTITUTION!
I CAN CALL PEOPLE SINISTER!
I'M A BIG PILE OF FLAMING DIPSHIT!
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:20:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
1) This was very well written and sincere. I respect that, even though you seem to like to "-2 No Comment" anything that I write which is even remotely political, because I'm a Christian, Republican, Racist, Xenophobic Homophobe, you intolerant bastard.
2) You allege a "chilling effect" on freedom of speech, but don't show it. In fact, by posting this very article, you sort of blow the shit out of that argument. Obviously you aren't afraid to voice your opinion for fear that THE ADMINISTRATION will retaliate against you for it (or perhaps you are just very, very brave). I'm not doubting that the A.C.L.U. is going to FIND people who claim to have been negatively effected by these actions, but I'm guessing that their case will be a bit of a stretch.
3) Your Fourth Amendment argument is better, but I believe that what does and does not constitute "probable cause" will come into play (the real issue here is that the determination of PC is not submitted to, nor upheld by a judge), or the degree of the level of intrusion versus expectation of privacy. That degree of intrusion will then be balanced against the Government's interest in preventing whatever behavior they think they are preventing by doing this. If the Uber response to this so far is any indication, I don't think, objectively speaking, that the general perception of the level of intrusion is all that threatening.
4) The "you can do this by voting for anybody but the Republican party" was a bit much and goes a long way in destroying whatever credibility you had managed to establish with the rest of the article. You freaking extremist zealot.
Submitted by randomhero83 (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:20:15 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:05:59 (#)
Ranking: 1
The government can monitor whoever they like, let 'em get a warrant.
__________________________
Chances are, if you have NSA monitoring your phone and/or e-mail, then you probably gave them a reason to. They just don't pick people off the street for shits and giggles.
Like Coyote said, the government usually does what it wants anyway, warrant or not. Is it right? Not always (like the previous stated Nixon example). That's why it's important for you to be active in your government.
Then again, you can always move to Canada.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:18:24 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Amendement 1:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--------------------------
Have they tried to stop from expressing any of the above?
Amendment 4:
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.
---------------------------
These all occured on international calls and emails.
I don't particularly like it, but I don't think it is a violation of the Bill of Rights. The CIA can spy on US citizens when over seas, when it comes to international evesdropping I think it is allowed.
That being said, if Clinton were president during 9/11 I think we still would have had a similiar step up in monitoring of international calls. And if I read the report correctly they only mentioned 20 US citizens calls they listened to, so I am guessing most of this took place on calls from foreign nationals to overseas. It is still ugly, but to compare it to secret police in Russia or Nazi germany is just plain ignorant.
Submitted by ozzy (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:13:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Unless you're planning to do something illegal, what do you care if someone taps your phone? Did you confess during a phone call that you've been secretly been masturbating into your mum's favourite oven mits?
Personally, if sacraficing the "Civil liberties" of a tiny percentile of 260 million people means keeping your nation safer, I don't understand what all the fuss is about.
The only people who should be worried about any of this are people who have something to hide.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:11:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
The Democrats are corrupt too.
Vote Nader.
Submitted by userpete86 (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:09:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
"Cause freedom isn't free... Freedom costs a buck O' eight."
Submitted by Coyote (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:05:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
People who see this as acceptable because it's only being used to fight terrorism are forgetting that when the people at the top want to get something done, the definitions of terrorism will greatly expand. The classic example would be the Nixon administration setting wiretaps on people working for opponents' political campaigns. The government can monitor whoever they like, let 'em get a warrant. Is it really that tough?
But, as anyone connected to Steve Jackson Games could tell you, this should hardly be surprising behavior coming from the NSA.
Submitted by nate (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:02:35 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
last year yahoo received an email from the chinese government asking for access to one of its citizen's yahoo email accounts. the fuckwit at yahoo complied, and the citizen who was planning on defecting was executed and probably tortured. when it gets that bad, THEN have 0% concern for the matter, because you dont give a shit about that situation now, until then, think about it even less
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2005-12-16 12:00:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
As sucky as it is, this shit being going on since they worked out how to do it.
I resent the CCTV network more, not to mention being fingerprinted just to get into your Goddamned country. I don't want that shit on file somewhere. What if I want to commit a crime in the future? Don't I deserve half a chance to get away with it?
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-12-16 11:57:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
email has never been private.
I could care less if they monitor my overseas calls, unless of course I was a terrorist.
Are you a terrorist?