First they came for the ... (903 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: 0.47 on 43 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Judoka (View user info) at 2006-05-15 16:48:17 EDT
It was only a matter of time; I just didn't expect it to happen this quickly. The "it" I am talking about the unintended consequences of tracking phone calls. It has been reported that the current administration is using the NSA to track down leaks.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html
For those of you who cannot bear to read another example of the Bush administration trampling on our civil rights, the thrust of the article is this. The government is monitoring journalist's cell phones in an effort to prevent leaking.
At this point I have become so numb it's hard for me to work up the requisite outrage that this deserves. It's true that I have been critical of the Bush administration for a long time now. I have always thought of the people in power as venal and corrupt. Not stupid though, they know exactly what they are doing. But this has taken it to the next level. I'm scared at this point. I'm scared because we seem to be moving slowly but surely towards a police state.
User Reviews
Submitted by Wildman (user info) at 2007-03-21 18:31:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I think joo is well done.
<sizzle....pop....sizzle>
Submitted by Tr4ppedunderice (user info) at 2006-05-16 15:42:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
hahaha bubba is like 30 years older than you
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-16 15:38:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Bubba '72
Submitted by cuberat (user info) at 2006-05-16 14:09:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
What do you mean "moving toward a police state" comrade?! Are we not already secure within the borders of the Soviet Un....whoops I mean...Go USA!
Smashing- Yea Capitalism!
Submitted by gank (user info) at 2006-05-16 11:54:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"ABC News does not know how the government determined who we are calling, or whether our phone records were provided to the government as part of the recently-disclosed NSA collection of domestic phone calls."
-----------
Let me translate that for you, "We at ABC News, don't know shit, but we are willing to speculate our asses off."
Nobody fucking cares that you called your grandma in Orlando, unless you called her from Tehran on Monday and Beirut on Wednesday, or unless she is a government official with top-secret security clearance and you are a NY Times reporter.
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-05-16 06:25:28 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 21:37:41 (#)
Ranking: 0
Bubba my boy, I'm probably older than you.
___________________________________________________
Not a chance. When were you born?
Submitted by Beano312003 (user info) at 2006-05-16 06:08:58 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Isn't the sad thing about this the fact that sophisticated criminal networks or terrorist cells will have high tech, stolen or cloned phone equipment or alternative methods of communicating with one another and that only ORDINARY AMERICANS will actually have their record probed and their privacy invaded?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-05-16 04:40:12 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
That better not be the start of the 'and there was no-one left to speak out for me' thing.
Bush is not hitler. And you do not live in a police state. And you're not likely to for a long time.
Isn't it bad enough what they're doing without having to blow it out of proportion all the time.
Submitted by OneCheapGeek (user info) at 2006-05-15 23:17:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
My biggest problem is that they are making a database of my information when they have proven thousands of times that they can't secure data or networks to save ANYONE'S lives.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 21:37:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Bubba my boy, I'm probably older than you.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2006-05-15 21:36:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-05-15 20:25:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Judoka, your comments about 'old men' are gonna force me to slide out of my wheelchair,
hobble to your home town, and kick your young ass. Fuckin' punk. :-D
Submitted by Bubba2341 (user info) at 2006-05-15 20:17:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
The quote is circa 1960.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:02:20 (#)
Ranking: 0
Conor I have no idea what you are talking about. That quote is probably older than both of us-combined. Read some history kid.
______________________________________________
The quote is circa 1960.
http://www.serendipity.li/cda/niemoll.html
Submitted by DavyJones (user info) at 2006-05-15 19:52:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
I think Bush has fucked up early and often, as much as anyone who's ever been in office - but you are blowing things out of proportion. Oh Emm Gee, we're gonna become a police state!!
Stuff it.
Submitted by cleanfornow (user info) at 2006-05-15 19:43:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Don't bother
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2006-05-15 19:11:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
As I said before on two other posts: the collection of phone records is totally legal. The police department of any municipality can get your phone records WITHOUT A WARRANT. Private companies sell the cell phone records of private individuals to others without so much as a background check. In other words, the government is using completely legal means to track illegal activity (the leaking of classified information). They are not wiretapping or recording phone calls, which requires a warrant. You have a problem with this? I'll give you a chance to explain yourself before I unload any -2s.
Submitted by Jack_McCallum (user info) at 2006-05-15 19:11:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"The government is monitoring journalist's cell phones..."
--
Oh for fuck sake.
Yeah, the Government, and 80,000 bored teenagers across the USA rigging up scanners for kicks...
Funny how private conversations that get leaked to the press are NEWS, but reporters conversations are somehow above all that.
Submitted by greEn_uGly (user info) at 2006-05-15 18:08:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
the big deal is the government will be able to find out who is with them and who is against them. and may use that information to quell all those who oppose them. soon people will be afraid to speak out against the government and that's when the shit really starts to turn bad.before you people throw up the 'commie conspiracy theory' defense like you inevitably will, consider this even if you trust the current administration, what about future ones? once precedent has been set, it will be hard to overturn.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 18:04:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:24:50 (#)
Ranking: -1
It's not your government that is extreme, it's you.
You people are so polarised, it's not even funny.
Just once, I'd like to see an issue being approach without an end-of-the-world scenario.
-------------------------------
The internet isn't as fubn without outrageous claims.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 18:02:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:27:39 (#)
Ranking: 0
indoninja please just say that this is wrong and move on. We're rational human beings we don't need a bunch of old men and one old lady to tell us that this is wrong.
-----------------
I actually don't think it is wrong. That is why I want it to go to the supreme court, cause even if they don't agree with me (I think they will) at least then we can put it to bed and I can stop hearing armchair consitiutional lawyers talk about it. I can stop being an armchair constitutional lawyer.
Submitted by BadAssJulie (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:59:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:51:43 (#)
Ranking: 2
You must be afraid that they're going to catch you making a drug deal cause that's the only reason in the world anyone would not support this administration in everything they do to track down terrorists.
---------
Ugh I'm so sick of the word terrorist. Anyway, I don't really see what the big deal is if you've got nothing to hide. Even if you're freaked out about it because you're doing something illegal, are you really going to discuss your illegal activities over the phone once you find out they're monitoring your calls? Am I saying it's right? No but I don't really care either.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:34:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:56:36 (#)
Ranking: -2
I am sorry I guess I missed the part where they were locking up reporters?
Oh wait they weren't.
Somone was warned (by an unamed and hence unreliable source) that their phone calls may have been tracked. So fucking what? They might find where the leak comes from, and then what? It will go to court and you will have a clear ruling on weather it is constitutional?
===
*gasp*
How dare you being laid back about this?!?! Where is your histrionic reaction!?!?! How come are you not adamantly defending this because we are fighting TERROR or are you not comparing our government to Nazis or the KGB? WHERE IS YOUR SENSE OF FEAR-MONGERING BULLSHIT?!?!
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:33:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
At this point you're just attempting to insult me, and the fact that I'm 18 doesn't make me stupid. I know a hell of a lot for someone my age, and it's not all from the classroom either.
All I'm saying is that I wouldn't be that surprised if a song you recently may have heard brought to mind a quote you had once learned and influenced your thought process in the naming of this post. Not to mention, the quote starts with "First they came for the Jews," which was not the name of title of this post. The song also leaves that part out, starting with "Communists" as you did.
Disregarding all of that, my point is this: you really didn't even have to respond to my review, it's not like I -2'd you or anything. Calm down.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:28:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
For those of you who cannot bear to read another example of the Bush administration trampling on our civil rights, the thrust of the article is this. The government is monitoring journalist's cell phones in an effort to prevent leaking.
-------------
So, it's not like they're doing anything about it - Scooter Libby's still free.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:27:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
indoninja please just say that this is wrong and move on. We're rational human beings we don't need a bunch of old men and one old lady to tell us that this is wrong.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:24:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
I'm scared at this point. I'm scared because we seem to be moving slowly but surely towards a police state. """
If it's so bad, why did you guys gleefully re-elected this administration and in almost half the cases, didn't even bother to vote?
This is blown way out of proportion.
I read the comments and it's either: "SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT! TRAITORS!" or "OMG! WE LIVE IN A POLICE STATE!"
It's not your government that is extreme, it's you.
You people are so polarised, it's not even funny.
Just once, I'd like to see an issue being approach without an end-of-the-world scenario.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:24:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Wow Conor your a high schooler? I never would have guessed. Who would have thought to conflate pop music lyrics and world history? God even when I take a day off high schoolers haunt me.
Submitted by Mrdurden24 (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:23:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
With everything this president has done, What does it say about the american people that we are not rioting in the streets but instead just shrugging our shoulders in compliance.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:21:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:11:47 (#)
Ranking: 0
Thank you wookie, I couldn't bring myself to refute that, I was afraid my head might cave in. Heretofore I had respected indoninjas opinion. He and I approach politics from different places, but I had respected his intellect. Now he relegates himself to just another Bush apologist.
-------------------------
Bush apologist?
Where is my pro-bush post? Where have I ever said I like him? Anyone who thinks that keeping track of phone numbers called is a bad idea and illegal should be happy about this. The only reason they would be looking for the leak is because they want to arrest someone fro spilling state secrets. Then it will go to court, if it is decided that it is illegal they won't get into trouble.
They aren't taking reporters away. They aren't locking anyone up and I think this http://www.ubersite.com/m/87963#1976591 is completely inappropriate.
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:17:21 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:02:20 (#)
Ranking: 0
Conor I have no idea what you are talking about. That quote is probably older than both of us-combined. Read some history kid.
========================
I know it's from the Holocaust time period, I can probably recite it without looking it up, and I just got a 4 on the AP US History test.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:16:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:06:44 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:56:36 (#)
Ranking: -2
I am sorry I guess I missed the part where they were locking up reporters?
Oh wait they weren't.
Somone was warned (by an unamed and hence unreliable source) that their phone calls may have been tracked. So fucking what? They might find where the leak comes from, and then what? It will go to court and you will have a clear ruling on weather it is constitutional?
========================================================
They cite a senior federal law enforcement officer as their source in a face-to-face meeting. Since when is a source unreliable simply by virtue of being unnamed? In fact, almost all reputable journalists have a host of extremely reliable resources that by necessity have to go unnamed.
-------------------------------
Reporters find stories with the help of unamed sources. I have a hard time having a lot of confidence in a story that rests 100% on unamed sources.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:11:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Thank you wookie, I couldn't bring myself to refute that, I was afraid my head might cave in. Heretofore I had respected indoninjas opinion. He and I approach politics from different places, but I had respected his intellect. Now he relegates himself to just another Bush apologist.
Submitted by skrapmetal (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:10:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:51:43 (#)
Ranking: 2
You must be afraid that they're going to catch you making a drug deal cause that's the only reason in the world anyone would not support this administration in everything they do to track down terrorists.
----------------
I'm Republican and all for quashing terrorism and keeping America for those who have earned the privelege of being American. But even I don't believe that the surveiled information not deemed to be relevent to terrorism or leaks will be discarded. Digital storage is just too small and cheap. You know your iPod with 4000 songs on it? How many 1 minute telephone calls do you suppose it'd hold?
So have fun with 'em. In every telephone call you make, every text message and email you send, put this sentence: "I am now going to use the word 'bomb', the word 'guns', the word 'destroy', the word 'embassy', the word 'Capital', the word 'God', the word 'Satan', the word 'Christian', the word 'Islam', the word 'Allah', the word 'retribution', the word 'prisoners', the word 'soldiers' the word 'praise', and the word 'infidels' for no other reason than piqueing the interest of anyone who may have the unfortunate task of sitting at a desk for hours on end, listening (or reading, as the case may be) to transmissions containing these type od words."
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:09:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
This is kind of an odd theme with Conor. He reads a post and then leaps to some really bizarre conclusion about its impetus. Case in point: http://www.ubersite.com/m/87722#1970085
The really confusing thing about it when he did this to me was that I even said in the post where I got the idea.
Not exactly a super sleuth it would seem.
I am really starting to think that this country deserves what is happening to it. Well maybe not all of us, but clearly there is a trend to swallow the shit the government is slinging. Maybe they were more successful that I realized when they pulled that stunt of painting anyone who dares to question anything they do as unpatriotic.
yer either with us or agan us
To think of everything that my grandfather went through in WWII to protect the freedoms that the current generation is willing to just piss away is astounding.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:08:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
His latest extralegal initiative furnishes more evidence that George W. Bush regards himself as an elected dictator, free to do anything he wants in the name of national security. Never mind what the U.S. Supreme Court said two years ago: "A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens." ... Even if you don't care about the privacy of your phone records, you might care that we have a president who feels no obligation to obey the law. You might care that if the government was secretly doing this, it may be doing other things that are even more worrisome. And you might care that one day, we may find that the free society we claim to cherish has become a police state.
Chapman is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune is really far to the right politically. I can't wait until he is tarred with the liberal media brush.
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:06:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:56:36 (#)
Ranking: -2
I am sorry I guess I missed the part where they were locking up reporters?
Oh wait they weren't.
Somone was warned (by an unamed and hence unreliable source) that their phone calls may have been tracked. So fucking what? They might find where the leak comes from, and then what? It will go to court and you will have a clear ruling on weather it is constitutional?
========================================================
They cite a senior federal law enforcement officer as their source in a face-to-face meeting. Since when is a source unreliable simply by virtue of being unnamed? In fact, almost all reputable journalists have a host of extremely reliable resources that by necessity have to go unnamed.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 17:02:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Conor I have no idea what you are talking about. That quote is probably older than both of us-combined. Read some history kid.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:56:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I am sorry I guess I missed the part where they were locking up reporters?
Oh wait they weren't.
Somone was warned (by an unamed and hence unreliable source) that their phone calls may have been tracked. So fucking what? They might find where the leak comes from, and then what? It will go to court and you will have a clear ruling on weather it is constitutional?
Submitted by ubetidid (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:55:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
you know, they're monitoring ubersite too.
(they are NOT happy)
Submitted by ConorJS (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:55:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Listening to the new Antiflag album a little too much are we?
(p.s. I know the quote is older than that and from a different source, but I think that "Emigre" may have inspired the title of this post.)
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:51:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
You must be afraid that they're going to catch you making a drug deal cause that's the only reason in the world anyone would not support this administration in everything they do to track down terrorists.
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:50:10 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-05-15 16:49:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
this might go to the supreme court under the whole "freedom of the press" bit...