Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

concerning nsa's ongoing domestic surveillance


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 21 April 2012 - 10:07 PM

is the djinni out of the bottle here?
will there ever be an attempt to reverse the outrageous destruction of the 4th amendment?
http://www.alternet....of_your_emails/

#2 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,627 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 01:51 PM

It's a case of "our guy can do no wrong"

Most people here don't really seem to give a shit what the Obama administration does.

I'm sure you've noticed the silence from those who consistently criticized the Bush administration.

It might actually be better for us in the long run if Romney wins this election, if only to get the masses to pull their heads out of the sand and realize wtf is going down on their watch.

#3 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 22 April 2012 - 02:55 PM

:lol:

yeah Mitt Romney would be so much better.

At least you're being half-honest telling us who you want to win. Why don't you follow through and tell us the real reason why.

#4 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 04:28 PM

c'mon now PF the suggestion is that romney would be such a horses ass he would rally those who voted for obama thinking he would change things like this.
obama has increased surveillance

#5 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,160 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 05:16 PM

Things are so far gone and their are so many weapons to turn inward it seems a sweeping change is what is needed.

#6 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 05:38 PM

i think i agree TEO
this is a symptom not the cause

#7 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 05:39 PM

so is hyperpartisanship as illustrated

#8 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:21 PM

the only obvious hyper-partisan in this thread is Joke.

He's still sulking about Bush's low popularity, and in saying "I'm sure you've noticed the silence from those who consistently criticized the Bush administration" he unconsciously admits that he didn't criticize the Bush administration nearly as much as he does the Obama administration (if he even criticized Bush at all), because he criticizes the Obama administration pretty consistently.

He won't admit that he's Republican, but it's pretty clear that he sympathizes with them.

#9 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,160 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:31 PM

i think i agree TEO this is a symptom not the cause


If the symptoms are indicative of the severity of the disease, why do we think more of the same or similar is the cure?

#10 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,627 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:43 PM

Things are so far gone and their are so many weapons to turn inward it seems a sweeping change is what is needed.


Yup, voting for either party is voting for more of the same.

The way it is now, at any given time half the country doesn't give a shit what happens as long as it's their party calling the shots.

#11 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 22 April 2012 - 09:58 PM

you keep saying that, but you're a liar plain and simple.

Do you think the minimum wage would have been raised if John McCain or Ron Paul won last election? I KNOW it wouldn't have.

Do you think Lily Ledbetter would have been passed? Do you think we'd have Obamacare?

Do you think we'd have Sonia Sotomayor on the supreme court? I doubt it.

I'm pretty sure we'd be at war with Iran right now if McCain had won.

If Ron Paul had won, we'd probably be battling terrorists right here on our own soil.

So, before you go around accusing everyone else of being a liar, maybe you ought to quit spamming the board with your own repertoire of lies.

#12 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 12:47 AM

i know yer in love and all but what do you think of the topic at hand...that is increased gov't surveillance
did you read the article or is this just another place for you to run your party line?

#13 freerange

freerange
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 01:25 AM

lol nevermind about that Peace Frog
there's nothing i can do about the topic at hand after i post
all done with this now

#14 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,627 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 12:12 PM

An excerpt from the article below article.






Operation Shamrock and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act


Bamford and others have described in detail how the Administration's wiretap program caught the attention of Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith in 2004 when the obvious became apparent -- that the Bush warrantless surveillance program was illegal and unconstitutional. Goldsmith prepared a memo outlining his concerns as Deputy AG Jim Comey, the second highest law enforcement officer in the country, agreed that the program could no longer be certified by the Department of Justice. Sharing their conclusion with Attorney General John Ashcroft, it was decided to allow the program to terminate the next day.

What happened next was more dramatic than any West Wing script ever anticipated, when Ashcroft suddenly doubled over in pain. Rushed to George Washington Hospital, Ashcroft had major surgery for gallstone pancreatitis which left the AG in a seriously debilitated condition.
From there the story becomes more bizarre. Bamford describes how Comey, now acting in Ashcroft's absence, informed the White House that the Department would not re-authorize NSA's surveillance program. Faced with the potential of a shutdown at NSA as the deadline approached or the potential of criminal charges and seeing Comey as a 'loose cannon,' White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and WH Counsel Alberto Gonzales made a frantic bee-line to the hospital.
As Comey headed home that evening, he received an urgent call from Mrs. Ashcroft that two visitors were on their way. Comey immediately called FBI Director Robert Mueller to meet him at the hospital and with red lights flashing and sirens wailing, Comey's FBI driver put the peddle to the metal. Running up the stairs and arriving in Ashcroft's room just ahead of the White House aides, Mueller ordered Comey's FBI security detail to not allow him to be removed from Ashcroft's room.
Upon Gonzales and Card's arrival, Ashcroft, still in a weakened condition, refused to sign the necessary document to continue the program.
According to Bamford, soon after, Comey received an irate call from Card demanding that he come immediately to the White House. Comey replied that he would only meet with Card if a witness was present. Accompanied by Solicitor General Ted Olson, Comey arrived at the White House at almost midnight and reiterated the Department's position that the NSA program was outside the law as he continued to refuse to authorize its existence.

The next day the President of the United States used his executive authority to reauthorize the warrantless surveillance program over his Attorney General's objections. As a result, Attorney General Ashcroft, both Comey and Goldsmith along with a handful of other Department of Justice attorneys and FBI Director Mueller all prepared their letters of resignation. After a one on one meeting with both Comey and Mueller, realizing the potential for an en masse resignation of the country's top law enforcement officials, Bush agreed to scrap the most egregious elements of NSA's illegal 'data mining.'
Beginning with adoption of the Patriot Act in 2001 (98-1) the floodgates opened for covert government surveillance not only for the NSA, FBI, CIA and Homeland Security but for hundreds of municipal and state governments, a green light to infiltrate and spy on millions of American citizens. All it took was a frightened bi-partisan majority to open the legislative doors to allow a steady erosion of Fourth Amendment protections against 'unreasonable search and seizure' and 'probable cause' requirements while fragmenting FISA's original intent of limited surveillance and required judicial and Congressional oversight.
For all of its good intentions in 1978, FISA has since been thrust into dangerous, uncharted territory morphing into a vehicle of unintended consequences, subject to a series of amendments in 2008 that further eviscerated the Fourth Amendment.
As already well-documented by Glenn Greenwald and the ACLU, the Obama administration has accelerated the erosion of due process and Constitutional protections beyond the Bush era even as candidate Obama promised that "with the firm intention -- once I'm in as president -- to have my attorney general conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future."


http://www.huffingto..._b_1406643.html

#15 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,745 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 02:25 PM

is the djinni out of the bottle here? will there ever be an attempt to reverse the outrageous destruction of the 4th amendment? http://www.alternet....of_your_emails/


No, the slide away from our original principles will continue until the entire system is replaced with authoritarian powers free of all liberty. Just as many would apparently like to see.

#16 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,549 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:08 PM

Posted Image

#17 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:27 PM

Actually, I've never really expected my e-mails to be private, so this isn't a huge let-down.

Thing is, if my e-mails are kept private, that means everyone's e-mail is kept private.

Do I want terrorist e-mail to be kept private? Do I want corrupt government official's e-mail to be kept private? Do I want corporate e-mail which contains reference to illegal activity to be kept private? No, not really.

So, basically, I have more to gain by letting e-mail remain as public information than I do having it made private by the government. After all, I'm sure even the conservatives will agree that it isn't the government's job to regulate what an internet provider does with its customers' e-mail.

Not only that, if you really have something to hide than you can just use encryption or something.

And finally, I've always known that Obama was too conservative. The problem is that my choices were limited to bad, worse, and loony toons. I chose bad. Since it's all relative anyway, bad was good enough.

#18 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,160 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 07:37 PM

Look at the information the "Google car" was able to "accidently" harvest.

I think I have pretty much given up on genuine expectations of privacy although at times I act as those I still have some.