The government has abruptly ended an inquiry into the warrantless eavesdropping program because the National Security Agency refused to grant Justice Department lawyers security clearance.

"Without these clearances, we cannot investigate this matter and therefore have closed our investigation," Jarrett wrote.

"This administration thinks they can just violate any law they want, and they've created a culture of fear to try to get away with that. It's up to us to stand up to them," Hinchey said.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/10/domestic.spying.ap/index.html

This article is especially disturbing considering recent revelations about the NSA's huge database of domestic phone calls. With all of this wire-taping and data mining of American citizens how can any of us really trust this government again?

Are we really supposed to just turn our backs and trust our government so deeply, trust that these scoundrels and thieves will use all of the power and information we've let them gain wisely and in our best interest?

Big brother is watching us, and we don't even seem to give a damn, we're all to afraid or to stupid to realize that this country's own government poses a much larger threat to it's citizens then some cave-dwelling religious fanatics ever could.

"The lawsuit, brought by an Internet privacy group, does not name the government as a defendant, but the Department of Justice has sought to quash the lawsuit, saying it threatens to expose government and military secrets."

Mystech, don't you think it's too late to complain now?

I don't think the government needs telephone information for its personal interests and I'd bet any individual motivated enough could get anyone's personal information without his/her knowing. The same for the US government.

What do you suppose the government is doing with this database that is objectionable?

I don't know, they could do any number of things, and we've no way to know if there's any accountability at all, and have no reason to trust them with that information. This is on par with having federal agents going through your trash - who knows what they might find that someone might have an interest in - they could put together a profile of your habits, build a chart of your social network - sell the information off to the highest bidder.

What would have happened if we simply trusted Nixon to have men breaking into private property to steal paperwork, these days it seems that Bush could get away with such a move if he said it was all for national security in some round-about way and then sicked his rabid pundits on us.

The fact is that this is not the sort of thing our government should be doing to us, even on the off chance that this secret program is totally on the up-and-up and being used only by very responsible people despite the lack of any accountability what so ever (as is the nature of a secret program) we've still lost the freedom to this measure of privacy, and as these things tend to go we can very well expect that we shall never get that freedom back.

What would have happened if we simply trusted Nixon to have men breaking into private property to steal paperwork, these days it seems that Bush could get away with such a move if he said it was all for national security in some round-about way and then sicked his rabid pundits on us.

What's happening now is, in my view, worse than if Nixon had merely gotten away with such a move.
If the response to Nixon's crimes had been the same as the current response to Bush's, first Nixon would have denied that his actions were illegal, then he would have nominated one of the burglars he hired to be director of the CIA. Debate in congress during the confirmation hearing would have centered around the burglars opinion as to whether they should rewrite the laws to explicitly allow presidential burglary, or accept Nixon's claim that it should just be assumed legal because he said that it was. He would then, in order to ensure a smooth confirmation, grudgingly accept that laws should be quickly rewritten when the president finds them inconvenient, over his previous position that laws simply do not apply to the president.(see below)
http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8HH2RO89.html
May 10,2006 | WASHINGTON -- Gen. Michael Hayden, nominee to be director of the CIA, told at least one Democratic senator that he may be open to changing the law that governs eavesdropping on U.S. soil to allow the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance.

According to Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., Hayden indicated he could support a congressional debate on modifying the Foriegn Intelligence Surveillance Act.

President Bush and other senior officials have said they don't believe that changes in law are needed to empower the National Security Agency to eavesdrop -- without court approval -- on communications between people in the U.S. and overseas when terrorism is suspected.

then he would have nominated one of the burglars he hired to be director of the CIA.

Hey, don't worry, I'm sure the current administration still has G. Gordon Liddy strangling people with piano wires in dark alley ways in between appearances on Fox News. In political terms that guy is an OG.

Let's just see a supporter of the Bush administration even try to rationalize this.

*waits*

The government has abruptly ended an inquiry into the warrantless eavesdropping program because the National Security Agency refused to grant Justice Department lawyers security clearance.

Nice to see that the Justice Department has no real power.

Is it just me, or should the "Justice" Department be trumped over everyone? How can they investigate any crimes if they do not have any real power?

- N

Good question, Neildo. . . and if not the Justice Department, then who will police the police?

And what am I supposed to do when a subject has me so flustered I can speak only in rhetorical questions?

I don't know, they could do any number of things, and we've no way to know if there's any accountability at all, . . .
do you really believe that the operation of the government is going to be obvious?
you do realize that the government has enemies don't you?
just because you do not see accountability thats no sign it isn't there.

But in that case, why not present the evidence for accountability, and say "Look, theres nothing to be worried about"?

we have had a good discussion about this here
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=50895

do you really believe that the operation of the government is going to be obvious?

Yes, I do. Call me an idealist, but I thought we lived in a democracy of by and for the people, and this sort of thing just doesn't fly under that sort of system.

Don't give me your "Oh just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there" B.S., if it were there then the process should be transparent and the whole thing should be directly accountable back to us, the American people. Secretly spying on us is definitely a breach of our good faith, and a sign that our government is turning on us, treating us like our master rather than our servant.

You should be ashamed of yourself if these recent developments don't alarm you. You're a betrayer of the ideals of a free society, and frankly a very bad American.

read the other thread mystech and get enlightened
the US government has been spying on it's citizens for the last 30 years

read the other thread mystech and get enlightened
the US government has been spying on it's citizens for the last 30 years
I've looked through the other thread, you ramble on about military satellite technology and the like, but it doesn't really amount to anything. There's not a single valid point in there.

You come off sounding like some sort of over-weight bearded arm-chair quarterback who's impressed with his own rather limited knowledge of military history and technology.

Okay reading farther into the thread it seems clear that you're some sort of nut-job bordering on being a conspiracy theorist, but I think that for you rambling on endlessly about the stupidest ideas is more about stroking your own ego than anything else.

You are now dead to me in this thread unless you can come up with some sort of valid point that is reasoned and relevant to the topic.

it isn't relevant that the military can read your license plate at will?
it isn't relevant that the military can watch your every move from orbit?
it isn't relevant that the military isn't bound by fisa?

instead of attacking me the person please explain how any of those questions is not relevant.

No, it's not relevant at all, and questionably truthful. I can do essentially the same thing with Google Earth and it's completely meaningless.

This is not a thread about the government or private citizen’s ability to monitor public space from a remote location - everyone is free to see that my roof is free of Frisbees and I have a few loose tiles, I don't care enough about that to bother starting a thread about it.

The Military is not a law-enforcement agency, nor do they operate in any official capacity in the US except when called in to shoot black people in a disaster area (excepting the coast-guard and National guard, but they are both part of the DHS and don't have the same mission as Army/marines/airforce/Navy/etc).

To put it frankly, the Military is not in the intelligence gathering game, it's not a part of what they do, and were they to start their own domestic surveillance project, spying on individual citizens, then it would definitely be a huge scandal as well.

Now, don’t say another topic-derailing word about the subject. I’m sure you’re just bubbling over with the need to pick some sort of semantic argument and then behave as if you’re scoring points with your fantasy football team or something, but please, for everyone’s sake just keep it to yourself.

No, it's not relevant at all, and questionably truthful.

you've got to be shitting me mystech.
you actually believe that the military does not have the capabilities that i described? you bitch and moan about illegal wiretaps while our beloved military kills unsuspecting innocent people for the sake of research?
you say it is not relevant that the military isn't bound by fisa but yet are concerned because a couple of judges do not know the few people the president is watching without a court order?

if you want to beleive that what i described is questionably truthfull then go right ahead fool. it must be nice to be young and dumb

Okay reading farther into the thread it seems clear that you're some sort of nut-job bordering on being a conspiracy theorist,
qoute the passage that leads you to this conclusion mystech

here's the questionable truth mystech
http://www.levity.com/aciddreams/timeline.html
http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/YugoWarSats.html

here's the questionable truth mystech
http://www.levity.com/aciddreams/timeline.html
http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/YugoWarSats.html

Again, please stick to relevent conversation or just get the hell out of this thread. I know about LSD tests - big fucking deal, how does that matter in the slightest?

qoute the passage that leads you to this conclusion mystech
Roughly everything where you talk about spy satelites and drug testing, and oooh the creepy military, as if it means anything.

Again, please stick to relevent conversation or just get the hell out of this thread. I know about LSD tests - big fucking deal, how does that matter in the slightest?
again you must be shitting me
don't you get it? the military is not bound by fisa, the courts, the president, NOBODY.
and you ask how it's relevant?
it is very relevant my freind especially when the military can conduct experiments without approval or oversight of any kind.
and you are worried about the president spying on people?

as far as the capabilities of the military is concerned the president is a nothing, a nobody

and it just isn't the military it's the cia, you know, the intelligence gathering arm of the government?

the spy programs of the government been going way before they were made public in 1978 when fisa was enacted.
thats how it's relevant, it's been going on for years and years purpetrated by the cia and military but when the president does it it's some kind of big deal.

Roughly everything where you talk about spy satelites and drug testing, and oooh the creepy military, as if it means anything.
which doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist nut-job
i was simply stating the facts.
i wonder why you feel creepy about it?

again you must be shitting me
don't you get it? the military is not bound by fisa, the courts, the president, NOBODY.

First off, thanks for hijacking this thread, you troll, second are you fucking retarted? No no, sorry, that was too rhetorical:

YOU ARE FUCKING RETARTED

There, that's better.

The military reports to both the brass in the pentagon and is under the direct control of the President, which is why they call him the commander in cheif, imagine that. He's the executive head of the military as well as the nation.

Also, the Military does not need a fisa court because it isn't a fucking police agency, it's not supposed to operate inside the United States unless there's a war on our soil, so get off it already.

and you ask how it's relevant?
it is very relevant my freind especially when the military can conduct experiments without approval or oversight of any kind.
and you are worried about the president spying on people?

There we go, this is why I call you a conspiracy theorist nut-job. You're making wild claims which are factually incorrect and frankly just so far out there that I don't know how you can even take yourself seriously.

as far as the capabilities of the military is concerned the president is a nothing, a nobody

Aside from the fact that they're an organization wich is ultimately under the President's executive control, yeah, oops.

and it just isn't the military it's the cia, you know, the intelligence gathering arm of the government?

The CIA, yes, again, an Executive agency. At this point I don't know what sort of argument you're trying to make here.

the spy programs of the government been going way before they were made public in 1978 when fisa was enacted.
thats how it's relevant, it's been going on for years and years purpetrated by the cia and military but when the president does it it's some kind of big deal.
Right, and there was an uproar and we tried to limit power and create systems for accountability, systems which are now breaking down. I don't see how anything that you've pointed out (even the true stuff) makes the slightest bit of difference. Fisa courts are being ignored, there is no oversight, it is never right for a government agency to have this sort of power and to probe so deeply into the privacy of US citizens for any reason - we established that in the 70s, but now we're letting the President pick and choose what laws he is bound by and what new powers he wants. It's just wrong.

There we go, this is why I call you a conspiracy theorist nut-job. You're making wild claims which are factually incorrect and frankly just so far out there that I don't know how you can even take yourself seriously.

like i said it must be nice to be young and dumb
there is nothing incorrect about anything i posted in this thread mystech.
if you want to believe that there is oversight in the the military then bury your head or better yet go hide under your bed and cower.

i know this, when the military can spray chemicals into the air and not be responsible to nobody then it is relevant. if you do not want to beleive they don't i don't know what to say.

as far as the other thread goes it discusses the very thing this thread is about.

in your opinion what is it i said that is not factual?

in your opinion what is it i said that is not factual?

I think I layed that out. The picture you paint of the military as our evil unacountable overlord isn't particularly apt, and is irrelevent to this thread. Saying that they're accoutable to no-one is utterly rediculous.

I think I layed that out. The picture you paint of the military as our evil unacountable overlord isn't particularly apt, and is irrelevent to this thread. Saying that they're accoutable to no-one is utterly rediculous.
i never said the military is evil
and no you have not said what statement of mine is not factual.

mystech do you realize that the military have murdered innocent unsuspecting people in their quest for information?
they have deliberatly infected many people during their research.
they used to be accountable to the mayors of the cities that they conduct their research in but no longer. as of this date they are responsible to no one, nobody.

the relevance to this thread is this:
people gripe and complain because the president spies on people and at what harm?
on the other hand this nations military can inflict untold suffering on INNOCENT u.s. citizens, even murder and they are not accountable.
that is the relevance mystech.

the question i have about all of this is who is behind all the hoopla about g.w.b spying? they must fear something about it, i wonder what that could be?

Congradulations, you are now dead to me!

I don't know, they could do any number of things, and we've no way to know if there's any accountability at all, and have no reason to trust them with that information. This is on par with having federal agents going through your trash - who knows what they might find that someone might have an interest in - they could put together a profile of your habits, build a chart of your social network - sell the information off to the highest bidder.

I'm sure you know there are already people whose 'profession' is to dig through other people's trash and sniff for unshredded sensitive information, etc. Like I said before, the intelligence agencies being the intelligence agencies, I'm sure they can find out anything they damn please about you if some 16 year old with good computer skills can borrow your identity.

What possibly could intelligence agencies benefit from selling the ordinary American's personal information? Maybe trading information on a terrorist with interpol/british secret service (or whatever) but I don't see how selling Amerian citizens information on such a scale is even useful.

Unless the information they are recording is anymore special than what some other determined individual could get on his own (and according to the article it is no where close to being so), then fretting over this is like complaining about marijuana when there's tobacco all around.

Think about it. If someone really wanted to buy/or otherwise obtain someone's call records, they wouldn't have to go all the way through the NSA/CIA to do so. Until there's any remotely feasible explanation of what objectionable thing the bureaucratic, incompetent government could be doing with the information of millions, I think you're just arguing 'civil liberties' for 'civil liberties' sake (you don't have a secondary reason).

As for civil liberties, the government can again get anyone's information it damn pleases without the nosiest reporter ever finding out. After all, only a few years back there used to be a website I went to where I could look up address histories, phone numbers, etc of practically anyone in America FOR FREE. I looked up my own family members and found them on that database.

With this experience maybe you can see why I think your objections rest on a weak foundation. There's only an infringement of 'civil liberties' when you know one has been committed. In this case I can't fathom at all what bad thing 'the Bush administration' could possibly care to do with this.

Did I mention that some 'pundits' are already freely talking about a law being passed requiring biometrics identification for one and all? That's a similar scenario anyway; the government collects with great hassle the information of persons it could track down (if it really wished to) at the click of a button.

I'm sure you know there are already people whose 'profession' is to dig through other people's trash and sniff for unshredded sensitive information, etc.

Be that as it may, it's still actually illegal :p

I guess like a lot of sheeple, you don't seem to really get all of the implications of this sort of datamining being preformed by our government on we the people. When our own federal government and intelligence agencies are performing this sort of action without regard for adherence to law (which they've already shown that they have no respect for) it can be used for any purpose at all, especially illegitimate ones, as there's simply no oversight for this sort of thing when they're all in on it. What if Bush were want to pull a Nixon - he wouldn't even have to break into any buildings, G. Gordon Liddy is out of a job!

As far as finding potential terrorists go this information that they're collecting is relatively useless, however when it comes to finding out dirt on political enemies within your own country, people who you already know are against you, because they happen to think they live in a safe and free society and voice their opinions openly, the consequences can be devastating. And thanks to sheep like you who are completely fine with giving up such privileges of privacy we will never again have that right.

Simply put it's entirely inappropriate for the government to be keeping track of who's calling who when and for how long - just as inappropriate in fact as it is to illegally tap phones without warrants in direct violation of laws put there to protect our civil liberties, and especially wrong to do so because you're apparently taping so many phones that you don't feel a FISA court could keep up with your warrant requests, regardless of the fact that they're allowed to file them afterward. That's simply not Government's roll, it certainly violates our rites to unreasonable searches and security in our personal effects, and serves no purpose other than to march us ever closer to being a totalitarian police state.

Be that as it may, it's still actually illegal :p

if you are talking about dumpsterdiving you are mistaken because it isn't illegal.

edit
oops, my mistake.
you might live in an area where it IS illegal
http://members.aol.com/TheDumpsterLady/thedumpsterlady.htm

Be that as it may, it's still actually illegal :p

I guess like a lot of sheeple, you don't seem to really get all of the implications of this sort of datamining being preformed by our government on we the people. When our own federal government and intelligence agencies are performing this sort of action without regard for adherence to law (which they've already shown that they have no respect for) it can be used for any purpose at all, especially illegitimate ones, as there's simply no oversight for this sort of thing when they're all in on it. What if Bush were want to pull a Nixon - he wouldn't even have to break into any buildings, G. Gordon Liddy is out of a job!

As far as finding potential terrorists go this information that they're collecting is relatively useless, however when it comes to finding out dirt on political enemies within your own country, people who you already know are against you, because they happen to think they live in a safe and free society and voice their opinions openly, the consequences can be devastating. And thanks to sheep like you who are completely fine with giving up such privileges of privacy we will never again have that right.

Simply put it's entirely inappropriate for the government to be keeping track of who's calling who when and for how long - just as inappropriate in fact as it is to illegally tap phones without warrants in direct violation of laws put there to protect our civil liberties, and especially wrong to do so because you're apparently taping so many phones that you don't feel a FISA court could keep up with your warrant requests, regardless of the fact that they're allowed to file them afterward. That's simply not Government's roll, it certainly violates our rites to unreasonable searches and security in our personal effects, and serves no purpose other than to march us ever closer to being a totalitarian police state.

Apart from calling me a 'sheep', I find nothing new in your post.

You still just don't get it.

ANY PERSON DETERMINED ENOUGH CAN find out anything he/she wants to on a friend, a 'political enemy', a school teacher, or Bobo the clown. There is nothing special about the government accessing information that can in any case be obtained through secret methods.

Say you were a terrorist and the CIA suspects this. I'm sure if they wanted to find out who you were talking to, they wouldn't HAVE to go through your phone company. The fact that they were going through your phone company to access your records is good reason to believe they aren't doing anything 'objectionable' with your information. If 'political enemies' is really what they're after, I'm sure they wouldn't need to have culled millions of records.

Seriously.

How stupid would it be if the government, wanting to do something 'objectionable' using of all things records of phone numbers called, formally went through the phone companies? I would understand if they were secretly harvesting DNA from newborns or something that could even remotely be said to be 'wrong'. But phone numbers!?

In that case you might as well say phone books have the potential to undermine civil liberties because the information in them could fall into the wrong hands - the point being any person who wants to badly enough can obtain a list of phone records.

Besides which, with the job investigative reporters are doing, there isn't much dirt left to uncover on anyone. This may be unethical/undemocratic in principle and I accept that, but to concoct reasons why the government could be using information irresponsibly. I'm no fan of the federal government, but I won't use that as a crutch to criticize every single action taken by it without a solid reason.

that is what i don't understand about mystech. he harps on the president doing something illegal but relativly harmless but when i point out the atrocities of the military i'm retarded. judging by his posts he wasn't even aware the military has been doing what i pointed out to him.

that is what i don't understand about mystech. he harps on the president doing something illegal but relativly harmless but when i point out the atrocities of the military i'm retarded. judging by his posts he wasn't even aware the military has been doing what i pointed out to him.

The military has done(and probably is doing) a lot of bad stuff. However, they still have to obey the law. They may do stuff secretly or find loopholes, but ultimately, if proof emerged that someone in the military were, for example, using their sattelites to gather and store information on U.S. citizens for recruitment purposes, they would face criminal charges.
At least thats how its supposed to work.

Whats disturbing about whats happening now is that the Bush administration has been shown to have ordered illegal activity, and they are insisting that the laws don't apply to them. The fact that their illegal activity hasn't been shown to have hurt anyone is totally irrelevant.

Consider an analogy: You come home to find that someone has picked your lock and is in your house watching tv. When confronted he says that there have been a lot of robberies in this part of town and he is randomly entering and staying in houses in the hopes of catching robbers in the act. Would you thank thank him for his services in light of the fact that he hasn't hurt anything?

since when does the military obey the law?
scrounge up one, just one, name of a military man that paid for the crimes at edgewood arsenal.
your statement about the satellites does not apply because sattelites do not store information they gather and transmit it only

what is so illegal about watching people that has ties to known terrorists?
bush has repeated over and over and over that is what he is doing.

now let me ask you a question, do you beleive that there are spies from foreign governments in our government?
do you see now why bushs plan has merit?

since when does the military obey the law?
scrounge up one, just one, name of a military man that paid for the crimes at edgewood arsenal.

From what I've read of the edgewood thing the army is denying that any civilians were exposed to anything, and there's no proof that they were. If proof emerged, and the people involved are still around its likely they would be punished, and at the very least the people who were exposed would sue the army for a fortune.

your statement about the satellites does not apply because sattelites do not store information they gather and transmit it only
How does this affect my example in any way? So if someone in the military were found to have used a satellite to gather information on americans, and then wrote the information down, they would face legal consequences.


what is so illegal about watching people that has ties to known terrorists?
bush has repeated over and over and over that is what he is doing.
Look at my analogy. So the guy who broke into your house says over and over that he was in the house to watch for robbers. Would you accept this?

now let me ask you a question, do you beleive that there are spies from foreign governments in our government?
do you see now why bushs plan has merit?
What does this have to do with anything?

are you sure no civilians were affected? (scroll down)
http://www.americandaily.com/article/10664

How does this affect my example in any way? So if someone in the military were found to have used a satellite to gather information on americans, and then wrote the information down, they would face legal consequences.

you sure? i don't think the government or the military paid for their crimes at edgewood or the myraid of other places they used human guinea pigs.