FBI Raids Home of Suspected NSA Leaker 608
During the hours that Congress was debating codifying the Bush administration's wiretapping by revising the FISA law, the Department of Justice was raiding the home of former Justice official Thomas M. Tamm to identify the person who first brought the illicit program to light: "The agents seized Tamm's desktop computer, two of his children's laptops and a cache of personal files... the raid was related to a Justice criminal probe into who leaked details of the warrantless eavesdropping program to the news media... James X. Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology said the raid was 'amazing' and shows the administration's misplaced priorities: using FBI agents to track down leakers instead of processing intel warrants to close the [purported surveillance] gaps."
What's the solution? Depends ... (Score:2, Funny)
"FBI Raids Home of Suspected NSA Leaker ".
Oops - NSA, not NASA.
(Will NASA diaper jokes ever go out of style? That too depends ... :-)
Re:What's the solution? Depends ... (Score:4, Funny)
Your government, working to scare the shit out of you since 9/11.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Kittens. And Republicans. But mostly kittens. mostly.
Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:3, Informative)
Fuckers. Its not enough for them to lose the election. We should be seeing jail time for this sort of overreaching corruption.
Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Makes me wonder why someone who leaks info in favor of Bush gets a pardon...
Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:5, Insightful)
It's actually worse than that. Ideally, the people should have a kind of public virtue, and virtue, as Aristotle teaches, lies in moderation. Democracy doesn't work when the people hate the government, nor does it work when they are infatuated with it. Accountability is the midpoint between paranoia and automatic trust. The government shouldn't do everything, but what it does, it should do robustly: if you stare the beast, you don't end up with good government, you end up with a ravenous beast.
People ought to be involved in government, but not to the point where it becomes an instrument of their irrational passions. And human nature being inconsistent as it is, it is quite possible to be apathetic, angry, fearful and infatuated all at the same it.
Re: (Score:3)
It's just like religious control in the Dark Ages, except swap out the Bible with the truth, and the church with a combination of g
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Let me correct that last sentence for you: (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters (Score:5, Insightful)
If you think /. is far left that probably means you're so far out in right field you can't see the game anymore. Let go of the partisan outlook a little bit, eh?
Slashdot has a heavy libertarian bias, particularly on social issues, and isn't particularly well represented by either mainstream party. The wannabe-fascist trend in the Republican party lately has made them particularly reviled here, but there's little love for the Democrats, especially their ties to the entertainment industry. If we have a Democrat president, expect /. bitching about the RIAA and MPAA to increase even beyond its already prodigious levels. On the other hand, the fact that Hillary is actually a viable presidential candidate is probably Bush's fault, too. ;)
Besides, honestly now. Slashdot? Not complaining about politics? Madness!
Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters (Score:4, Funny)
What I find so sadly amusing about hardcore righties like him (he's a talk radio radical, loves Savage, Rush, Hannity, etc) is that they can ignore the evidence of Bush lying us into war, abusing our civil rights, exposing CIA agents, fucking the economy, ass-fucking the environment, tea-bagging the military, and tubgirling the entire Iraq war, but it's the "wetback crisis" that finally has them upset. But oh, they blame this on those goddamn liberals who think that the rights of "furriners" are more important than honest "murricans", along with venom for Bush "going along with them," but they never stop to ask "Who the fuck is employing all these illegals?" They may be illegal but they ain't dumb, they wouldn't be coming here if there wasn't any work! Go after the people employing them and you'll see the flow stop. But who makes the money off of that? Republican-owned businesses. Aaaaaaah, now we see the truth. Obviously it's a fucking liberal conspiracy to get these wetbacks in here working for Republicans. *Jolly twirls finger beside head*
I do wish the dems were as effective political creatures as the talk radio radicals seem to think they are. Shit, with the amount of opposition they're allegedly putting up, Bush should have been impeached already. Back in reality-land, all I see them doing is asking Bush if he'd like a rimjob to go with all that ass-kissing they're doing.
Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters (Score:4, Informative)
What you are calling "The left" does back the respect of other cultures.
But if you think that means that the same political movement that fought for a womans right to vote in this country, wants a far-right fascist religious culture that treats its women like cattle, then you're grossly mistaken.
It's a strawman attack. And a retarded one, at that.
There is no liberal who supports Sharia law, or wants "Radical Islam" to take over the West.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or possibly could you mean "christian values" or something similar? (Just for edification, religion and politics aren't supposed to mix in the USA.)
I'll agree that slashdot readers seem to be liber
Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Let Me Rephrase This To The Bush Haters (Score:4, Informative)
The military has a few extensions on their limitations due to UCMJ but all members of the US military still retain their constitutional rights.
As for your comments about ignoring commands, that is specifically against the UCMJ so it's unlikely to happen unless there were a complete military coup. In which case, there are so many checks and balances against that happening, it's a seriously unlikely scenario. And each member of congress, the President, Vice-President and all members of the military swear an oath. that oath is to the Constitution of the United States, no one else. I'd like to see more people in those positions remembering their oaths and acting accordingly.
So whether he broke a law or not, the leaker was definitely upholding the Constitution, which is, in theory, the highest law we have in this country. He therefore did his duty to uphold the constitution (though he likely didn't take such an oath) and was far more "in the right" than if he had kept quiet about it. There are also "whistle blower" laws to protect him and his family in just such an event. Why is the current administration not extending him the courtesy of these laws I wonder?
When a company, any company is breaking the law in their business practices, it is an employees duty to report that company. So how do you get around the "illegal" disclosure of an illegal act? You accept the possible consequences, knowing that in the end you did what was right, whether it was legal or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Both houses of congress knew about this program before they blew the whistles. Well, leaders of the inteligence comities in both houses anyways. They were briefed on it regularly by the president who says he reviewed and reauthorized the program every 45 days. They didn't seem to object to it, they were in a position to do something if they thought it was necessary and it didn't concer
What a pack of crap. People need to know. (Score:3, Insightful)
At the time, Gonzo tried to justify the program in a similar but more direct way,
and it's complete bullshit. Actual terrorists know that FISA can authorize wiretaps though a secret court and that their communications may be monitored without any public record. No information of use was gained by them learning the court was bypassed by a corrupt administration. Ha
Phew! (Score:5, Funny)
Thank God we're finally catching these damned terrorists. I hope he hangs.
Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Insightful)
Saying that "The State" is right no matter what, is fascist. Currently the government is purging or minimalizing the non-fascist elements within the state. Of course they're doing it on the path of least resistance, so they're keeping up the veil of the justice system, but with the swampy legal system, far reaching laws and by simply ignoring basic rights (habeas corpus, etc.), without means to challenge the state it is a mere facade.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Insightful)
I would recommend extreme care on the next elections.
Remember "checks and balances". You need a whole lot more of them.
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were you, I wouldn't expect any miracles to happen within the next few years, regardless of who is in the White House.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Almost every single person in Washington needs to be removed and sent home for a few years. Two complete years with none of the normal people in Washington.
If we were alone in this world, it would be a great thing to do. But we are just one country on this planet, so I'm not sure I want to imagine what a more openly anti-US country would do during that time.
My fantasy:
1) Bring your entire army and Navy home.
2) Deploy them on the borders for 5-10 years.
3) devolve responsibility for any vital domestic services to state governments.
3) Completely shut down your federal government.
4) hold 3-6 years of debates and referendums to decide what kind of federal system you want.
5) hold elections and construct/staff your new federal government agencies.
I would even recommend an amnesty for the criminals in the current system so that you can get a full account of what went
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Fascist" is such a poorly defined word
Yes, but the OP confined its meaning well when he said
Saying that "The State" is right no matter what
and inferring Bush and Co are on a supress all oposition below the threshold of reaction from the general populace. It will be interesting if they manage to rig the coming election so they can continue their PNAC agenda. I also find it interesting that anyone with a clue thinks the currrent regime is off the rails, but there seems to be no major backlash?? Why is this so? Is the media really that controlled, is it apathy, or is really not a problem,
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Insightful)
And I doubt this is a good thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And the legality of the program is still a little in question. There are arguments on both sides. Also, this isn't the first time something like this going after the leaker has happened. A cop/court worker even lost his whistle blowing retaliation case in CA when he informed the defendant in a case about information that could of helped him in his defense and was punished, denied promotion and transfered to a shit job.
Good or not, this isn't anything exactly new. It migh
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:4, Interesting)
*PLONK*
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that's one reason why the current government gets away with so much. To an outside observer, especially from a northern European democracy, it seems really amazing that there's isn't more of a backlash, especially in the media. Even my father, whose a very mild-mannered man commented on the Scooter Libby pardon, sorry, 'commute', 'it's like it's some kind of a banana republic!'
Then again, there is the apathy. And the money. But I really do think that the two-party system and the mentality it brings is hurting the country.
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:4, Insightful)
There is nothing more incensing to me than to watch the various political ads preceding any election as it becomes quite apparent how truly stupid the candidate(s) believe the voting public to be (heck I guess it's working, so they must be partly right). Being able to swing votes your way by trying to convince the public that your opponent is in huge favor and would prefer to kill babies (for example) is the type of "mudslinging" and polarizing ideas that get presented in these advertisements. It's unfortunate that a lot of the voters don't realize that they're being manipulated by allowing their personal religious beliefs to cloud their thinking and are putting WAY too much trust into people who would stoop to that level.
I would love to see the expulsion of the Electoral College, and I'd love to see some serious reform for campaign advertisement and debates. I'd prefer a much more level playing field. I'd like to see a situation where these things are controlled so that a grass-roots candidate is able to have the same visibility as a veteran of "the game". The elections shouldn't come down to essentially who has the most money to spend on advertising and who can hire the best "muckrakers" to dig up crap about their opponent(s), it should come down to who comes the closest to what everyone wants. I concede that if this ever happens, we'll have to listen to some real whacko's, but I'd much rather sit through a ridiculous speech of impossible campaign promises from some "nobody" than I would from 2 or 3 "somebodys" realizing that I HAVE to choose one of the 2-3.
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Informative)
The entire entry, titled "What is Fascism?", is available online in a myriad of places. It is somewhat lengthy, but I suggest reading it in its entirety.
As for this situation, and the GP's label, I would say that it fits rather nicely Mussolini's definition.
An American Episode of Russian Fascism (Score:5, Insightful)
Without the leaker, we -- the American public -- would still be in the dark. Without the leaker, our government would still be conducting warrantless wiretapping. The leaker actually helped to strengthen our democracy. He did not endanger it.
Yet, why is Washington trying to send the leaker to federal prison? This massive raid by the FBI smacks of Russian-style fascism.
Re:An American Episode of Russian Fascism (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why prosecute? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, that was an extreme example. But it would be a situation that would leave one person wronged - your sister. Warrantless wiretaps left countless people wronged and in ways we will never know.
By your logic - the government can do whatever it wants whenever it wants and call it classified and if anyone talks about it they go to jail. That would be something that Saddaam would have done. Or Hitler.
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes it isn't plain obvious and the courts need to determine if you were justified in breaking a law in order to do something.
It isn't a matter of calling something classified either. The agent would have had to of been classified in the first place and you would have to know about it. With la
Re: (Score:2)
Classifying the identity of an agent is a privilege we gra
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Secret Service used to be run by Treasury--it's not Homeland Security. Interestingly, I read an article the other day about how due to the huge number of presidential candidates receiving protection that they were running low on investigators to fulfill their other duties--like dealing with counterfeit currency!
By your logic - the government can do whatever it wants whenever it wants and call it classified and if anyone talks about it they go to jail. That would be something that Saddaam would have done. Or Hitler.
Or Roosevelt. Or Clinton. Or any number of other presidents. Plenty of people have been jailed for leaking/selling/whatever classified material--it's often called spyi
Re: (Score:2)
The government needs not be protected from its citizens. The government's sole purpose is to serve and protect its citizens. Its whole reason to exist lies in the fact that these people are supposed to work for the benefit of the people that voted them in. If they work against said people, if they overstep their granted rights,
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actions like these distinguish the system (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't think fascist regimes come to existance through coup d'etats or civil wars, like many communist regimes did. Most of them grew from a combination of a flawed democratic process and fear in the population that a civil war or anarchy is imminent, and the general feeling, especially in the leading classes, that a fascist regime is still better than the uncertainty of an absence of government.
Let's see... (Score:2)
Rebuilding America will take longer than that (Score:5, Insightful)
and getting states, banks, credit companies, airlines, etc. to do massive data collection. And it's not like it started with them - the FBI wiretap enthusiasts like Louis Freeh, the NSA anti-public-crypto people, the Echelon project, etc. all date to the Clinton or GHWBush/Reagan administrations or earlier.
It's going to take a *long* time to tear down that stuff and turn this back into America again, and most of that won't happen unless we replace the current Executive Branch with one that's actually committed to doing it. Most of the major candidates aren't talking like that - certainly Hillary and Rudy and John Edwards and McCain and Romney don't have a history of wanting to do that, and you're pretty much down to Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul before you'd get to anybody who'd talk about that kind of concept as a campaign strategy. Perhaps if the Democrats not only win the White House but also increase their control of the Senate and House they'll have some willingness to do that after a couple of years.
For now, though, Homeland Security Anonymous Spokescritters report that Enhanced Terrorist Surveillance Program has been reporting increased frequency of terrorist chatter saying "Booga Booga", so if you're even suggesting that we decrease wiretapping then you're a threat to national security and our precious bodily fluids.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Granted, the US Government has been moving in this direction for quite some time now. Each administration seeks additional p
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But Bush isn't even *attempting* to use his power, or your money, for anything beneficial to the USA. He is actively using our count
Re: (Score:2)
If the end result is the same who cares? There's no practical difference between allowing someone stupid without intent to do damage vs someone evil with intent. The results is still the same damage.
Re: (Score:2)
I will vote for whoever is against gun control that has a good chance of winning, or against which ever candidate supports gun control and looks like they are probably going to win, which ever lets me vote for the least Evil Candidate.
I would really like to vote for Ron Paul, but each of the 3 top Dem's has a strong "I will not read anything the founding fathers wrote about the 2nd amendment that fully explains what it means" mindset; I HAVE to vote for whoever is not
Because I don't kmow (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, the Whistle blower's policies might not pertain to matters of national security and matters that are top se
If they've got warrants, it's "legal" - just dirty (Score:3)
If the information that was allegedly possibly leaked had been enough for somebody to actually prosecute some Executive Branch people (whether FBI or Pent
Am I the only one (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Am I the only one (Score:4, Informative)
"Enabling Act of 1933" would be the Patriot Act (Score:2, Insightful)
The systematic placement of Bush cronies throughout the government was the like the period 1933-37.
The extension of the 'Enabling act' twice corresponds to the extending of the Patriot act.
The burning down of the Reichstag, is the burning of the twin towers.
So far
*breeze* (Score:2)
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Were you also against any investigation into the Valerie Plame leak?
From "The Eagle has Landed" (Score:2)
Are we ready to impeach yet?
What's the problem? (Score:2)
What will they find ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The purpose of the raid is as much to deter others who are thinking of exposing government wrongdoing as it is to punnish Mr Tamm.
Re: (Score:2)
The long and short of it is, leaking classified info is a crime. See Valerie Plame case. Good or bad, still a crime. Maybe th
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so who was indicted for leaking the info on Plame?
Oh yeah, nobody was.
What's your point?
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately it was decided that no crime took place (other than Libby's perjury/obstruction/what not) but you'll note that there was an investigation which took place over many months. That's how investigations go!
Punish the Right Choice (Score:2)
Happens everywhere (Score:5, Insightful)
However, there is a difference between the US and the UK. The last time the Met became really corrupt, the Hertfordshire Police Force was called in to investigate them. (Disclaimer: Guess where I grew up.) Even so, it happened, and a significant number of Met officers were exposed. This is one example of why separate and independent police forces with local rather that national accoujntability are such a good idea.
The problem is, who will investigate the FBI? That seems to be the fundamental weakness of the US system. In the UK, MI5 and MI6 have no powers of arrest. They have to get in regular police to arrest suspects. Although clunky, this provides a check and balance. If the FBI is corrupted or ordered by the Administration to do corrupt things, who is to stop them?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
MI6/SIS is foreign only whilst MI5 are domestic. If someone from overseas comes to the UK then 6 is supposed to hand the problem over to 5 as they have no infrastructure for UK based ops. Note that there is a certain healthy rivalry between the services which limits their power. Five do have officers out and about (most famously at places like Heathrow) and they actually work through so-called Special Branch rather than the regular police. If five tell SB to do something that they think is illegal, then SB
Re: (Score:2)
With regards to the reporter you're talking about... Think about it another way--if YOU were being investigated and somebody leaked details of the case, the investigation, your personal information, etc--details that could one day make or break your case in court, details that were in no way confirmed or guaranteed--would you want the leaker investigated? It's good that in this particular case the reporter got i
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fabrication not insightfull (Score:5, Informative)
You really haven't been paying attention have you? Notice that both of these articles are from the first day of the shooting, where the media was full of misinformation. Both of the articles you list are full of "facts" that are now heavily disputed and is completely at odds with the findings of the independent police complaints commission.
See the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] or this article in the Torygraph [telegraph.co.uk].
1. De Menezes was wearing a light denim jacket.
2. He was given no warning that an innocent man could understand. From the IPCC commissioner: "There is no action he could have consciously taken that would have saved him".
3. De Menezes passed through the barrier normally using his pre-paid Oyster card. He did not run or jump the barrier as some eyewitnesses had claimed.
Newsflash (Score:2)
Just like not everybody at your work is a CEO, not everybody at the FBI processes Intel.
Procedure for installing country control system (Score:2)
Step 2) Place your political friends and allies in charge of the infrastructure
Step 3) Reduce measures to control abuse of they system by claiming it's in the interests of "national security"
Step 4) Undermine the efforts of your political enemies with your newfound power
So what's the big deal? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, wait. Yeah, I guess we are.
They will hunt you down ... (Score:3, Interesting)
The whole tenor of this administration - from Bush downwards - is one of petty and mean-mindedness. It will be good when they go, for they do nothing but poison the American body politic and bring it into dis-repute.
Listen again Radio4 - Abu Graib story (Score:3, Informative)
30 minutes, nice broadcast. Sounds like he's getting support from the US government but Rumsfeld screwed his whole life up by announcing his name to the world. People harassed his wife and his wife's sister (apparently they couldn't spell Iraq right when they graffitti'd her house, spelling it "Iroc"
Before the hyperventilation gets too out of hand.. (Score:3, Insightful)
You say tom-mae-to, I say to-mat-o (Score:3, Insightful)
I understand that, of late, the game is rigged on
But I honestly wonder how much of this response is based on what we think of as being "right". This guy was right because he exposed an "illegal" program. He narked on a program we don't like, therefore he is a hero.
But who is to determine what an illegal program is? Should each federal employee sworn to secrecy decide on his own whether something is legal or illegal?
I can hear the "heck yeah!" calls right now. You will say it was obvious that it was illegal. He had a moral duty to leak.
The problem with these moral arguments is that one can always take another tack -- perhaps it was legal. Or rather, perhaps it was illegal, but known to all branches of the government, which was working to make it legal. Or perhaps it was legal all along. The way we figure out whether something is legal or not is we have a charge, we have a trial, and we have a verdict.
If the employee sued the government for illegal acts (using the FISA court), then I would agree he was acting on his morals. But to hide behind anonymity, make his own decision for the entire country, and then claim to he a hero? Heck no. I will not condone such actions, EVEN if they are for a greater good. If we can't keep secrets, we're screwed. End of story. I'd rather have illegal acts by a country that has dedicated public servants, than each servant deciding on his own whether he likes a program or not.
This is the problem with the highly-charged partisan BS we have going on. It's not just that Bush had a program, it's that it was BUSH. Heck -- he's like the devil or something. We must stop him before he gets to the children! In an atmosphere like that, each side plays to the public servants to do the "moral" thing. The system just won't work like that, guys. We got a lot more problems than one president or program going on here.
Legalities (Score:5, Informative)
There were laws put in place regulating surveillance. These laws are very clear in what is allowed, and what is not. This program completely ignored those laws, and sidestepped the oversight mandated by those laws. There are laws regulating what can and cannot be secret. This program fell outside the bounds of all those established laws.
It isn't partisan BS. This is between those who believe the US is based on the Constitution, and those who believe the President should hold powers above all others.
And public servants should do the "moral" thing in any administration, even the nicest, bunny-loving, thriving economy, no-war-abroad President. We should all do the moral thing, including monitoring the activities of the government (including the President), and holding them to a higher standard of ethics. They are, after all, representing all of us. Their actions reflect our own morality by proxy.
This is only a partisan issue because the PR has spun it into a partisan issue. If this had happened during the Clinton years, those who defend the current president would've been at the head of the lynch mob. Let's stop caring to which party these immoral, selfish sons-of-bitches belong, and start holding them all accountable.
Which leakers are the problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, I'm all for using FBI agents to track down people that leak information. There was recently someone that leaked the name of a covert operative to the media in a time of war. Based on the timing and the identity of the person exposed, it appeared to be politically motivated. Please use the FBI to track down things like that. However, for someone that exposes an illegal government activity, knowing that the whistle blowing protections are really honey pots, what are they expecting to do with him? Have the FBI track him down to give him a medal? He did what the FBI should have been doing.
Re:Objectivity? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not clear, or the obvious path, and I don't think it will happen. Pure, utter disregard for the Constitution and Justice like this makes me see it as a possibility, though.
I also don't think the next election will make much of a difference, unless everyone running for president except Ron Paul dies the week before the election.
Re:Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! (Score:5, Informative)
See: H Amdt 674 [vote-smart.org]. He voted to prevent the federal government from enforcing federal anti-drug laws which conflicted with state laws.
I don't see how you could possibly consider him a neo-con. He's clearly an honest conservative. He's strongly against being in Iraq. He voted against the homeland security act and the patriot act. He voted in favor of the whistleblower protection act of 2007.
He's consistent. He voted against an act to prohibit cloning while at the same time voting against anything that would fund cloning. He's just against federal power.
Remember that it's all too easy for the federal government to gain more power. It's near impossible to force them to lose any power. If Ron Paul causes the federal government to give too much power back to the states then rest assured that future presidents will pull it back. But we should be grateful for any reprieve from the constant power grabbing that's going on in DC right now.
You can see his entire voting record at: Ron Paul voting record [vote-smart.org].
Re: (Score:2)
That has always been open to discussion and congress along with the court have moved the targets quite often. The real question is whether the president can move the target of the definition. As far as the constitution is concerned, it doesn't say it is illegal, it says certain conditions have to exist. It is these conditions that are in doubt.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
No, seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
We have concluded that the acronym U.S.E. (Unplanned Sexual Event), when used regularly to replace the word "rape", will remove the stigma associated with this sometimes unpleasant situation.
From: Bapists From Brownback. [wordpress.com] It's a pro-life thing, apparently.
Wow. Just wow.
Well said!!! (Score:5, Funny)
[Republican parody mode off]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's a scenario for you. (Score:5, Funny)
Unnamed extra #1: "Sir, you need to see this. It's Osama's cell phone! And the call is coming across OUR circuit!"
JB: "Dammit! He's up to something. I want that call intercepted and get me a translator! I want to know what he's saying and to whom he is saying it!"
Unnamed extra #2: "But sir, if we don't get a warrant within the next 72 hours, that will be ILLEGAL!"
JB: "No problem. I only need 24. Just tap that call!"
JB walks over to a different phone and picks it up.
JB: "Get me the FISA court! This is an emergency!"
Begin one-way telephone communication bit
JB: "I have an emergency and I need a warrant! No, I'm not going to wait! Yes, I will be right over! That's right, I want your Liberal judge ass sitting on that bench when I arrive!"
JB slams down the phone and walks over to unnamed extra #1.
JB: "Are you getting it all?"
UE#1: "Yes sir. Will there be a problem with the warrant?"
JB: "Not as long as I still have 3 days to get it there won't be."
JB then grabs some paper work and runs to his car. He then races across D.C. avoiding enemy mines, fighter aircraft and snipers. He screeches to a halt outside of the Court and runs up the steps. He slams open the door to the judge's chambers and throws the paperwork at him.
JB: "Listen, you have less than 71 hours and 26 minutes to sign that warrant or I'll have your terrorist loving Liberal ass!"
Unnamed Judge: "Always nice to see you, Jack. Here's your warrant. Let's see, that leaves you 71 hours and 24 minutes to get back to your secret spy base. Can you manage that this time without speeding or running over anything? Hmmmmm?"
JB: "You Liberal judges make me sick! My ass is on the line every time I have to drive over here! Good bye!"
JB then runs down to his car, notices the parking ticket on the windshield and throws it away. He then gets in and races back to work. Avoiding various mines, attacking aircraft and snipers.
Yes, the "ACLU types" are really trying to "slow down the wiretaps". 72 hours is just not enough time to get a warrant. What if JB had to take some time off to go look at swatches with his wife? What if he wanted to maybe take a couple of days in Reno when a terrorist call was coming in? Maybe there was a concert he wanted to go see! It's just too much to ask for them to process the paperwork in only THREE DAYS!
Re:Here's a scenario for you, with more ... (Score:3, Funny)
JB: DAMN! why wasn't I told that there is a secure full-color fax at the FISA court, and could someone tell me who makes and sends my secure-faxes in this office
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That is why you as a Republican should be worried about it. Hillary is going to get in, and you want her to have the same sort of powers Bush is exercising ?
Not civil disobedience (Score:3, Insightful)
The only difference was he released information damning to the government. This is just one more bit of evidence that the government of the United States believes it is above the law, above the constitution, and above the best interest of the citizens th