A Program By Any Other Name…
A Program By Any Other Name…
The White House is desperate to change the name of Bush’s warrantless domestic surveillance program. The White House wants people to call it a “terrorist surveillance program.” The press office even released a handy fact sheet:
Domestic Calls are calls inside the United States. International Calls are calls either to or from the United States.
Domestic Flights are flights from one American city to another. International Flights are flights to or from the United States.
Domestic Mail consists of letters and packages sent within the United States. International Mail consists of letters and packages sent to or from the United States.
Domestic Commerce involves business within the United States. International Commerce involves business between the United States and other countries.
It’s good to know that the White House knows the difference between a domestic flight and an international flight. But it’s completely irrelevant. (Afterall, the White House isn’t asking people to call it an “international surveillance program.”)
The program should have a name to accurately describe it. A combination of two things distinguish this program from all other legal surveillance programs:
1. It was conducted without a warrant. (Warrantless)
2. It involved people on U.S. soil. (Domestic)
If this wasn’t a warrantless domestic surveillance program it wouldn’t be a story. A “terrorist surveillance program” is not descriptive. It could be referring to any number of programs, many of which have been around for decades and are not at all controversial.
Journalists are supposed to describe stories as accurately as possible. Any journalist who uses the label “terrorist surveillance program” isn’t doing their job.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Domestic bullshit is what Bush tells Laura, international bullshit is what Bush tells the world.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:37 pmExactly. The defnition of “domestic” used by a telephone company or an airline is irrelevent, because the right of U.S. residents not to have conversations recorded by the government is outlined in the Constitution. The 4th Amendment is pretty clear.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:38 pmThe other problem is that the Bush administartion refuses to define what a terrorist is. It seems to me that anybody that disagrees with the Bush administration is called a terrorist by the right wing propagandists.
So, since none of here agree with Bush, we can be labeled terrorist and can be spied on inside the US.
It, like everything else these guys say, is pure and simple bullshit.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:39 pmHere’s a counter to their talking point:
January 25th, 2006 at 1:39 pmOne of the monitored individuals was in the United States. The agencies making use of the monitored phone call was also in the United States. That brings us right back around to it being ‘domestic’ spying again.
I really hope we are not as stupid as this administration thinks we are. Well, maybe 36% of us…
January 25th, 2006 at 1:43 pmBush is selling out our rights to Bin Laden. No wonder he can’t “catch” the fu*ker, the wire transfer of funds has yet to go through.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:45 pmSo, if I make a call from my home in the US to a friend in the Middle East, and happen to say the words “Al Qaeda” or “Bush is a f*cktard,” then I’m a terrorist, right?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:46 pmI just received a package from England.
It was from iwantoneofthose.com
If you look at it, it’s funny and unique toys.
The name and website was all over the package.
Customs opened it.
A package from England.
I am so mad.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:46 pmHere’s a thought. Beings that mostly all of our communications are routed through satellites, and space is international territory, then would not a large majority of calls have an “international” component to them? Not to mention that internet routing processes cross international borders routinely, hence the name “world wide web”.
Just a little sustenance for the noodle.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:48 pmHey all, Please visit this site. Give them your Thoughts.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:49 pmhttp://www.campusprogress.org/
Its part of Think Progress I suppose
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2094.2.jpg
Nice Karl. now lets show your Childishness to the American People
January 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmand see what they think of your SPIN
The MonkeyPalace can try to redefine anything it likes. It won’t change the reality of what they did. The important question is: Will the MSM bite, follow King George’s lead and change how they describe the trashing of our Constitution?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:52 pmIf Bush&Co. really believed what they are saying, that everything they are doing is perfectly legal, why all the hype? They have lost all ability to be subtle. Any time they need to rename something, you can be certain that they are trying to hide something. But, we SEE you!!!!
January 25th, 2006 at 1:53 pm#11 – that is indeed BushCo’s salute to the American people. :-(
January 25th, 2006 at 1:53 pmHere’s another thought. If the definition of “terrorist” is: An individual or group who terrorizes and the definition of “terrorize” is: motivate somebody by violence or make somebody very fearful then was not Mr. Belafonte spot on when he said that bush and his administration are the biggest terrorists on the planet?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmWhat a Bunch of Juveniles in the White House.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmThis picture says WAY more than a thousand words. It says it ALL . The crazies, Children run Amok with Power, Ideologies of a few, and High School Antics.
These Antics of Foolish men are what has given America a Bad Reputation.
The fourth amendment is clear, it is citizens who are protected from “non-probable” search and seizure without a warrant. Now if any of the tapped conversations were with an American citizen or legal resident, it is illegal. Now if the “probable cause” is replaced with Bush’s crayon scrawl of “reasonable suspicion” then we are plebs.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:55 pmBush is doing the same thing he always does: He commits a crime, the public gets outraged, he goes on a PR tour and tells everyone he is doing it in the name of national security, and the public rolls over and plays dead.
I fear that he is going to get away with this violation of the Constitution just as he has gotten away with many other impeachable offenses simply because the American public is too lazy and ignorant to even care. No matter how much you despise it as I do, you have to admit that Bush and his ilk sure are damn good at what they do – they know exactly how to manipulate the public to their advantage. And, the Democrats are constantly playing catch up.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmHey New york Times and other corporate Media whores, this is what Bushco Karl thinks of you. Are you gonna take that?
Huh? Are you reporters gurlie men that take orders from ROVE?
Where are you Huevos?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:57 pmTom Tomorrow’s comic strip in a paper I read today pokes fun at how frightened ReichWingNuts are. In one panel he has two Konservative Nuts talking about how scared they are of Osama and how it’s soooooo important that we trash the Constitution so bin Laden won’t kill us all.
It summed up perfectly for me just how stupid, frightened, greedy, and shallow the WingNuts are.
Jail to those involved in spying, lying, and theft of citizen rights!
January 25th, 2006 at 1:58 pmI saw the former head of the NSA on TV claiming that they weren’t tapping the phone of average Americans. If he is right, then average citizens have nothing to worry about, but what if he isn’t right? They have every right to monitor the calls of terrorists overseas or in this country. I just don’t want my Country to become like the former Soviet Union, but spying on it’s own citizens for no reason.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:59 pm#21 – the Constitution says nothing about the rights of “average” Americans. It speaks of rights to all Americans. Period.
Besides, there were laws, tools, and processes already in place to help BushCo uncover and deal with those who would and did cause us harm.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:01 pm#8 – My son bought a camera lens on ebay, and it came from a guy in England. Took FOREVER to get here, even though the guy had mailed it within days of the order, and it had been opened and inspected. It was a really creepy feeling.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:01 pmExactly Jesus
The think Americans are cowards like themselves, that we are will to cave to a fu*king terrorist and sell out our rights. Fu*king squatting eunuchs.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:02 pmJanuary 25th, 2006 at 2:02 pm
#20 Jesus Christ God of WAR, here’s a link to the online version of Tom Tomorrow’s comic strip. It is great, isn’t it and exposes Bushco’s supporters for the terrified “fraidy” cats they are.
Conservative Fear Factor
January 25th, 2006 at 2:03 pm#23 – When I travel overseas, I make sure that my checked luggage holds the smelliest most foul stench I can cram in there. When visiting South Asia this is a pretty easy thing to do.
If the Feds want to paw through my crap, I let ‘um have at it. I always get a smile on my face when I find one of their cards in the suitcase telling me they “inspected” it.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:03 pmEh…
It’s just another example that the admin treats us like elementary school children. Have you ever noticed that in some of his speeches, or answers to questions from an audience, Bush likes to explain simple things in the simplest of terms?
Like just the other day when he was at KSU, a lady asked him about border security. He spent at least the first 30 seconds of his answer explaining that America had 2 borders, they were long borders, and listed the names of the southern states that border Mexico.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:04 pm#26 – Ah, that’s a thing a beauty.
Thanks for posting the link.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:04 pmWow, Sins? Who is defining sin? Danger to the world maybe but forget sin.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pm#28, I think it’s called a snow job. Something Bushco probably did a lot of when writing term papers in high school and college. I think he is just so used to not knowing how to answer that he tries to fill in his time with trivial things so that people get so confused or bored they forget what they asked him in the first place , that or time runs out!
January 25th, 2006 at 2:08 pmYea, Tom Tomorrow is great! I belong to Salon and can’t wait for Mondays!
January 25th, 2006 at 2:08 pmCan you imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the freeptards if “Billary XLINTOON” had been conducting the spying w/o going through the FISA process?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:11 pmI am sure that I have been investigated…
My parents and sisters live in the UK.
I talk with my parents on the phone frequently.
Some of our calls have mentioned Bush, Al Qaeda, Bombs (I called to check that none of my extended family had been affected by the London Underground bombs)… and so on.
These were International calls that involved a Lawful US Resident (me) and were terminated at one end in the US.
The Fourth amendment may cover these calls…
The only question is whether I count as one of “the people” as I am not a citizen. Given the explicit use of Citizen (in Article II) where the rest of the time the words person and people are used I would argue that people was intended to include non-citizens. Given the history of non-citizen voting in the US and the proposed amendment to change the 14th amendment from “person” to “citizen” I suspect that my comments are valid.
If I have had my calls monitored (for being concerned about the welfare of my extended family) then my wife has probably also been investigated (she is a US Citizen) and given that we use the same phone line, anyone listening to my calls would also be listening to hers…
So this is warrantless, domestic surveillance. Whether you agree with it or not.
Z.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:12 pm#31
And the sad thing is, people buy in to it! Not only does it confuse and/or bore people, by the time he is gets through with these trivial ramblings, he often changes the subject of the question that was asked.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:12 pmHas anyone kept track of how many days / miles / gallons of fuel this bozo prez has used to attempt to sell his crazy ideas or cover over his mistakes? It seems like he’s always gone from DC – which isn’t bad considering the damage he does when he’s there!
January 25th, 2006 at 2:14 pmJesus Christ God of War and ACONCERNEDCITIZEN -
The fourth amendment does not speak of the rights of Americans. It speaks of the rights of “the people”. This includes all residents. Whether citizens, legal-residents or whatever.
I know that it’s a fine distinction, but it IS important. I am a “person” not an “american”.
Z.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:18 pm#34 Zwack
If you are a legal resident, the Supreme Court has affirmed that you indeed have the same protection under the fourth.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:21 pm#38 – you’re exactly right! This is indeed a very important distinction.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:23 pmNo Zwack
As far as the Fourth Amendment, the court has been quite specific, citizens and legal residents.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:24 pmTo those of you gullible enough to believe that Bush is only monitoring calls from Al qaiada, then besides having some prime Floridian real estate for you to examine, examine this.
In 2003 we saw on the evening news for weeks how there was soooo much data, NSA could not go through it all.
They even showed us on the evening news inside of NSA at Ft Meade, where they were they said ALL American calls pass are able to be monitored.
They explained how all calls are screened for keywords, so when someone says bomb or president in Iowa they can trace it, record it etc.
When Bush talks about capturing calls from the central exchanges what he is talking about is that ALL calls that pass outside of a local LATA and that go through digital switches.
Once the data is converted to digital form, it can be offloaded from a CO PoP or NAP point, to a SANS network for data warehousing and later data mining.
In other words, all calls are being recorded, digitally.
Massive supercomputers perform keyword signature searches looking for whatever the soup de jour is at the moment.
Down the road, this data can be used for non terror related activities.
In fact they are already talking about using it to catch child molesters.
Why child molesters? Easy.
Because they know people won’t say no to using the data to supposedly catch such evil criminals.
But the bar will continued to be lowered on the use of the data until the America we knew ceases to be.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:35 pmNice Karl. now lets show your Childishness to the American People
and see what they think of your SPIN
Comment by mr ho #10
mr ho,
I don’t think you appreciate the significance of this act being exhibited by Karl, to zoologists
This photo is totally unfair to Karl…
He’s merely engaged in a natural behavior called “rooting”,
It’s what all PIGS do…
January 25th, 2006 at 2:36 pmWarrantless Domestic Terrorist Program-related activities
January 25th, 2006 at 2:36 pmCitizen80203 – I am assuming that illegal residents don’t count because they are illegal. However, the proposed changes to the fourteenth amendment from “person” to “citizen” would also affect illegal immigrants, so it seems odd that the fourth amendment doesn’t include them.
My point still stands. It’s not just Americans. Legal residents (who let’s face it are more likely to have international telephone conversations that say things like “So, nobody was caught in the Underground bombings then, that’s good. No doubt the president will tell us immediately that Al Qaeda was responsible even if the IRA take credit.” which is roughly what I said) are also included. I refuse to apply for US citizenship while Bush is still in office. I might do so under a president I approve of. At the moment I refuse to do so because I don’t want it to seem like I approve of this administration.
Z.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:38 pmNumber 42.
Quit insulting pigs.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:38 pmImagine if Porky heard you comparing him to Turdblossom.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:40 pmThe supreme court has extended the bill of rights to anyone legally in the country and I think but I’m not sure they might have even extended the bill or rights to so-called illegal aliens, but don’t hold mr to the second
January 25th, 2006 at 2:41 pmIt’s illegal wiretapping. That’s what the problem is, nothing to do with the terrorism or surveillance aspects of the program, simply that they have engaged in such activities illegally, without a warrant to place such wiretaps.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:45 pmEven pig feces can be used as fertiliser
January 25th, 2006 at 2:46 pmInternational vs. domestic?
I smell a strawman.
The operative word here is “foreign”, as in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That act covers surveillance (wiretapping) involving “foreign intelligence information”, defined as follows:
(1) information that relates to, and if concerning a United States person is necessary to, the ability of the United States to protect against—
(A) actual or potential attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power;
(B) sabotage or international terrorism by a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power; or
(C) clandestine intelligence activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by an agent of a foreign power…
Don’t get caught up in the playing field set up by the Bushies. They’re trying to distract you.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:48 pmI am sure you are not the only one that has been spied on for non terrorism. I sent an email to the palastinian ambassador in Canada explaining all those suicide bombings was making it hard to stand up for their cause and they should look to the American and Irish revolutions for tips on how to fight with honor.
Of coarse all arabs are terrorists so I guess I was talking to one…
January 25th, 2006 at 2:49 pmFor more on the cynical Bush White House marketing ploy, see:
January 25th, 2006 at 2:56 pm“Branding the Domestic Spying Scandal”
The Dems are so useless… Bush is just getting away with anything he wants. Bush breaks the law by spying on his own people and two months later he hasn’t answered to congress. Does no one have a voice? Can no one communicate what has happenned. At this rate Bush will just make up a law so he can stay on for another term because he has war powers of his own mind. Again, who is stupid enough to believe a terrorist and a US citizen wouldn’t think they are being spied on. Americas’ enemies are empowered because Bin Laden has uncovered how stupid we are.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:59 pmHey, what about those of us who are not residents of the US, but are in countries decidedly neutral to it? Is someone keeping track of my posts?
Gee I wondered why I was seeing so many people with sunglasses lately. Oh, and Bush, if you are reading this, bite me. Osama. Terrorist. Al Qaeda, and Bomb. Oh, guess I need a major American Symbol, Big Pointy Stone Phallic Symbolly Thing In Washington (GW’s Head)
January 25th, 2006 at 3:01 pmRead post # 41 people.
We are all missing the point.
Practically ALL CALLS are being captured digitally.
This is a wide net.
Much wider than America realizes yet.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:11 pm#54, right, that’s it Bruce, you are going down.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:13 pmTAKING AIM AT PROBLEM
To reduce strain on soldiers, the Army is pursuing several new paths:
Increasing the number of active-duty combat brigades over the next few years from 33 to 42, with a goal of allowing soldiers to spend two years at a home station for every year on a war front.
In the short term, adding more troops to active-duty ranks. Eventually converting more military jobs to civilians, that would result in a larger combat force while keeping the overall Army at about 482,000.
Converting units like artillery and air defense to the kinds of units that are in greater demand, like Green Berets and military police.
Reducing troop levels in Iraq. A cut from the current 136,000 to 100,000 or lower by the end of the year, as many expect, would provide significant relief. The only announced plan is to cut to about 130,000 by March.
- The Associated Press
January 25th, 2006 at 3:13 pmAsk yourself this question.
If we know that they can pick up words like President, bomb, Bin Laden, etc, then ask yourself HOW can they pick up those keywords on ANY phone call in the US?
When you answer that question, we will start to see what the bigger story is here.
Welcome to Orwellville. Population, 300 Million.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:14 pm#58 – … and people thought 1984 couldn’t/wouldn’t happen here…
January 25th, 2006 at 3:24 pmOrwell just got the date wrong.
When people start to think about this whole spying scandal, and they start to think “hey, how can they pick up the word BOMB, or Bin Laden, anywhere in the US whenever it is said?”
Ask yourself this question and you will see a much bigger picture.
Ask yourself, How dey do dat?
January 25th, 2006 at 3:33 pmWorfeus actually about 6.5 trillion from bushco, inc.’s perspective, at least they want to controll that many
January 25th, 2006 at 3:35 pmLOL, true Clif, but keep in mind I am being dead serious here.
WORFEUS happens to know a little about analog and data communications, and I can tell you, that over the last 3 years, the Bush administration has been breaking it to us slowly, that ALL CALLS in the US are being digitally captured and warehoused for future digital signature searches.
When the reporters finally get around to asking this hard question “Mr. President, are you saying that ALL US calls are being recorded?” , then you will see Bush say, “yea, but we told you that already back in 2003″.
Watch and see. Or start asking now.
But of this I have a fairly high level of confidence.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:43 pmKeywords trip the digital recording devices, this we know.
But ask yourself, HOW do they pick up the keywords, if they aren’t already digitally monitoring everything?
Lets say I am a news reporter. And I am in a large conference room, there to get quotes and statements from the discussion in the room.
But lets say I agree to ONLY write down quotes that have to do with Lima Beans.
Anyone saying anything other than something to do with Lima Beans, is NOT to be quoted.
But in order to do this, I would still have to listen to everyone in the room about whatever they were talking about, in order to extract only the quotes about Lima Beans, would’nt I?
January 25th, 2006 at 3:53 pmRemember they are Republicans and their language is different than real people.
Domestic Spying = Hidden camera to keep illegal imigrant housekeeper from stealing silverwear.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmFrom Media Matters
Video essay in WMV
Video essay in QT
The BushCO spin on REASONABLE CAUSE vs. PROBABLE CAUSE
AMERICA DO NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THE DOUBLE SPEEK.
The Constitution protects ALL Americans fronm unreasonable search and seasure WITHOUT probable cause.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:14 pmSpeaking of reasonable and probable cause, did anyone see the General in charge of NSA yesterday, insisting that the 4th Ammendment does not mention Probable Cause?
This is the guy in charge of NSA and he thinks the 4th ammendment does not include the words, Probable Cause?
He didn’t just flub. He vehemently denied it over and over, almost yelling at the reporter saying “the 4th ammendment does NOT say ANYTHING about PROBABLE CAUSE”.
And this is the guy in charge of NSA?
Holy crap are we screwed or what?
January 25th, 2006 at 4:32 pmI mean, the 4th Ammendment is part of our BILL OF RIGHTS!
And the GENERAL in CHARGE OF NSA swore on camera that it NOWHERE MENTIONS PROBABLE CAUSE?
Does anyone wonder why now we are so hard on this Right Wing administration?
When the Commanding officer at NSA does not even know whats in our own BILL OF RIGHTS, then how can we ever imagine they will UPHOLD them?
January 25th, 2006 at 4:33 pmBin Laden.
Okay, here is what you are all going to do as a protest.
Go to every site you are a member of, and state a list of words which you believe would trip the search. Make Bin Laden a greeting, and Bush sucks Dick Cheney, a new way of saying goodbye.
Flood the bastards. Drown them in mentions, and get your friends and families to do it too. Spread the love, and make the program unuseable. Don’t wait for the corrupt Republican Congress or the equally Republican Senate to contradict the Republican President, go out and say Osama. Shit knows we have all talked about the git enough.
This is Bruce Gorton, and all I have more to say is that Bush sucks Dick Cheney.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:05 pm#28, Did he get the states bordering Mexico correct?
#31 & #35, He’s also been doing that cupping of the ear and claiming he didn’t hear the question more frequently when a non-prescreened type of question gets asked. That kills a few seconds.
This is just like the death tax, partial birth abortion, etc. Change the name to something people feel it’s in their interest to support and they’ll forget the details.
I’m now calling it EWW. Got it from Keith Olbermann. Eavesdropping Without Warrants. Only I say, “Eww!” as in “yuck!” Seems to fit perfectly.
Maybe Condi Rice should have read the “bin Laden determined to attack” memo over the phone rather than in person to Bush. Maybe that would have averted 9/11.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:31 pm“The program should have a name to accurately describe it. A combination of two things distinguish this program from all other legal surveillance programs:
1. It was conducted without a warrant. (Warrantless)
2. It involved people on U.S. soil. (Domestic)
If this wasn’t a warrantless domestic surveillance program it wouldn’t be a story. A “terrorist surveillance program†is not descriptive. It could be referring to any number of programs, many of which have been around for decades and are not at all controversial.
Journalists are supposed to describe stories as accurately as possible. Any journalist who uses the label “terrorist surveillance program†isn’t doing their job.”
This is another example of TP’s willful obtuseness. The NSA program, as universally described in press accounts and administration statements, is an electronic surveillance program that targets al Qaeda and other terrorist communications – some of which may have one end inside the United States. In other words, it is a terrorist surveillance program.
To suggest that such surveillance requires a warrant, just because one end of the communication may be in the U.S. is an absurd limitation on the President’s constutional warfighting powers as commander in chief. TP is advocating, in effect, that the President must fight the terrorists with one ear tied behind him.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:47 pmIf we had had this terrorist surveillance program in place prior to 911, we could have interecepted the calls of the hijackers, and then of course, done nothing.
George “Dubya” Bush
January 25th, 2006 at 5:50 pmTo suggest that such surveillance requires a warrant, just because one end of the communication may be in the U.S. is an absurd limitation on the President’s constutional warfighting powers as commander in chief. TP is advocating, in effect, that the President must fight the terrorists with one ear tied behind him.
Comment by Blue State Red — January 25, 2006 @ 5:47 pm
Do you honestly think anyone is stupid enough to buy that line of horsecrap?
What do you work for the administration doing damage control?
NO ONE is suggesting he do anything with his hands tied behind his back.
Right now the laws are clear, and with FISA he can spy, then get the warrant weeks later!
In order for tyrants to rise to power they need fools to follow them.
Looks like Bush has the corner on that demographic.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:54 pmTo suggest that such surveillance requires a warrant, just because one end of the communication may be in the U.S. is an absurd limitation
Comment by Blue State Red — January 25, 2006 @ 5:47 pm
So our LAWS and our CONSTITUTION IS AN ABSURD LIMITATION?
I see. Seig Heil mein freund, Seig freakin Heil.
DIE NEU TASUAND JARH REICH IST HEIR!
HEIL BUSCH!
January 25th, 2006 at 5:58 pmAre you claiming that this “Terrorist Surveillance Program” is being conducted with warrants? Are you claiming that this “electronic surveillance program” is only collecting information from actual Terrorists? Are you claiming that this Program is NOT picking up on any communications within the USA?
Assuming the answer to all of these questions are No then you should be more accurate and describe it as a “Warrantless Terrorist and Non-Terrorist Surveillance Program that includes American Residents” We can shorten that as the union of the Terrorist and Non-Terrorist sets is the universal set…
“Warrantless Universal Surveillance Program that includes American Residents” That’s still a bit unweildy so let’s shorten the includes American Residents to “Domestic” as that’s what it means…
“Warrantless Universal Domestic Surveillance Program”
Wow, Don’t you just love how that sounds?
So, according to you, the President can just do “WTF” he likes because he is President….
Can I point you at this little thing called the Fourth Amendment? Can I ask you how your “Warrantless Universal Domestic Surveillance Program” fits with that? It doesn’t? Are you sure?
Z.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:09 pmThe General I spoke of earlier, was General Michael Hayden, the so called expert that we all heard saying that if the Terrorist Surveillance Program had been in place we could have avoided 911.
Well this so called expert sat on camera denying that the words, “PROBABLE CAUSE” appear in the 4th Ammendment of our US Constitution.
This expert, apparently is not so expert, is he?
January 25th, 2006 at 6:34 pmHey, why don’t we just rename the “war on terror” to something more descriptive (since that seems to be the theme of the week) and accurate? Once it’s no longer a “war”, the President’s War Powers (which he perceives he has now based on his creative naming) are eliminated, so he’s back to the plain old non-war Constitution.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:53 pm#77
Been there, done that. From salon.com:
Throughout July, administration officials have substituted new words for the old. Instead of trumpeting the “global war on terrorism,” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have sounded the call to “a global struggle against violent extremism.” Medals have been awarded to brave U.S. soldiers stamped “Global War on Terror.” Will new medals now be minted?
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2005/07/28/war_on_terror/
January 25th, 2006 at 8:26 pmISOAP (Illgal Spying On Americans Program) works for me.
January 25th, 2006 at 8:35 pm.
Again, it’s semantics — that’s the game they play for distraction. It’s part of their newspeak — like clear skies is really air pollution. I think their play book was written by George Orwell.
January 25th, 2006 at 8:42 pmTo the point – if “international” spying is what they say they limit themselves to (pardon me while I snicker) – why were they spying on Quakers in Ohio? Or domestic environmentalists?
January 25th, 2006 at 8:45 pmNothing they say is to be trusted.
Here, ask yourself this one, simple question.
We all know that if anyone in the US says the words, bomb, terrorist etc, particularly in the same sentences, that a computer somewhere at NSA starts recording that conversation for later analysis.
This is fact, at least, thats what they told us on national television several times over the last 3 years.
So knowing this, ask yourself this one question.
Ready?
If they are able to start recording when I say Bush sucks on the phone to my brother, how do they know I said Bush sucks?
How did they pick that up if they were not already monitoring everything everyone everywhere in the US, is saying over the phone?
Pour yourself a stiff one, or a tall one, sit back, and ponder that one for a bit.
When it comes to you what Bush has been subtly trying to tell you all along, then you can pour yourself another.
In fact, make it a double.
Cause you’re in Orwellville baby, and there ain’t no turnin back now.
January 25th, 2006 at 9:31 pmThen scroll up and read my posts on analog to digital switching and data warehousing.
It will all start to make sense.
January 25th, 2006 at 9:32 pmUnless of course you already took the blue pill.
January 25th, 2006 at 9:32 pmBush tries to twist words to obscure his criminal acts!
He blatently broke the FISA laws, but tries to deny it!!
The Congress must wake-up from their coma and impeach him!!!
January 25th, 2006 at 11:23 pmNo sooner has the president asked than FOX News delivers. Reporter Harris Faulkner, during one of the H&C news breaks, referred to it as Bush’s “terror surveillance program.”
Surprise, surprise, surprise.
January 26th, 2006 at 12:12 amWarrantless Homeland Spying – When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal
January 26th, 2006 at 7:38 amThe administration and its propaganda mills are trying to frame this practice as unobjectionable — who’s against spying on terrorists? The problem is they want to be the only people who determine who’s a terrorist and who’s not.
As Ross Perot once said: “It don’t work that way!!” Nobody — not even the president — has the authority to unilaterally declare an American to be a criminal. And even if you DO trust the prez now, this policy can be used by successors as precedent to spy on whoever they deem a threat.
There is no legal distinctinction between a warrantless terrorist surveillance program and a warrentless political enemies surveillance program. Bush wants us to believe his good intentions, when he’s lied about just about everything important since 2001, including that this program exists!
The Declaration of Independence says that government exists to secure our liberties. Which of our liberties is Bush securing right now?
January 26th, 2006 at 8:14 am#8 & 23 – To have your parcels opened is a creepy feeling – but having flame-thrower Islamic clerics and train bombings is an atmosphere most people realize is a reality. Your progressive hyper-sensitivity is showing.
I wish Senators Reid, Kennedy, Biden, Durbin et al would tell more than half the story. (Are they capable??) Everytime they attempt to politicize (more!!) the surveillance program they regurgitate, “illegal spying on Americans”. They conveniently forget to mention (uh-huh) that the calls MUST come from outside the US and those recieving the calls may or may not be Americans – like the barbarians hijackers who were here in San Diego. Once a target-call has been made to an American, warrants must be granted to continue surveillance. Those tedious details!!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pm#88 – “The Declaration of Independence says that government exists to secure our liberties. Which of our liberties is Bush securing right now?” – Matt
January 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pm****Simple answer to a stupid question – “Life”.
****Simple answer to a stupid question – “Lifeâ€.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 26, 2006 @ 2:58 pm
Actually, you meant stupid answer to a simple question.
January 26th, 2006 at 8:59 pmACLU all the way!! Even if that means blood in American streets? no…not really…..but thats what most of the people in this discussion sound like….
This is a unique time in history….unique times call for unique actions….During wartime the American people have historically been called on to make sacrifices…..In comparison to the sacrifices of our forefathers–listening in on a believed terrorist does not sound that harsh……is the government listen to your phone calls to Aunt Tess? I dont think so….but I know many Americans do…and that is the sad point….
January 27th, 2006 at 7:40 amMighty Aphrodite…
Life may be a right, but it is not a liberty.
Mike…
This is not a Unique time in history. During the First and Second World Wars America was more threatened than now. Widespread domestic warrantless surveillance was not instituted then.
This is NOT “listening in on a believed terrorist” The FBI have pointed out that the majority of “leads” that the NSA gave them led to innocent people, and the few that haven’t they were already aware of from other sources.
This is the NSA trawling all phone calls for keywords. When they hit a keyword they flag it for further review. They don’t care where the call comes from or goes to. The constitution explicitly says that the people have a right to be secure unless a warrant is obtained. That means that the American government needs a warrant before it listens in to a conversation involving someone in America. FISA extends that and allows them 72 hours to ask for the warrant.
You know what, my Aunt Joan (her name isn’t Tess) might not have been listened in to, but conversations between myself and my parents about the Al Qaeda bombings in London probably were. Because we would have used enough keywords. Even though I just wanted to make sure that my extended family were safe.
These people aren’t “believed terrorists” or “suspected terrorists” they are “people who use certain words that the government is looking out for in telephone conversations”… If you think that that is acceptable then please feel free to check in to your nearest prison.
Z.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:00 amZ-
You make some valid points…but I must disagree with your “not a unique time”…when is history have we ever faced an enemy of this magnitude that did not have a “home base”? Meaning country/fatherland/motherland…..being that we dont have a “front” (although I might call Iraq a front-but that is for another debate) we must utilize every means of our advanced technologies (ie. computers pulling key words) to our benefit…heck-if its just a computer pulling key words whats the deal? I guess I-along with many other americans have no problem with “trawling” (i like your comparison)….sooner or later you are going to catch the big one, right?….Like they did in Italy a short time ago? were those phone taps authorized by the government? maybe, maybe not…..but the result was capturing terrorists that had elaborate plans to destroy bridges, tunnels, and cruise ships that Americans would have been on…..
Also, Not unique? When have our citizens been repeatedly attacked? I cant think of any….not citizens alone…military and government…but not citizens….
Not unique? When in history has an individual or group of individuals had access to possible weapons that could erase an entire city?
Great point on the constitution…but if you are going to fight the battle(s) of the ACLU over fighting the guys that want to kill us—it simply explains your/and many others rationale…..I can tell you want whats best for America—so do I…it just seems like we are willing to take different risks……mine is a risk of intruding on someones phone call—yours is a risk of death to more americans….
January 27th, 2006 at 12:40 pmMike,
I’m not an American but as a legal resident the fourth amendment covers me too.
I guess that my opinion of what is and is not unique would vary from yours because I lived in the UK when the IRA were most active. I have lived most of my life under the threat of terrorist attack.
The “size” of the enemy is irrelevant when discussing terrorists. That’s part of the point. If the “enemy” was large enough wouldn’t they just invade with their overwhelmingly large army? The point is that a small handful of people using terrorism/guerilla warfare tactics can cause a disproportionate amount of chaos/confusion.
Given your willingness to allow NSA trawling of all telephone conversations wouldn’t you consider an acceptable (and more legitimate) approach to be get legislation that allows for automated trawling with congressional oversight on a periodic basis (a six monthly report that says X calls were picked out and Y were valid leads) and then allow for some initial screening of the call and if it is questionable get more normal warrants for further investigation. Would that be an option?
Given that Congress was willing to pass the USA Patriot act, actually going the legal route for this would have been a much more acceptable method. I might not have liked the passing of the law, but at least the administration wouldn’t be breaking the law and claiming that they have every right to.
The ACLU does many things that I disagree with and I am not a member of the ACLU. I don’t see this as fighting the administration or fighting the terrorists. I see this as fighting things I disagree with everywhere. I can’t justify living peacefully under a dictatorship, nor can I justify giving in to terrorists. But I don’t think that because some unbalanced lunatic is willing to die to make their point that that should change whether the government can spy on innocent people.
If this program only listened to calls to or from terrorists it wouldn’t be objectionable. But it listens to all calls and decides which people might be terrorists because they use certain words. I suspect terrorists might talk in code rather than saying things like “the bomb will go off at noon”.
Z.
Z.
January 27th, 2006 at 1:42 pmTell me how you exercise liberty without life.
January 27th, 2006 at 6:46 pmZ-
As I am sure you know legislation works as a snails pace (unless it is to accept/increase their their own pay)….I get your point…and from what I understand it is very easy to get the proper paperwork AFTER the “trawling”….what do you think? How would that have been received? Listening to “high profile” international calls and then the proper paper work? I would think that it would have been much more acceptable…..
I would also doubt highly that they have the capabilty to listen to ALL calls…..i think they might be saying that to keep potential terrorists on their toes….
This is certainly one of those issues that falls in line with many more here in America…….split…….about half for…about half against…….here we go again…..
January 30th, 2006 at 9:10 amMighty Aphrodite,
You can’t but that doesn’t make Life a Liberty.
You can’t feel Hunger without Life either, but that doesn’t make Life a food.
You don’t bleed (much) with out Life, does that make Death a Band-Aid?
Mike,
Consensus… My complaint is not so much about what they did as the way they did it. Given the length of time it took to get the Patriot act pushed through, they could probably have done it. In fact I’m surprised that it wasn’t included in there… But yes, legislation that said “we can do automated trawling of electronic communications without any oversight (As it is automated) provided that any follow up is done with some form of judicial oversight, and the parameters used for the trawling (the list of keywords, or whatever) are approved every three months.” Of course that would be expanded to three pages and include irrelevant clauses interspersed before it was passed… :-)
Yes, I might still have complaints about what they were doing, but at least it would be totally, unquestionably, legal.
Z.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:30 am[...] Since January, the White House has tried to re-brand their domestic warrantless wiretapping program as a “terrorist surveillance program.†The goal is to make critics of the program’s legality seem weak on terrorism. [...]
March 22nd, 2006 at 5:03 amSalon Business Plans
Thanks for creating this blog. I thought it was a very interesting read. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 27th, 2008 at 2:25 amEbay Selling Program
Want to take a look at my site, you will find it very interesting.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:26 amluggage online
) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links on some blogs (see sping). The term is used
April 1st, 2008 at 10:20 amDigital Picture Frame Review
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:37 pmAaron
Perfect. Cut. Print. Great.
April 6th, 2008 at 4:08 amcommunication component marketing
April 9th, 2008 at 6:03 am