Letters to the Editor
Margalis
Published Letters: 614 Editor's Choice: 16
-
critical thinking skills
[Read the article: Chris Dodd on FISA, habeas corpus and Democratic capitulation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Most people don't have them. It's that simple. Look at the number of people who can't follow simple A->B->C logical statements. (For example nearly every journalist who responds to Glenn's posts)
How many people in Congress do you think read and understood the FISA bill? (Or on these boards)
I hope Glenn talks about what the meat of the new FISA bill. I took a stab at it in the previous letters section but I am not a lawyer. Parts of it are obviously crap (the AG makes the reports on abuses - that should work swimmingly) but my interpretation of the overall scope might be somewhat off.
It seems to me that at the very least it allows the government to listen in on a US citizen as long as the citizen is talking to someone "reasonably believed" to be outside the US, and it could be argued that it allows the government to listen in on two US citizens as long as the information of interest pertains to that foreign person.
The part I'm not sure about is how, if at all, other laws come into play. One of the Democrats made some remark about US citizens being protected by some other law that she couldn't remember the name/number of.
-
Conference Committee and DCLaw
[Read the article: Chris Dodd on FISA, habeas corpus and Democratic capitulation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]DCLaw I saw your posts, thanks. They did clarify to some degree though I would still appreciate a Glenn post on the subject.
Conference Committee:
The Senate passed their version of the bill and then went on recess. The House then passed the same bill - it's a done deal.
By the way, check out the sunset clause. After the bill sunsets any authorizations that have taken place are still in effect.
-
No two things are exactly equal
[Read the article: Chris Dodd on FISA, habeas corpus and Democratic capitulation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Perhaps I've been a Pollyanna. Maybe the morose libertarian Silber has been correct all along that both parties are equally bad, or close enough not that is is sensible not to prefer one.
Bad as the Democrats are, the Republicans are far far worse. Compare how many Dems voted for the bill to how many Republicans. Clearly replacing more Republicans with Democrats can only help.
Throwing your hands in the air and giving up is quite lame and makes one an enabler.
-
Obama's foreign policy
[Read the article: Chris Dodd on FISA, habeas corpus and Democratic capitulation]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In a way it's quite sad that it is some sort of amazing revelation. Hey, our old strategy isn't working - maybe we should try something else!
Yet he took a bunch of hits in the media for not being "serious" and "experienced" and for stating what should mostly be the obvious. Not talking to our enemies doesn't work. Dividing the world into good and evil where Iran is evil and Saudi Arabia is good doesn't work.
To the beltway pundit class, pointing out that something isn't working then suggesting an alternative strategy is mind-blowing.
-
Communications involve more than one person
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is the key point that Bush officials pretend to be unaware of. Under the new revisions only one participant in the conversation has to be foreign, there is no restriction on where the other parties may be.
Bush is now claiming that the law is "narrowly scoped" (cue laughter) and that we need to do a lot *more*, including providing retroactive immunity for telecom companies who already broke the law.
Glenn pointed out in a conversation a couple of days ago that Bush was trying to make it harder to sue telelcoms - now he wants to make it impossible.
SAL04C - the bill is online. Read it.
-
Cato talk
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm 48 minutes in, the other dude has started blabbering. This guy is a fucking moron and an ass.
"Mr. Greenwald clearly faults George W. Bush for his faith in God's purpose..."
These clowns are incapable of any sort of intellectual stance. ("ZOMG Glenn Greenwald declared War on Christmas!!!") His characterization of the book is just awful, quite on purpose I'm sure. He makes it sound like Glenn portrays believing in God as a horrible flaw in itself.
Sadly a lot of dumb people fall for this sort of claptrap.
-
I want to know the specific language that is problematic
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]How about the FIRST FUCKING LINE OF THE BILL. (Minus headers and such)
You know, the line that redefines the term "electronic surveillance " to no longer apply when the target is abroad, and hence removes the previous FISA requirements?
"Nothing in the definition of electronic surveillance under section 101(f) shall be construed to encompass surveillance directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States."
Translation: The old FISA requirements only apply to "electronic surveillance" which has been dramatically narrowed in scope to not include communications involving US citizens, as long as the surveillance is directed at someone outside the US. When surveillance is directed at someone outside the US, even though the surveillance may also include people inside the US, it is subject to weaker rules with zero oversight.
Does someone need to come over to your house and sound out the text of the bill word by word for you or is that enough?
-
And more on the Cato stuff
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Man this guy is just awful. Now he's on about how Europe naturally hates us just because they are jealous of how awesome we are - which of course does not answer the question being posed at all. (Why the standing of the US has dramatically dropped very recently across the entire earth) It's an extended exersize in figuring out what set of talking points is at least vaguely related to the topic at hand. (We've already hit on how liberals were mean to Vietnam vets)
And yes his voice is really fucking annoying. Whiny, sarcastic and contemptuous - perfect voice for silent film.
-
I'm not sure what else you would like.
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Beam your thoughts directly into his brain, only that will suffice.
-
This question is almost as important as
[Read the article: Obama's big blunder]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Obama, do these pants make me look fat?"
Almost.