Letters to the Editor
-
Which Leaker told Newsweek where to point their "Periscope"?
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/did-blog-commen.html
Did Blog Comments Lead Feds to Raid Ex-Justice Lawyer in NSA Spy Leak Investigation?
By Ryan Singel | August 06, 2007 | 7:00:18 PMNewsweek reported this weekend that FBI agents raided the home of a former Justice Department lawyer Thomas Tamm as part of an investigation into how the New York Times learned about the government's secret wiretapping program. Righty bloggers quickly scoured the net, discovering that Tamm had donated to Democrats in 2004 and that several blog comments critical of the administration had been posted with his name attached.
One blogger at the Free Republic notes:
If it turns out that Thomas M. Tamm is the FISA leaker, then a good case could be made that [Bush Derangement Syndrome] postings on the web might have been his undoing.
[...] I'm not convinced that any judge would issue a search warrant, even in a national security case, simply for the kinds of posts that were actually done in Tamm's name (especially given that anyone could use his name to pass off posts). But then again, maybe the lack of discretion in blog comments sections did get Tamm a visit from the feds.
- - By Ryan Singel
Why was Tamm raided? Probably not because (or not only because) of his blog comments, even though some natives of Rightist Blogistan are ecstatically thrilled at that possibility. Other questions, besides why Tamm was raided, are: who leaked the story to Newsweek, and why did Newsweek grant anonymity to an Administration leaker who is obviously acting as an Administration spokesman?
-
--Anonymous @10:47
"Huh!? Moussaoui is doing life without parole in the Federal Supermax in Colorado for being part of the 9/11 conspiracy."
You're quite correct, I was thinking of Jose Padila when I wrote that. My error.
Speaking of Padila, what's the status of Gonzo's case against him? Do you know?
-
How did that big, bad, scary "Soft-on-Terrorism" strategy work out? ...
... The Democrats crushed the Republicans in an historic election, re-taking control of both houses of Congress, protecting every single one of their incumbents, and vastly increasing their hold over governorships and states houses.
Exactly. The American people yearn for peace. That was the biggest anti-war vote in modern times. That tells me that the one central message this coming time should be; "we did bring home the troops" or "we did everything we could to bring home the troops". That message is a winner.
-
A day without a tsk is a day without shooter
I do miss the heh! though. I hope you didn't omit it in the interest of appearing more rational. As for the IRS, you do pay your taxes, don't you shooter? I mean, I'd hate to think....
-
@sysprog
Interesting.
re: "Rightist Blogistan"
I'll bet that's some sort of Caliphate.
-
Attack on U.S. would be very counter-productive
Why would al-Qaeda want a terrorist attack on U.S. territory? They support our pullout in Iraq and to attack would give ammunition to the GOP/neocon plan that we need to remain in Iraq permanently. It was foolish to pass this bill, even on a six-month basis, for fear of a terrorist attack that would only hurt the continuing disintegration in Iraq and support the Democrats who want common sense and sanity to return to U.S. foreign policy and begin the restoration of the good name of our nation in the eyes of Islam and the rest of the world.
The reason we have not had an attack is not because of the protection the present administration has provided, even though the GOP has often pathetically proclaimed such. The reason is al-Qaeda could not have asked for better support of their goals because of what has happened since the moralistic, power-hungry, ideologues decided to invade Iraq. Al-Qaeda is keenly aware of the psychological and political effects of any planned terrorism and knows they are dealing with neophytes and gullible idiots.
-
Mr. Murder attack
Anybody can check my life's history (what a wild ride its been), starting with my birth certificate. I have no control over my privacy, the same way you don't. I'm positive information on me is being shared. I'm part of the database.
My point is, I'm being spied on by everybody already, just don't blow me up. It's not a matter of having something to hide, but nowhere to hide.
I just adopted a dog from the humane society, he was inserted with a microchip! Now even my dog has my information!
-
Retired Military Patriot ...
... apparently doesn't read the newspapers. Just this week al-Qaeda in the form of Adam Gadhan promised to attack American embassies around the world, and the group's No. 2 guy, al-Zawahiri, urged Muslims around the world to take the fight directly to America.
Be careful about speaking of "gullible idiots," Mr. Know-Nothing.
-
punkout
Read c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y
KITT
-- punkout
No, you try reading carefully, punkout.
Repeating the same daft droll you said the first time, only prefaced with a smart ass introduction, doesn't change anything or address anything new. Do you think you are the only one in America who is aware of scanners at the grocery store?
Simplistic 'Be afraid, be very afraid', type rhetoric is not making conversation or bringing in new information. It's just regurgitating simplistic rhetoric in a feeble attempt to voice some big deal conclusion that we are all supposed to stand up and take notice of.
-
punkout has a point
Y'all shoulda started this back when drug testing for employment became the rule. And I'm talking about you don't work if you smoke a little pot on weekends or when you get home.
-
Anonymous @11:51
To support your argument you are quoting al-Qaeda propaganda that they are feeding to their supporters and potential recruits as proof that an attack is immanent? That’s the kind of simplistic thinking that got us into this mess. When trying to determine what is in the minds of the enemy, you need to first understand at a minimum, their culture, then goals, then tactics, and then current situation. I realize it is hard for you to understand the need for any thorough examination, before making any decision, since those you appear to support refuse to even think about a comprehensive, reasonable approach to war.
-
@shooter242
This is just liberal hypocrisy. You don't mind information gathering just not being the one currently in charge of the data.
So shooter242 won't mind his personal medical information being in a national health database accessible by god knows who after say, Clinton, wins.
Nor will he mind that his household energy usage is profiled to make sure he's not overly wasteful during an energy crises, his weekly mandatory blood test to make sure he's not smoking and therefore defrauding the taxpayers, or his genetic profile showing 20 generations of pure Aryan ancestors, putting him at the very bottom of the affirmative action list...
He supports government surveillance in the first place, so he wouldn't mind any of that. It's all for security, ultimately, right? Just like reading emails?
Well, he'll eat it and like it, unless he's a hypocrite.