Letters to the Editor
-
Another cheering sign
There's a further positive dynamic here that should be recognized and hailed: The reporters who develop these Democrats-are-about-to-capitulate stories, and the editors who front-page them, don't have to be doing this and must know that they'll mobilize the left (if the left is there to be mobilized). So I've taken the stories as signs that some people in the MSM are rediscovering their own oversight functions, and maybe are also a bit aghast at the Dems.
-
The Art of the Possible
You spy on mine; I spy on yours.
Glenn, you have a point that "I spy on mine" is worse, but I think you are underestimating the problem nonetheless. -- Mike Sulzer
I don't know that he's underestimating the potential for, or current extent, of this kind of government activity. But it's not as addressable as internal spying. We have laws on the books about that -- laws which have some cultural legitimacy since they were accepted & relied on for +25 years.
It will be interesting to see if the politically compromised Congressional leadership can actually remember how to logroll. It would be dandy if they succeeded in using this bill to regain some oversight on the Executive. I'm convinced Paul Dirks and tempus are right tho -- what they'll find mainly, is an administration that spent +4 years hiding their abject cluelessness behind the purdah wall of National Security.
-
@Glenn
No. The term "target" is a term of art in law enforcement with clear meaning. The "target" is the person whose phone line is ALWAYS monitored. ALL of their calls are surveilled.
The person whom they call (or who calls them) is NOT a "target." NOT all of their calls are monitored. The ony time they are eavesdropped on is when they speak with a target.
With all due respect, Glenn, this is not the way modern electronic surveillance equipment works. So maybe in addition to revising the parts that "even Russ Feingold" realizes need revising because of routing and packets, this definition needs to be updated by civil rights lawyers. Otherwise, what Mad Dogs and others are saying will be the de facto way it works, even if the de jure way is as you say.
If that is the case, the civil rights lawyers are even more behind the curve and facing an uphill battle than just their problems with the Recalcitrant Representatives of the Congress of Cowardice in the Millenium of Fear.
bebop-o: You get the Michael Harrold Award for this:
I'm so tired of hearing, "The American People want to be protected."
[9/11 didn't change everything, July 4, 1776 changed everything. Michael Harrold]
-
The Real Cowardice
At first I thought that the Democrats were giving in on the domestic spying due to cowardice, specifically fear of being called soft on terror, and also fear of being blamed if a terrorist attack occurs anytime after they fail to capitulate.
But now I'm beginning to think that while although the above fears are indeed a dynamic occurring within the Democratic party, there is another fear going on here, namely fear of taking on Bush directly. Let's face it, there is no way the Democrats could demand and get oversight and accountability along with a concrete statement of what is legal and what is not with out it turning into basically impeachment hearings for Bush and Cheney.
Basically Bush is saying to congress, "Yeah, I've raped the constitution and broken numerous laws, either impeach me or get the hell out of my way"
Them Democrats have kindly gotten out of his way.
-
The Wiretap bill we should be seeing
would not only restore the due process eviscerated over the summer, but also create clear lines for law enforcement access to the location field for cellphones and other wireless devices.
Realtime location tracking was mandated by the "E-911" legislation of the late '90s, for use when YOU dialed 911 in an emergency, but as built out, the architecture knows your whereabouts any time the phone's powered to receive calls. More, a record is retained, and you're deemed to have waived any privacy in this data history.
Is this package going to see normal Committee markup, or is it being rushed straight to the floor?
-
@ Several
@ Scientician: How does the spying empower Bush? Any evidence that they have used it against political opponents? (reminds me of the ex-bouncer in the Clinton admin who got FBI files on Republicans). If Bush is spying on political opponents, why are they giving him the go ahead to keep it up? Do you know more than his opponents do?
@ Denning: We are, at times, dealing with a smart enemy. 911 proved that. Hijacking and flying jets into buildings doesn’t just happen. Doing it simultaneously with 4 different aircraft takes a lot of planning. It was a sophisticated attack. It took smarts. Sophisticated bad guys can do a lot of damage. As technology advances, and becomes more readily available, so does the threat that they pose. Just maybe Bush is worried about that.
@ orbitboy: I’m not stalking, I’m stealing. . . your name.
@ Paul Dirks: Thanks for the back and forth. You suggest that Bush over-reacted to 911, and ever since has broken the law in order to cover-up that over-reaction. I can’t refute it, but I doubt it. He has too many allies among his opponents for me to believe that.
@ Those that don’t like me: I’m not offended. I asked a question, and got more accusations hurled at many that honest attempts at an answer, hence my overuse of the term salonista. Several of you earned it.
-
tempus
I hope that is an eyebrow floating in a tea pot tempest? I'll reboil another pot. no gulp that.
It may have floated down, lightly, from 28,000 feet? I'm glad it (a split butt hair) didn't land on any saloon's baloney's delicate head or lunch soup, for that matter, into the tater soup, aren't you? Pilot.
That's collateral damage!
That's real bedridden languish.
Hey, I'm begging to get out and pick money leaf from trees.
_
There was a Vietnamese old man who sat via a B- 52 strike and all he could do was watch banana leaves float during the rumble of 500- pound bombs. That's abstract? The ground shakes. I use to feel the ground shake. Were you the bomber? You should have heard the flute being played all night in the jungle. The wail was hauntingly beautiful. I still hear that beautiful grief some nights when I can't get no shut-eye.
In Homer's era, a real warrior would decide to not wear shin guards. That was considered cowardly. The warriors wanted to smell the sweat, be close, and hear the groan, and feel the person they killed, warm blood. Shame on you. But don't ya's hate when them hippie naive people: You know: Those damn panicky Peaceful 'folk' with flowers adorning the braided Goldilocks hair...cornstalks...gold woven tassels, beautiful hair, long, long, long, long beautiful hair. And the hair smells musty (not like bomb sulphur), like a new-mystery sense perfume. It escapes. An aroma gets released.
The fragrance seems to enter a soul, as if a essence came to pay a divine visitation- or SOMETHING from some celestial abode- an intoxicant, from out-there somewhere, foreign? Not easy to explain,
but beautiful. Agree?
_
Yea- If a baby was bleeding from collateral damage, and the black hair of an infant was all matted with blood and dust- a good soldier would touch the dead person. Maybe cry.
tempus: Plant a fall rose garden.