Letters to the Editor
-
It could be that pharoah
Ramesees.
-
"OT -- Trojans and Worms" what's your browser?
I use firefox and a lot of times on Salon a script somewhere on Salon's page (ad) hangs up and I kill it. Could be related.
-
Whining Spoiled Brat
I heard a clip of Smirky on NPR yesterday afternoon, thowing a hissy fit about those meanie democrats.
Not making an argument, not making a point, not defending his position, just ... whining.
He sounded exactly like every four-year-old holding up the grocery checkout line screaming for candy his mother won't let him have.
You know, the one that when the exhausted mother finally slaps the shit out of, everybody applauds.
-
In any anyone wants a diversion...
I've been having this silly "debate" about FISA, criminal and civil contempt, and executive power and privilege, over at Daily Kos, with someone whom I've come across in the past and has long struck me as either a delusional authoritarian, or a right wing troll (or, really, both, since the two are hard to tell apart, and there may not even be a difference).
Said person appears to believe (or at least is arguing the point) that the president has certain absolute powers (including ones never mentioned in the constitution, such as EP) that neither congress nor the courts can legitimately challenge, limit or revoke (even though some of them were originally granted or ceded by them). I.e. the Unity Executive theory of absolute and uncheckable presidential power. He reminds me of David Rivkin, actually. "Enjoy".
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/2/26/102929/804/11#c11
-
@ tempus
Your post about rummaging through CDRs and private messages, even if for "legal" and "troubleshooting" purposes merely highlights the NEED for encrypted telephony and encrypted text messaging.
Well, yes, I agree.
As I said, no one (I know) does "rummaging", but nonetheless, there are those exceptions recognised for monitoring for maintenance and troubleshooting purposes (subject to prohibitions on the use or disclosure of any contents).
But if you don't want anyone to hear, you should use encryptation (but also refrain from making calls in restaurants, shops, etc.). You should avoid cordless phones, and Bluetooth headsets too.
FWIW, while most people consider privacy to be something to be protected from everyone else, the Fourth Amendment pertains only to the gummint's snooping and doesn't prevent anyone else from doing so. Your recourse WRT other, private parties is positive law; statutory law enacted to protect your privacy, such as HIPAA, the telecommunications laws, etc..
Cheers,
-
@Yellow Dog
I think that's what chapped my ass about the "in public" bit from the press conference. The guy is a snotty little frat-boy child of privilege who thinks he's king of the world.
And what galls is - for the time being at least - he's right.
-
@ondelette
Thank you for taking the time to write down your ideas on this topic, that the power of the government to hold secrets is one that needs to be subject to rebalancing through extension to the courts and the legislature. I think this is one of several changes that need to be made. It is first, and it is the one that is clearly stated now. Others would involve a similar rebalancing of the powers to collect and analyze information.
I think your proposed amendment is a good start, but it needs to be much more specific as to what the people's power to challenge is, and that requires some legal expertise.
In your long post you say "The problem becomes explicit in the FISA debate, twice." This may be a problem with my reading comprehension, but I was unable to figure out what the second instance is. If you have the time (and please, only if you have) could you tell me what the second is?
-
George Bush told the truth yesterday
"Allowing the lawsuits to proceed could aid our enemies, because the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of information about how we conduct surveillance."
God have Glenn G got this wrong, Bush was right - it would aid his enemies. And he is so perseptive, perhaps the only time he has been right in the last 15 years
Note I said his enemies - me and about 210M other Americans.
Go for it l'tle Bushie and when you leave office we will have Air Force 1
drop you off in den Haag along with Dicky Boy for the War Crimes Court.
-
@Svensker on Vundo
There's an app available on the net called VUndoFix.exe that works (doing dir /od *.exe on your Windows->system32 directory and looking suspiciously at and deleting anything that has junk names and is less than a couple of days old also works, as long as you know what you're looking at).
Last time we got that, it was from downloading government software (epi info, I think).
hope this helps
-
@Mike Sulzer
No, it isn't your reading comprehension. The thing got long before I got to number two, and I forgot to say that it was number two. Number one is in the procedures I laid out in that paragraph -- only one of which calls for destruction of the information (rollback). Number two is the framing from Glenn, and from ACLU and EFF and others. There is a paradox inherent in saying the court can keep a secret and simultaneously saying we need the court to tell us what the secret they're hiding is (the only way we can find out what happened is by the lawsuits).
The first doesn't point to secrecy being the problem until you try to ferret out what should be prohibited in a database/internet/datamining scenario and find you can't make a rule that always works so you will need to restrict secrecy to be able to make judgments. The second is obvious on its face once you state it as I did above.
I agree my amendment proposals are in need of legal expertise and wordsmithing. I was trying to create something that allowed secrets but made the right of the people not to be damaged by them sacrosanct. The one thing that is clear is that there can never be a secret so vital that it never can be scrutinized by anyone other than the people who made it secret in the first place. That has to cut across all claims of things like 'executive privilege' and 'national security' and 'separation of powers'. So I thought the only place that could happen is in the Constitution itself. If you'll allow that the education of the people also means keeping them informed, then, to paraphrase the sign on the Boston Public Library:
The nation requires the informing of the people as the safeguard of order and liberty.