After reading the Complaint filed by the ACLU (and with the usual IANAL disclaimers), it seems to me that by "mass acquisition," the ACLU is not referring to the method by which information may be acquired (data-mining), but to the fact that the new law removes virtually all restrictions on the government's activities re: international communications. IOW, the government can now acquire anything and everything they want, which includes listening to your phone calls and reading your emails (the "mass acquisition"), without having to get a warrant, etc.

I probably didn't phrase the above particularly well, but that's how I read it.

I want to congratulate you on your boycott of a site that has banned you. It takes real dedication not to post at a site that won't allow you to post.

Just out of curiosity though, how many posts did you throw up at C&L before they banned you and over what time frame did you do your posting?

Once again, Congratulations! You are The Man!

Read carefully and you will note that I didn't attack you, I criticized the dynamic and people participating in it. And that's the last I have to say on it.

Just for the heck of it, I went back to Bob Altemeyer's "The Authoritaritans" to see if I could find any parallels with the few, but annoying, Obama supporters. This made me laugh...

You could have left-wing authoritarian followers as well, who support a revolutionary leader who wants to overthrow the establishment. I knew a few in the 1970s, Marxist university students who constantly spouted their chosen authorities, Lenin or Trotsky or Chairman Mao. Happily they spent most of their time fighting with each other, as lampooned in Monty Python’s Life of Brian where the People’s Front of Judea devotes most of its energy to battling, not the Romans, but the Judean People’s Front.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

Thanks, but location is not my main point. Are you saying that the sweeping doesn’t just include emails sent but all information contained in email accounts and web sites worldwide? If so, that is a hell of a lot more data to screen and if the terrorists use code terminology, why would this screening be successful? If the account were created in the US at say a public library, and the method Silash mentioned is used, is it legal under the new FISA law, to screen that account. If so, all this concern about foreign sources/location is useless as far as the Internet is concerned. What am I missing?

"Rufus11

I must confess, this is the first time I've read any of your postings, so I don't know what you're perspective or attitude is. My personal belief is that if posters had a policy of mostly ignoring other posters that seem out to start problems--that is, if after witnessing a post or two degrade into silly name calling with said poster, just ignore them for the future--there would be rarely a need to ban. By this same logic, I have noticed that you seem to go round and round with a few here, but I've never taken the time to notice why, and I believe I'm the happier for it. Glenn seems to tacitly accept the idea that it is not just the disruptive poster, but those also who drop everything to mix it up with them for hours and pages of posts at a time, that reduce the helpfulness and quality of the site.

"

Why, then do you feel the need to take time to attack me? What's the point of what you do? If you believe this why no ignore like you said? Why feel the need to stick a knife in?

I'm trying to keep the internet free. Remember when no liberals could speak? Do you remember that? Or do you remember when clitnon backers were all banning obama supporters? Probably not.

My issue is with picking and choosign who gets free speach. that is a fascsit concept to me. In america we have something called democracy. You might have heard of it. Peopel speak their minds and consensus is built. If only certain voices are heard than thos enot heard are cut out of the process of democracy. do you understand that concept? You must not be a liberal. We have been banned for many years. our voices have been stripped from democracy since the red scare and before. I thought the internet would free liberals. I thought there was no way the fascsits could hold us down.

When liberals are banning liberals, we have became what we have fought against. You people always mistake thinking it's about me. It's not about me. Much bigger than me. It's about free speech on the internet. You must be a republcain or clitnon backer, same thing, if you are not worried about being silenced. Us liebrals are daily.

I would prefer if you ignore me . It is you picking the fight, tough guy. I just posted one post you felt the need to attack. Do you. I'll definatly do me

I listened to the podcast. One thing I remain confused about is on what the ACLU bases its motion [no lawyer here, forgive if I misuse the lingos] to make the hearings of the FISA courts public [or did I even misunderstand that?]. If they are so hypersecret to begin with, what on God's green earth could move the court to publicly air its laundry list on a specific request for surveillance, I ask rhetorically? Anyone?

Another terrorist attack and this legislation will not be sufficient.

I must confess, this is the first time I've read any of your postings, so I don't know what you're perspective or attitude is. My personal belief is that if posters had a policy of mostly ignoring other posters that seem out to start problems--that is, if after witnessing a post or two degrade into silly name calling with said poster, just ignore them for the future--there would be rarely a need to ban. By this same logic, I have noticed that you seem to go round and round with a few here, but I've never taken the time to notice why, and I believe I'm the happier for it. Glenn seems to tacitly accept the idea that it is not just the disruptive poster, but those also who drop everything to mix it up with them for hours and pages of posts at a time, that reduce the helpfulness and quality of the site.

I assume now that i will be accused of trying to dictate behavior to posters here, which is fine, I've learned to ignore that too.