What a broken record...oofdah!

With everyone and their cat, "looking into the matter" we should have a HUGE pile of reports flooding out of the various committees for 6 ! years now. The front pages of every newspaper would/should be in flames with revelations.

We need a law and order rally or some blunt reminder that "No one is above the law."

Pshaw ?

With a conglomerate running all media, when will any significant truth come out? Break them up.

I remember when Journalists exposed the govt, spoke truth to power and were worth their price tag. Now they'd rather die than report...newspaper suicide by strangulation.

It isn't working, this sitting and waiting. It looks like we have to go unemployed and sit-in-Washington en masse.

Regulation -- Oversight -- Enforcement, is that too much to demand?

Whispering isn't working.

Thanks Glenn, I don't know how you can stand it?

If a person of interest mails a letter at a mailbox in Germany to a US citizen, and US counter-intelligence breaks open the mailbox and reads the letter, is that a violation? I think the answer is no.

That would be a violation of GERMAN law. (I know you were talking about FISA, but why are so many people speaking as if the US automatically has global jurisdiction?)

Thanks for the good discussions, I feel "smarter" if not more informed today, I have definitely added to my arsenal of arguments on the particular subject and peripherals ones you've all touched on.

If only the majority discourse could be conducted like this (regardless of the forum, the subject and the parties involved), we would be in a better place I am sure.

for one of the best discussions about 'National Security' I have read on UT!

There are regular communications from their commanders exorting their followers and referring to events in planning. We ignored those at our peril...

WGsalter you are so close to getting it and you don't even know it. Turn that sentence around and apply it to the citizens of other countries. Imagine innocent, cosmopolitan students and reformers seeking positive change in a nation that has never attacked the U.S. hearing "regular communications" from the leaders of the United States "exorting" our citizens on the need to attack said nation and "referring to events in planning" to do so. How should the people in such nations feel about the U.S.? You know you don't like it, but they should be just peachy when it comes from "us" because? Well... because.

I'm reminded of a great line from HBO's Elizabeth I mini-series delivered to the Queen herself herself by her friend the Earl of Essex: "Bess, you possess the great weakness of the clear minded. You believe that everyone else sees the world as clearly as you do..." and make rational decisions based on what they plainly observe to be true. (Had to paraphrase the last bit.)

The corollary to this is that throughout the world and all its cultures the befuddled, fearful, and authoritarian minded all seem to posses the same great weakness: they all believe that everyone else will react differently than they would to insult, threat, provocation, and assault.

First, this is not about assigning blame but about realizing that other humans will respond in the same ways you would likely respond to hostile acts. They will respond the same way you would respond if a foreign gov't burned down your entire town and killed lots of your neighbors and family, just to get at the few neighbors who attacked them. It is foolish to think that we are the only ones who will ever feel righteous anger and desire to punish those who attack us. So, we should be extremely careful in the tools we choose to use and how they are wielded that we don't commit grave injustices that others, previously neutral or friendly, seek to avenge.

Second, we need to decide just what it is we are "protecting". There was much noise about the "terrorists not winning" after 9/11. They won, everyone agreed, if we surrendered our freedoms. Except that very shortly after that we were told that we couldn't defeat them unless we surrendered our freedoms. Few batted an eyelash at this montrous contradiction. So, they win if we surrender our freedoms... but we can't defeat them unless we surrender our freedoms... ergo, simply by attacking us they won, by putting us in a position to do exactly what they hoped we would do: surrender even the appearance of adhering to our most deeply held principles and cede our liberties for a flawed sense of safety.

You have joined the Obama administration who now agree 100% with this neocon farce of safety and "freedom". I knew we were in big trouble when freedom and patriotism were equated with going shopping, rather than maintaining our liberty and principles in the face of danger. I'm surprised by how quickly even the pretense of law, liberty, etc have been abandoned. If seemingly intelligent folks like you can be led down this insidious path of "victory" then maybe the republic really is doomed.

I know this thread is on it's last legs, so it's probably unfair of me to put these two questions out there but I have yet to receive an answer from one single person, arguing positions similar to yours, to whom I've put them. Maybe you will be different.

What freedoms, what checks on your government are you unwilling to cede (if any), in the quest for safety or some other goal? Is there any action that could be taken or policies persued by the political faction/leaders of your choice that would cause you to remove your support for them?

My only rule for answering is that the answers cannot revolve around a comparison to a hated faction/leader. Such as: I'll stop supporting republicans/Bush if they start acting like liberals/Clinton. The definition of liberal/conservative etc have proved too fluid to be seriously allowed (if anything republicans do is by idiot thinking conservative then conservative means nothing).