Text 19881, 173 rader
Skriven 2006-05-12 11:16:54 av John Hull (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 19879 av BOB SAKOWSKI (1:123/140)
Ärende: Reaction to Der Fascist Monkey
======================================
BOB SAKOWSKI -> ALL wrote:
 BS> Editorials, from Right and Left, Hit Latest NSA Shocker

 BS> By Greg Mitchell

 BS> Published: May 11, 2006

 BS> NEW YORK Leading newspapers reacted swiftly to USA Today's Thursday
 BS> bombshell confirming the long-rumored National Security Agency "data
 BS> mining" operation drawing on phone records of tens of millions of
 BS> Americans. Web sites covered the reactions of the day in Washington, and
 BS> now editorials are appearing.

 BS> The New York Times' James Risen and Eric Lichtblau first disclosed the
 BS> program, but in less specific terms, last December. Thursday on its Web
 BS> site, The Washington Post confirmed it, using these words: "The Bush
 BS> administration has secretly been collecting the domestic telephone records
 BS> of millions of American households and businesses, assembling gargantuan
 BS> databases and attempting to sift them for clues about terrorist threats,
 BS> according to sources with knowledge of the program."

 BS> A Post editorial asserted that data mining can be legitimate but "a giant
 BS> government database detailing which phone numbers called which other phone
 BS> numbers...is a massive intrusion on personal privacy."

 BS> USA Today on Friday ran a lengthy editorial slamming the program -- while
 BS> observing that the White House had declined the opportunity to provide an
 BS> opposing view.
 BS> The newspaper declared, "Creating a huge, secret database of Americans'
 BS> phone records does far more than threaten terrorists. It is a deeply
 BS> troubling act that undermines U.S. freedoms and threatens us all."

 BS>  From the right, the Chicago Tribune editorial page on Friday opined,
"This
 BS> sounds like a vast and unchecked intrusion on privacy. President Bush's
 BS> assurance Thursday that the privacy of Americans was being 'fiercely
 BS> protected' was not at all convincing.....Based on the newspaper's
 BS> reporting, this effort appears to go far beyond any surveillance effort
 BS> that would be targeted at terrorist operations.

 BS> "At first blush this program carries troubling echoes of Total Information
 BS> Awareness, a proposed Defense Department 'data-mining' expedition into a
 BS> mass of personal information on individuals' driver's licenses, passports,
 BS> credit card purchases, car rentals, medical prescriptions, banking
 BS> transactions and more. That was curbed by Congress after a public outcry.
 BS> It seems the people who wanted to bring you TIA didn't get the message."

 BS> The Tribune noted that it had backed NSA surveillance "if it included some
 BS> modest judicial oversight. But this vast mining of domestic phone records
…
 BS> this is something else....

 BS> "Why would the government seek and store records of every telephone call
to
 BS> your doctor, your lawyer, your next door neighbor? Tell us."

 BS> The Los Angeles Times echoed this, noting that "by now no one in (or out
 BS> of) Congress should have any faith in the administration's assurances
about
 BS> either its actions or its intentions under this program. As another
 BS> president once observed: Trust, but verify. Congress needs to fill in the
 BS> blanks. "

 BS> The conservative Boston Herald observed, "Since 9/11 the American public
 BS> has been willing to rely on the assurances of government leaders that they
 BS> are preserving our privacy while fighting terrorism. Unfortunately, and
 BS> perhaps understandably, many Americans no longer believe them."

 BS> The Detroit Free Press expressed horror, but in an amusing fashion,
titling
 BS> its editorial "Liberty and Scrutiny for All" and leading off with: "Might
 BS> as well just assume that every move you make, every step you take, every
 BS> call you place, they'll be watching you. So conduct yourself accordingly."

 BS> The New York Times, meanwhile, declared on Friday that "there is more
 BS> reason than ever to be worried — and angry — about how wide the
 BS> government's web has been reaching....

 BS> "The government has stressed that it is not listening in on phone calls,
 BS> only analyzing the data to look for calling patterns. But if all the
 BS> details of the program are confirmed, the invasion of privacy is
 BS> substantial. By cross-referencing phone numbers with databases that link
 BS> numbers to names and addresses, the government could compile dossiers of
 BS> what people and organizations each American is in contact with....

 BS> "What we have here is a clandestine surveillance program of enormous size,
 BS> which is being operated by members of the administration who are subject
to
 BS> no limits or scrutiny beyond what they deem to impose on one another. If
 BS> the White House had gotten its way, the program would have run secretly
 BS> until the war on terror ended — that is, forever.

 BS> "Congress must stop pretending that it has no serious responsibilities for
 BS> monitoring the situation. The Senate should call back Attorney General
 BS> Alberto Gonzales and ask him — this time, under oath — about the scope of
 BS> the program. This time, lawmakers should not roll over when Mr. Gonzales
 BS> declines to provide answers. The confirmation hearings of Michael Hayden,
 BS> President Bush's nominee for Central Intelligence Agency director, are
also
 BS> a natural forum for a serious, thorough and pointed review of exactly what
 BS> has been going on.

 BS> "Most of all, Congress should pass legislation that removes any doubt that
 BS> this kind of warrantless spying on ordinary Americans is illegal. If the
 BS> administration finds the current procedures for getting court approval of
 BS> wiretaps too restrictive, this would be the time to make any needed
 BS> adjustments."

 BS> The USA Today editorial observed, "The fact that the government is trying
 BS> to track (but not wiretap) every call you make and every call you receive
—
 BS> at home or on your cellphone is, to say the least, disturbing.

 BS> "It means that your phone company (if you are a customer of AT&T,
BellSouth
 BS> or Verizon) tossed your privacy to the wind and collaborated with this
 BS> extraordinary intrusion, and that it did so secretly and without following
 BS> any court order.

 BS> "That is, unless you're lucky enough to be served by Qwest, the one major
 BS> phone company that had the integrity to resist government pressure.

 BS> "It means that unless public opposition changes the government's course,
 BS> this database will be compiled, updated and expanded into the
indeterminate
 BS> future, through countless administrations with who-knows-what interests
and
 BS> motives.

 BS> "Only the most naive and unsuspicious soul could trust that it will remain
 BS> safe, secured and for the eyes only of those hunting terrorists."

 BS> It also found "questionable" arguments that the spy program is legal.

 BS> The New York Post, on the other hand, found the revelations all the more
 BS> reason to confirm Gen. Michael Hayden--who once oversaw the NSA spy
 BS> efforts--as new CIA director.

 BS> "It needs someone like Hayden - who understands the need to maximize
 BS> efforts actually to defeat the terrorists - to whip the CIA into shape
once
 BS> and for all," the Post declared.
 BS> [snip]

 BS>
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002501664



 BS> [The conservative wing of the Republican Party, the most corrupt political
 BS> movement in the history of the republic and, like the fascist swine they
 BS> are, actively working to kill the America of The Founders.]


You know, you really are a moron.  "NSA Shocker" my ass.  The New York Times
reported on this program at least six months ago, if not longer, and nobody
batted an eye.  Don't try to make out like nobody on the left knew this was
going on, either.  The people in Congress who NEEDED to know, were briefed a
long time ago.  Even that scag Nancy Pelosi said its a necessary program. 
Also, despite what USA Today put on the front page, they still said that it was
a legal program and that only phone numbers - NO PERSONAL INFORMATION OF ANY
KIND - were being tracked (although they conveniently buried that 5 pages
back).  And finally, two thirds of the public, according to an ABC Poll
released this morning have no problem at all with it.

The ONLY reason this came up now is because the Dems are desperate to find
something to beat up on Hayden with in his confirmation hearings.

By the way, if we really were fascists as you love to call us, somebody would
have offed your smarmy butt a long time ago.

--- Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308)
 * Origin:  (1:123/789.0)