digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Breach of Obama's passport file leads to firings at St. Dept

msnbc.msn.com — "Two contract employees of the State Department were fired and a third person was disciplined for accessing passport records of Sen. Barack Obama "without a need to do so," State Department officials confirmed to NBC News." This is continuing to develop so more is coming in each minute.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • JNudda, on 03/21/2008, -15/+110This is sketchy on all levels. And now it appears it was accessed on three occasions times by the three different people (the first two of which have been fired), MSNBC is reporting on Countdown as I type this. This is an appalling breach, and I would not be surprised to find out that this was not some curious employee. And the most shocking part is how long it has taken for the State Dept to report this to Obama (Rice called Obama's Senate Office THIS AFTERNOON). Chances are this was the doing of the Bushies, not the Clintons or McCains.
    • motivatedmama, on 03/21/2008, -9/+8I agree, much as I would like this to be more of the Clinton's dirty work. Still, this is excellent fodder for the general election. Conference call slated for sometime after 9:00 tonight.
      Papers please!
      • motivatedmama, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4Uh, hello? I was AGREEING with the dude above about it being as likely to be the Bushies. I hope Hillary goes down in flames just as much as the next guy! This MAY be good for Barack in the general election IF it was a Republican stunt. Hence the "fodder" remark. Hell, it's good for him now and I'm glad! IF it is Hillary's doing then great! The Dems will rally (I hope!) and she will crash and burn. A win/win/win situation. As for it merely being curious snoopers, theres the suspicious time line and it was ONLY Barack's privacy that was violated. The "papers please" was a Nazi comparison that the Bushies are well deserving of. Now that I've addressed my comment point by point, get off my ***** back. If you had a legitimate gripe with it, reply and quit the lame anonymous digging. Assholes.
        • sovietninja, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Then you should have left out the Clinton comment. And your promoting the sensationalism politics that revolve around the election instead of what should be addressed, IMO, how the hell are we gonna fix our economy so I don't have to spend my tax refund on gas. If neither will provide a strong solution, it doesn't matter to me who muckrakes the most. If Obama finds out something about Clinton like she received an advance copy of GTA4 and plays it on her campaign trai, or if Clinton finds out that Obama plays Vietnam Era Paintball with McCain online. NO ONE SHOULD GIVE A DAMN. Lets get back to what's important for this country.
          • motivatedmama, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1If this is to be strictly about the issue as it was submitted, then it is you who are off topic. I was responding to a comment about THIS issue. Sure, there's a lot of bad crap going on in the world. We're not going to fix it all in one day by being "high minded" all of a sudden about political strategy. This is a privacy issue first. We should all be alarmed. This likely has to do with the campaign, hence the conspiracy theories. Yeah the government and the economy suck and THOSE issues will out live THIS one I'm sure. But they are not the issue here. And as obvious as it is that you do not support Obama or Clinton, it is HIS privacy and campaign that ARE the issues of THIS article. And FYI, not that you'd care, Hillary may well be behind this. Call me crazy, but I do give a damn about that.
    • martalli, on 03/21/2008, -3/+22At what point will someone go to jail for the immense corruption spreading through government these days? I honestly think this is the result of a culture coming from the very top...and why are contractors allowed to pursue such shoddy work - breaking into confidential records, leaving wiring to electrocute soldiers, and God knows what else???
      • skizzabadoo, on 03/21/2008, -1/+6Great question. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was the closest answer you will get though, and we all know how much jail time he served...

        At least he can't practice in D.C. anymore.
      • iainc, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1The Chinese are light-years ahead in dealing with corrupt civil servants.
    • JNudda, on 03/21/2008, -4/+15To correct what I posted, it was not Rice that called Obama's office, but someone lower in the Dept.
      This should be disturbing to all Democrats, supporters of Obama and Clinton.
      • PunkRampant, on 03/21/2008, -0/+21Or all Americans for that matter. Just think of all the snooping into Average Joe's records that doesn't get reported because he isn't a high-level official.
      • gquaglia, on 03/21/2008, -3/+6Please, this has Clinton written all over it. She and her dirt merchants are looking for any bit of mud to sling at Obama.
        • Lythium, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Yes, because getting caught red-handed doing something like this is going to be _such_ a campaign boost for Hillary. Give me a break - there is no evidence linking her to any of it, and everyone's first reaction is _still_ "Hillary Did It." I'm not a Hillary supporter; that woman scares me on any number of levels, and repulses me on even more. But while she may be frigid and ruthless and amoral and whatnot, she is _not_ stupid enough to do something this damn obvious. If nothing else, she's too canny and conniving for it.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Gee I dunno...do you think it should be disturbing to McCain too? What about the 18 other people whose files were looked into?

    • saska, on 03/21/2008, -1/+12The mismanagement here is what boggles the mind -- even more than the breach of privacy. Word is that the employees, since they were contractors, are not compelled to speak to the State Department unless they open a criminal investigation because they've already been fired. And they were fired without being investigated first.

      I couldn't believe it -- William Safire's 1994 writeup about the passport file breaches during the Clinton years is online. This should bring back memories for my fellow thirtysomething diggers: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940 ...

      "The Bush State Department snoops who wrongfully searched the Clinton passport files will not be prosecuted because the snoops in the Operations Center were wrongfully listening in on their plot, while the Clinton State Department snoops who wrongfully rifled the files of one of those Bushie snoops will not be prosecuted because Clinton Justice goes easy on its own."
      • djm159, on 03/21/2008, -9/+0It seems a little odd that this "breach of security" comes at the same time Obama has received negative press to some degree for the anti-American, anti-white rants of his so-called pastor. As for this being "Bushie" it is Clintonesque. What administration was it that had the FBI files of 400 plus GOP operatives in the White House - I believe that was Clinton. Talk about a breach of security. Where's the outrage. This has Clinton and Obama written all over it. Obama needs the sympathy vote because he is falling like a rock and Hillary just needs to be Hillary, the most corrupt politician, short of her husband, to ever grace the office of the co-president. We don't know what company these contractors worked for. They are probably Obama operatives. Spare the Bush bashing, welcome to reality.
      • nixfu, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1>The mismanagement here is what boggles the mind


        What the ***** do you not understand about the words "GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES"?
    • SKbSuJ, on 03/21/2008, -5/+0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_F._Kennedy

      He has endorsed Hillary.
    • canewediggit, on 03/21/2008, -2/+14comment jack- looks like there's a clinton connection after all, ms maura hardy, running the counselor affairs office, a bill appointee as ambassador years back. more details coming, but it could be GOOD NIGHT HILLARY!!!!
    • JoeVet, on 03/21/2008, -2/+8Nobody will believe that a sitting president would use his power to manipulate an election......oh wait.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/21/2008, -2/+10People do this (and get fired) for looking at customer records all the time.
      One place I worked some guy looked up George W. Bush's credit file. He was escorted out of the building within minutes by security.

      This might simply be a dumbass intern or clerk trying to impress his co-workers.
      • poxonyou, on 03/21/2008, -1/+3Yeah, sure that's what it is. They just hire any dumb ass off the street, allow them easy access to politicians private files, and those dumb asses, completely unaware of the seriousness of such breaches, just casually glance throw Obama's passport files so they can tell their friends Obama went to Sweden for a week in 1991. /s
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Wrong.
          They hire people in Canada, who are without criminal records.
          Then they monitor everything they do on the custom made computer network system.
          No Internet access.

          System access is extremely limited and there are security flags everywhere that alert the bosses of trouble.
          They also don't allow writing materials of any kind into the building.

          Finally they sue or file charges on offenders.
      • nalimca, on 03/21/2008, -0/+5I wonder what GWB's credit score is. He's been taking huge loans to finance the war...
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Probably maxed. He is filthy rich.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 03/21/2008, -3/+3Work of the Bushes? What kind of conspiracy crack are you smoking?
    • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4This reminds me... I was listening to some random republican operative giving an interview to the BBC not long ago, and he had some strange comment like "Obama isn't really as worldly as people think, he hasn't visited Europe much".... or something to that effect. And it made me wonder, how would he know that? Is it possible that whoever was behind this has already been distributing the info? Just a thought.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Stop thinking....ur not good at it
    • aboutlogin, on 03/21/2008, -7/+3please ignore this story. it is a meaningless distraction. if you question why you are even being given this information you will realize that they are trying to cast a cloud around where obama may or may not have been in his lifetime. this is irrelevant. resist the temptation to feed the very system that oppresses you, isn't this what his speech was about? not this time...?
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2I disagree. I don't think there is anything to hide. I think this is just more evidence of the desperation of Obama's opponents - they will break the law if necessary to gain a political advantage.
      • saska, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3I don't think there's anything to be found in Obama's passport file. That's not the draw of the story.

        The draw of the story is that it happened, right on schedule, as a second-term Bush prepares to exit the White House against the backdrop of a country hungry for a changing of the party guard.
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -8/+4Seriously, the intelligence level on digg is dropping like mad. WTF is wrong with you people? Who taught you to believe every ***** thing in the world is a conspiracy, the politician you hate's fault, and can't just be some idiot doing something stupid? You people really need to get a grip because you are so completely blinded by your partisan politics, of which you only retain what you're fed, and you embarrass yourselves each time you post your garbage. It's stories, with replies like all of these, which makes non-Americans think we're retarded.
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -3/+5Maybe you're an idiot, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are just ignorant. In 1992 the George H. W. Bush campaign illegally accessed Bill Clinton's passport records in order to try and dig up dirt on him. That is a proven fact. The very reason these alerts were placed on the files of prominent politicians is because of this. Yeah, politicians never break the law, conspiracies and cover ups never happen, especially during campaigns. I guess you've never heard of Watergate either. Educate yourself before you run your mouth.
        • Latimer, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2Did you just compare this to watergate? Crazy ass conspiracy theorists!
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Oh, and to preemptively stop you from saying something else stupid. No, I'm not comparing this to Watergate. That was simply an example of an actual real life conspiracy, since you don't seem to think such a thing exists.
      • Asterra2, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Don't bother replying to this guy. Imagine what a Hillary supporter might do when confronted with the details of this latest snafu. Yes indeed: He would do what he could to make any reaction seem like an overreaction. Just as the press is likely to do. There's probably little chance that the fellow actually believes what he's saying; that's not the point of his post.
    • toefinder, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1the intelligence community has been disloyal of every democratic president since Jimmy Carter. They have been instrumental in election rigging and smear tactics against democratic party candidates for decades. This gaff is par for the course. I'm just surprised that there has been any admission at all. This will quickly get swept under the rug...the media will not follow up on it and the power brokers will continue to have it their way.
    • iainc, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Two contractors. They could be affiliated with any of the major interests not wanting an Obama presidency.
  • DiggedyDoo, on 03/21/2008, -17/+103Please let it be Hillary behind this...
    • FoxyMark, on 03/21/2008, -12/+2HAHAHAH XX would do that.
    • kamel, on 03/21/2008, -4/+18I believe this is the work of Benjamin Linus.
    • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+13Whoever is behind it, i find the incompetence of the state department to dismiss this as merely "imprudent curiosity" without any actual investigation, without passing this up the ladder, totally unacceptable. ANY US Senator that has people illegally accessing their files should be notified immediately - whether they are a presidential candidate or not. Anything else looks like a cover up.
      • r00fus, on 03/21/2008, -0/+7Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguisable from malice
        (with apologies to Larry Niven)
        • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2that's a good one. i'll have to remember that.
      • Lythium, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1"ANY US Senator that has people illegally accessing their files should be notified immediately"
        Let me fix that for you: "Any US CITIZEN whose files have been illegally accessed should be notified immediately." What makes MY privacy any less sacrosanct than the privacy of some guy running for office?
    • DaviDTC, on 03/21/2008, -2/+21Just heard on a msnbc show that one of the people is or has worked with clinton.
      • DaviDTC, on 03/21/2008, -2/+12Maura Harty. She was the United States Ambassador to Paraguay under Clinton from oct 1997 to may 1999
      • MrDuke77, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Not too much of a shock. GWB failed to clean house when he took office and left behind a bevy of clintoon faithful to create mischief during his term. Now using their position to dig up dirt on the dude they perceive as standing in the way of hilly's birthright (first woman prez).
    • NyteStarNyne, on 03/21/2008, -2/+7Surprise, Surprise. I'm sure the Clinton campaign will be working overnight to spin this new revelation. Lets see what they come up with tommorow.
    • jason4188, on 03/21/2008, -21/+4That is so sweet, did they mention how today, Obama referred to his Grandmother as the, "typical white person." I wonder what his definition of typical white person is? I mean what would be done to the average digg user if they refered to a black as the, "typical black."?
      • DEIx15x8, on 03/21/2008, -12/+2The other day he called his white grandmother un-American and claimed that she says the same things as his wacky pastor. So I know he has insulted my religion and race. What else can he insult. Is he going to insult all males? Maybe college students? He could just insult all Americans, wait, he accomplished that already.
        • AreTooDeTo, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1how did he insult your religion? the pastor he was referring to was outwardly racist (toward white people)
      • runCMD, on 03/21/2008, -6/+1I didn't understand why he threw her under the bus either.
    • poxonyou, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Could be as those responsible were contractors...not like they were hand picked by Bush as Republican loyalists. Though, it doesn't explain why those higher up would be quick to dismiss this as "nothing to see here." I'm sure the Republicans would love to get Clinton if they had any chance as well.
    • runCMD, on 03/21/2008, -6/+3Hey Doo - if you can't find something about Hillary - why don't you make something up ? LOL
    • mal1964, on 03/21/2008, -5/+2Please let his comment be true so I can do more Hillary bashing on digg, because its fun and cool!
    • nalimca, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Must be someone HRC cannot disown.
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1You desperate, lost little boy.
    • Myztry, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2Their is no way this could of been Hilary. The simple fact someone got fingered tells us that. Don't you think Bill's primary concubine, after spending so many years as a fly on the WhiteHouse wall would know the people and the methods to get this done properly.
      Not all channels of access are regulated. Their are always those beyond the reach of oversight. You just need them to owe you (or your husband) a favor.
  • Mrdudeperson, on 03/21/2008, -37/+2Just another conspiracy.
    • MoofTheStoof, on 03/21/2008, -3/+15Actually, the Bush Administration has been using the Justice Dept. and various other Executive Branch tools to target political enemies since they took office. ...And they're not subtle about it.
      • saska, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4In fairness, they learned that trick from the Clinton administration's use of the IRS for the same purposes.

        I think Bill Clinton did great things for America as a whole, but a saint he was not.
        • Dumbledorito, on 03/21/2008, -0/+7If Clinton learned that trick from someone, look no further than Tricky Dick. And I don't mean Cheney.
    • jdenzer, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Much like the link of Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda and 9/11 that the Bush Administration continues to try and convince the public.
    • Wacer, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2The Clinton's went through the same thing when Bil was running for president. This isn't the first time this has happened.
  • DiggedyDoo, on 03/21/2008, -5/+20... that was really malicious of me. I almost feel guilty.
    • JNudda, on 03/21/2008, -1/+7Yeah, lets not point the figure at her. As much as most of us dont like her, there is nothing that indicates that Hillary had anything to do with this.
    • DeadFox1, on 03/21/2008, -3/+2I went to digg your earlier comment up, but accidentally dugg you down. sorry bout that!
    • RansomHoldiay, on 03/21/2008, -1/+5dont feel guilty. everyone's thinking it, you just said it for us.
    • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2honestly, if anything, this looks more like republican tactics to me. They did this to Bill Clinton back in 92 - it was tied directly back to George H. W. Bush's camp
    • jcroweall7, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3I kinda DO hope she's behind it because it almost definitely would spell a quick end to this long primary season.

      That said, yeah, probably not Clinton work.
    • toefinder, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1you shouldn't feel guilty for saying that ...you should feel stupid
  • diggydiggs, on 03/21/2008, -10/+2More continuous updates throughout the night:
    http://digg.com/politics/Obama_Campaign_Releases_F ...
  • Aidenag, on 03/21/2008, -19/+4Dupe.....
    http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/2_fired_over_Oba ...
  • DeadFox1, on 03/21/2008, -9/+22What's so important in a passport file?
    • Pentalaimon, on 03/21/2008, -2/+40In 1992 a similar thing happened to Bill Clinton:
      State Department officials said Ms. Tamposi and Mr. Moheban were looking for documents that would show whether Mr. Clinton had ever considered renouncing United States citizenship or becoming a citizen of another country to avoid military service in Vietnam. No such information on Mr. Clinton was found.
      In this year’s Presidential election, the Bush-Quayle campaign portrayed Mr. Clinton as a draft dodger, criticized him for taking part in demonstrations against the Vietnam War and suggested that a 1969 trip to Moscow by Mr. Clinton raised doubts about his patriotism and his character.
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 03/21/2008, -15/+3Mr. Encyclopedia over here. People like you are a curiosity to me. You have the time and ambition to investigate claims like this on a machine-like level, yet you don't raise your voice in consternation over bigger conspiracies like, say...

        Dyncorp trafficking in the sale of women and children:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTa04c5eMuY

        Or, the curiosities in regard to 9/11(too many instances to post links to)



        Is it me, or are you gossip geniuses. Only interested in getting to the bottom of non-issues?
    • wonderchemist, on 03/21/2008, -4/+13Information to fuel the Obama is a secret Muslim flames?
      • saska, on 03/21/2008, -5/+6Maybe that's why they're not talking about his pastor. They'd have to admit he's a Christian.
        • JoeVet, on 03/21/2008, -0/+11Don't fool yourself. They'll use both. He's a Muslim who attends a Christian Church in which the former minster is anti-American. Oh and he's black and his father was not an American. And he can speak a foreign language and has worn African clothes.
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Well his brother certainly is!
    • PunkRampant, on 03/21/2008, -3/+24A list of every country Obama has been to in most of his life. The suspicious side of me wants to think that they were looking for "Obama has been to [insert Muslim nation]" and then they would release it on the internet as "proof" that he's a secret terrorist.
      • canewediggit, on 03/21/2008, -0/+18you mean like in february when photos of him in somalian 'terrorist' garb from the '06 trip started showing up in the press?
        • PunkRampant, on 03/21/2008, -0/+21Interesting.
          Feb. 21 - second instance of passport security breach
          Feb. 25 - Drudge Report releases photo of Obama in Somalian garb

          Hey, I'm just sayin...
        • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -0/+12the funny thing about that is that he was all ready a US Senator traveling on an official basis when those pics were taken. It would be like showing pics of Bush holding that sword with the Saudis and saying "OMGZ Bush is secret al Qaeda!"
        • canewediggit, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4see my comment above under first thread and kiss the clintons goodbye. it's obama/mccain time.
      • cdigioia, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1I think they'd only have a list if he had reported to the local consulate where he was going (even that is iffy). Other than that they should only have his original passport on file...not an updated scan that includes all the pages with stamps.
    • JNudda, on 03/21/2008, -2/+9Travel History, personal details, social security number, sensitive information of that nature. Also, comments from officials at foreign consulates in countries where Obama traveled to would be in there aswell.
      • nirav72, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4I don't think SSN number is on the passport. I don't see one on mine. But it does have other info DOB, name, address, countries traveled visa stamps etc.
    • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4When you have a political campaign, information about where Obama went and why would be very valuable in any sort of "opposition research"
    • Devaney, on 03/21/2008, -2/+7don't know why you're getting dugg down, i'm curious about what they'd be looking for too...i'll probably get dugg down, but i think anyone who's running our country shouldn't be too worried about people finding out about their travel history, if we had done more research on GW and made him take some of the security checks, tests, polygraphs, etc. (that those entering the fbi/cia have to take) i don't believe he ever would've won the election because we would've realized the threat that he is...that said, Obama 08
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4it's not a matter of whether he should be worried. it's a matter that the information was accessed illegally. as a US citizen people working at the State Department can't just look through your files without a warrant. Not only that but he is a US Senator and a presidential candidate. Who knows WHO would want to get information about him. Yet it happened three times, months passed and no high officials, including Obama himself, were notified
        • Devaney, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3yeah that's true, it's technically illegal, but think about it--the nsa can legally read any citizen's e-mails, and even listen to their phone calls and enter their homes without a warrant thanks to the current administration... I guess I just don't get why people are actually surprised about the fact that this happened; i'm far more surprised about the fact that it's actually still illegal to look at this stuff without a warrant considering everything else we put up with
    • vat0r, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Potential destinations yet to be traveled to as well as a wealth of information including his social security number, names/addresses of foreign family members and even comments by the ambassadors that may have met with Obama during his travels. For anyone trying to dig up information on Obama this would be considered a document of high value.
  • kwazyhulk, on 03/21/2008, -2/+15I'm glad they caught them but it makes you wonder what political dirty tricks have gone unnoticed (or at least unreported.)
    • Juicediggs, on 03/21/2008, -2/+0Again I seriously doubt this was political. Just curiousity.

      FYI most career Fed employees and contractors lean towards the democrat side of things. These are probably just people who thought it would be cool to look up a Presidential candidates info.
    • 4d669, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1He voted for the Real ID Act and the Patriot Act, let him lose his privacy like everybody else.
  • NyteStarNyne, on 03/21/2008, -3/+70Props to Olbermann for being the only political news program not looping the Wrightgate Debate and talking about this issue. Today I flipped on CNN at least 5 separate times and the first thing I hear is of Lou Dobbs on the issue of race and the first thing I see is a cycle of black analysts and a white analysts going at it.
    • RickHavoc, on 03/21/2008, -1/+33MSNBC was on top of it. An hour later Sean Hannity tried to dismiss the story as an attempt by the Obama camp to draw attention from the Wright story (as if we haven't heard enough). Hannity's guest Newt Gingrich promptly disagreed saying, "I'm with Obama on this one". You know Hannity's a kook when a conservative like Gingrich calls him out on his agenda.
      • SPThom, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Say what you will about Newt, but he seems to be about the only one who tries to be "fair and balanced" on Fox. He's a smart guy, and it seems when he wears his journalist hat he's got more integrity than most.
        • veloscaper, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2that's more a reflection of Fox News than Newt being worth more than a piece of ***** w/corn.
    • NameTry2468, on 03/21/2008, -2/+11For real, man! Olbermann had a whole script for his show ready to deliver, but when he learned about this, he covered it like a pro, completely off the cuff. Truly up-to-the-minute coverage and her remained professional in a developing situation that was really touch and go for every second. He didn't even break a sweat.
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -7/+2Why am I not surprised you get all of your news from a "partisan to the extreme", sportscaster? Olberman does not do the news, he is not a journalist. He is a sportscaster, spouting off his personal opinion every night, and anyone with a brain knows it. His show is at the bottom of the ratings, and the only people I hear talk about him are at digg. I hope you tell everyone you know that he is your main news source so they laugh in your face. Don't forget to tell them your other hero is John Stewart, yet another partisan hack giving his personal and biased opinion on things, not actual news, unfiltered.
      Save your breath calling me a republican or Hilary supporter as I support none of the candidates, they all suck.
      • sircomix, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Mmm-mm! Trollicious!
      • rawheadrex, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Yeah, and who's your main news source? Lou Dobbs? Yup, he's neutral all right.
  • artemis77, on 03/21/2008, -4/+18This is not going to be going away for a while. I smell a Special Counsel investigation.
    • martalli, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4That won't be finished until the day after the election (or the day after Bush high tails it to Saudi Arabia circa February 1st, 2009)
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1I smell a non-story and some idiot talking about something he knows nothing about. I'll bet you right now that this story dies fast.
  • drband36, on 03/21/2008, -13/+3There are so many different angles to the Clinton NAFTA sleaze that it's becoming difficult to keep up...

    http://kitchensink08.blogspot.com/2008/03/nafta.ht ...

    Elise in NH
  • NameTry2468, on 03/21/2008, -3/+51The government says they won't launch criminal investigations because THEY don't think anything wrong happened? *****! They know damn well that if they find out who was behind this, it'll help Obama, and they're blocking him on it? Heads better roll...
    • stevensj2, on 03/21/2008, -4/+7Since when is Obama the anti-establishment candidate??

      Now, I enjoy a good conspiracy, but "the goverment is blocking Obama??"...
      • sulthernao, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3Led by Bush...
        • NameTry2468, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3You really wouldn't put it past Bush to do anything he could to secure a republican victory in 2008?
        • d03boy, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1LED BY RON PAUL LOLOLOL
  • slapster, on 03/21/2008, -4/+513 separate occasions. Over the past three months? Not political? Yeah, right ...
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -5/+1Don't you think if they really wanted dirt they'd break into his house, try to get a hold of his financial statements, dealings, etc.? A passport isn't valuable and the info on it can be gained elsewhere and under the radar you idiot(s). Wake the ***** up.
      • tannerpetry, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Is that a real question? Here's a similar one I crafted for you....Why would a kid steal a candy bar when he could just rob the register?
  • HipsterSarah, on 03/21/2008, -3/+69I called CNN about 10 minutes INTO Keith's report and they are dissecting Rev. WRight's sermon. This is the EXACT ridiculousness that happens with the American media. We are focused on the small things when larger issues are happening right under our nose. Politics aside, what does this say about American's civil liberties and the privacy laws. EVERYONE SHOULD BE OUTRAGED! They are ALREADY trying to spin it as "innocent snooping" or "low level employees..." This story is already looking crazy fishy! Why would low level employees be able to have the OPPORTUNITY to even get INTO a Senator's files??? Why didn't Condi alert Sen. Obama? Why doesn't anyone have any REAL answers? This is outrageous!!! Who knows who has been behind this whole thing?? This is a presidential candidate whose information has been breached! IF we can have special investigations and hearings or whatever about baseball players and steroids, CERTAINLY we can have an investigation and hearing into this incident!

    EVERYONE should be outraged from Americans to Hillary to McCain, etc...

    • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+7Larry King was interviewing Obama at the very moment these revelations where being broadcast on MSNBC - what was Larry talking about? Rev. Wright.
    • d03boy, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1karma, biatch
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -7/+2You mean everyone who's an ignorant, partisan hack like yourself, which is in the extreme minority. Speak for your fellow idiots not the rest of us.
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Have you ever wondered about yourself? No I guess that would probably be a no.
  • HipsterSarah, on 03/21/2008, -3/+36What companies did these contractors work for??

    They just said the files could be disseminated electronically, telling someone, etc...

    This is beyond ridiculous! Yeah right, it was just "innocent or curiosity."

    DAMN IT, AMERICANS DESERVE THE TRUTH!! I AM SO TIRED OF OUR GOVT LYING TO US ABOUT OUR SECURITY IN THIS COUNTRY!!



    • g0k50, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1They are hired by republicans, that's who they work for.
      You think they work for USA? Check what Cheney said!
    • d03boy, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Americans deserve the truth.... about their candidates? Maybe thats why they were snooping?
  • RansomHoldiay, on 03/21/2008, -3/+13jesus. the justice department says that it was only out of curiosity because that is what the immediate bosses of those employees said. these are the exact same low level bosses that failed to pass on the information to save their careers.
    • a6n28f, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2I'm really curious how the justice department can say anything yet considering the info only reached the Inspetor General's office this morning.
    • tannerpetry, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1If it was just curiosity, then there should be similar breeches of McCain's Passport File, Hillary Clinton's Passport File, Mit Romney's Passport File, John Edward's Passport File, etc. Hard to believe it would only be Obama's if it was just curiosity.
  • martalli, on 03/21/2008, -2/+27Wouldn't it be nice if the information flow was a two way street at least? Things I would like to know would be Sen Clinton's tax records and where Bush was when he was "in" the National Guard.
  • viewlakes, on 03/21/2008, -3/+8There needs to be an immediate and thorough investigation. This sounds like a politically motivated excursion to benefit the Republicans and/or the Clinton Campaign. Enough is Enough! Investigate and prosecute the perpetrators now!
  • inputusername, on 03/21/2008, -3/+9Utter incompetence at its best and potentially a felony!
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1Don't be so hard on your fellow diggers lack of any critical or independent thought. That extra chromosome is a bitch.
  • S3dative, on 03/21/2008, -3/+29How is the media going to find time to report this story when they have the Rev. Jeremiah Wright tape running 24/7?
    • PunkRampant, on 03/21/2008, -0/+4Any network still running that tape is retarded. People are sick of it, the passport story is more interesting, and Obama put the Wright story to rest with his speech anyway.
      • nirav72, on 03/21/2008, -0/+6FOX news is still running them and has banners at the bottom constantly mentioning Wright and Obama in the same line.
        • Rizzen, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2I think he was talking about news networks not propaganda networks. Its hard to tell the difference anymore.
  • sofaKing812, on 03/21/2008, -2/+6I can not wait to see what level his develops into in the next couple days; Water Gate?
    • DomesticDiva, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Smells like Clintongate to me; there are ties to Clinton I'm sure of it!
      • toefinder, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1only because you want it to be Clinton. You have no concept of what is going on...you just take sides like it was a football game or something. People in the administration and military community are making efforts to effect the election results.. This is a terrible breach of power. Don't you give a damn about America? oronly care that your side wins? Grow up.
    • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1This is comedy gold, comparing it to Watergate. Do you even know what Watergate was about? Obviously not comparing looking at someone's passport to it. The level if idiocy here is ***** astounding.
      • dn11, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Does saying "***** this and ***** that" every other word and accusing everyone else besides yourself of partisanship every two seconds make you some sort of genius? Because I think it does. You've shown yourself to be the most nonpartisan level headed person I've ever seen on digg, not a troll at all, congrats. Only a nonpartisan genius would suggest that it is perfectly ok that a politician they hate has their confidential files accessed repeatedly, without it being reported to the proper officials or investigated in any way. I must be a partisan hack ***** idiot, because I would call that an outrage, regardless of the candidate or their political party.
      • sofaKing812, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1I was simply tossing out the idea that once the full story is told it could end up being a scandaled of Water Gate proportion. You are the one that made the comparison and thus maintaining the "***** astounding" level of idiocy, dick-hole.
        • Malevolant, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1Hey dumb ass did you happen to notice that all three candidates had people checking out their passport info? So much for your paranoid, ***** ***** theory.
        • sofaKing812, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Troll much?
  • AtHomeBoy2000, on 03/21/2008, -1/+59Quick recap of all I have heard to date:
    *3 separate people on 3 separate occasions
    *Dates were Jan 9, Feb 21, Mar 14
    *2 have been fired, 1 reprimanded and case still open.
    *No criminal investigations
    *Condi Rice was only notified this afternoon
    *Obama campaign was notified by a low level official late this afternoon. NOT notified by Rice.
    *Rice was notified by a senior staff member who was informed by a REPORTER!
    • evil-doer, on 03/21/2008, -7/+4why all the secrecy and treating them with kid gloves? lemme guess. they hold dual american/israeli citizenships.
  • saska, on 03/21/2008, -16/+3Reason for Bury Digg Count at Time of Bury Bury Count Time/Date of Bury Area of Digg
    General Bury 24 1 2008-03-21 00:59:32 Upcoming
    Duplicate Story 24 2 2008-03-21 00:59:04 Upcoming
    Duplicate Story 25 3 2008-03-21 01:00:15 Upcoming
    General Bury 46 4 2008-03-21 01:25:10 Upcoming

    It's fun! http://www.ajaxonomy.com/buryrecorder/
    • saska, on 03/21/2008, -2/+2Digg me down, it had dropped off the upcoming stories list when I posted this comment but now it's back.
  • jlee2081, on 03/21/2008, -10/+1Someone or some entity is digging.
    For America's sake let's hope the never find anything.
  • truthstream, on 03/21/2008, -1/+30Not only was this THREE separate breaches by THREE different people in THREE consecutive months - but that ONLY Obama's files were breached...if people were just 'snooping' - wouldn't they have looked at several of the candidates records instead of just one? If there had been even ONE other breach of one OTHER candidate in ANY of these occurrences, I would believe the 'snooping curiosity' theory.
    • d03boy, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1well we already KNOW all the other electable candidates are horrible people, why would anyone need to look up anything on them?
    • fedupamerica, on 03/21/2008, -0/+0Billary is up to this.
  • nemodomi, on 03/21/2008, -9/+12Hillary sucks.
    • toefinder, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1If she sucked what you suck, Bill wouldn't have had to play with Monica.
  • eieoeoo, on 03/21/2008, -24/+5Who gives a crap about a passport. Our economy is tanking and we are worried about a friggin passport?

    Obama = liberal socialist (communist)
    Clinton = moderate socialist (communist)
    McCain = radical fascist (neocon)
    Paul = conservative republican (constitutionalist)

    Tough choice.
    • moolaismyfriend, on 03/21/2008, -4/+12Your simplistic black and white view of the word = retarded
    • vade79, on 03/21/2008, -0/+10Give me a break, Paul had his flaws. When he spoke about abortion, evolution and (lack of) impeachment for Bush when he was for impeachment of Clinton. Even though I like some of Paul's ideas still, i'm glad i got off the paultrain before i went too far...realistically it would have been 4 years of no movement, since paul couldn't push all of his agenda on his own.

      Also, what kind of Paul supporter are you not caring about civil liberties(the passport issue), a cornerstone of Paul's views. Are you just supporting him arbitrarily or what?
    • JoeVet, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Paul = conservative republican (Theocrat)

      There, fixed it for you.
    • Leomarth, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2They all say they want to rule well. But they all intend to rule. Make no doubt about that.
  • moolaismyfriend, on 03/21/2008, -8/+9So is Condi Rice going to resign for covering this up for over 2 months? Talk about a complete dereliction of duty!
    • nirav72, on 03/21/2008, -4/+4Actually Condi is not all that bad. She was one of the few moderate voices around Bush. Otherwise, she would not have made it as Sec of State. Too bad it didn't help when that moderate voice was most needed. .
      • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1No way.. She absolutely IS all that bad. She is just as bad as Bush (supports him blindly and fully) and what's extra scary is that she's a lot smarter than Bush. She should GTFO.
  • poploserdigg, on 03/21/2008, -10/+3wow...if this isnt proof that the election season is waaay too long. talk about an overblown story to fill news airtime.
  • ileftfark, on 03/21/2008, -6/+9This kind of thing is a lot more likely than you may know. These files are handled by some of the lowest-level admins in the industry.

    They have a "system" in place in which there's a notification when a high-profile figure's records are accessed, and ideally, there will be an explanation as to why they were accessed. The same thing actually happened to Bill Clinton in the 1990's.

    I honestly don't think there was any real malicious intent here, it was some guys who were like "Oh *****- check it out! Obama's passport information!" If I worked in a place like that, and a co-worker dug up something on a famous figure, I'd probably take a peek myself. But really, there would be many other ways to get information on someone than looking at their ***** passport. Yes, it was wrong. Yes, it's illegal. No, it's not going to harm Obama in any way.
    • wubblie, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Exactly. I once worked in an insurance company where we had access to famous people's medical records! Tell me that you would sit in your cubicle day after day, being bored, and not eventually take a little peek in the system at your favorite celeb. And yes, people did occasionally get walked out for this.
      • kingUssop, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1So you think people want to get fired? Or in deeper ***** than that? Also I wouldn't want on my resume "breached important person's files"
        • wubblie, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1I don't know man. It's human nature. And in the case that I saw, the only reason the people were caught was because they talked about it. Most people (myself included) would not do this, but in an office with 100 people, and a high turnover rate/ low salary job (as most contractor jobs like the one in the article are), that people were caught doing this is not surprising. Don't usually get the workers who are the most mature and self-discipled in these kinds of jobs. Saw people getting fired for silly things that will kill your resume all the time.
  • carpetbomberz, on 03/21/2008, -4/+17Restore the Constitution Mr. Obama, you're our only hope. Now even potential Presidential candidates have no shelter from the many fingers of Domestic Surveillance. Get this! Contractors "accidentally" accessed Dem. Presidential candidate Barack Obama's passport records. Three times! This sends a message that at long last no one is safe these days.
    • salinemist, on 03/21/2008, -7/+1Why would a Marxist who hates America restore the Constitution?
      • EtherGnat, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2I'll take my chances with somebody who has taught constitutional law over somebody who thinks the constitution "just a goddamned piece of paper" any day.
        • HavenBastion, on 03/23/2008, -0/+0Does "Real ID" and "Patriot Act" mean anything to you?
  • rickabbo, on 03/21/2008, -2/+6The fact that State Department higher-ups just learned of this story today shows how broken this government really is. This is not a coincidence that three separate people accessed Obama's files three separate times, and at times at least a month apart. This is either a hit job or something worse...
  • papipablo, on 03/21/2008, -4/+17This has Clinton written all over it.
    • ileftfark, on 03/21/2008, -4/+4Just out of curiosity, what makes you (and many others) say that? I understand people feel she's shady and underhanded, but what evidence do you have to accuse? And even if it were for political reasons, why would it be accessed three times? They'd pull it up once (trying not to get caught), and save any relevant information. The fact that it was accesses three times when red flags can be raised leads me to believe it has "amateurs" written all over it.

      Not trolling, I honestly wonder what you are basing your accusal on.
      • sulthernao, on 03/21/2008, -1/+3Apparently one of them worked for Clinton. But if anything, this reeks of GOP involvement or some random people with their own motives. In either case there needs to be a full investigation.
    • Seawin845, on 03/21/2008, -1/+0For your information, it was discovered that Clinton's and McCain's passport files were also breached. So there goes your theory on blaming Clinton for this incident.
      • papipablo, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Of course Clinton's goons are going to access her file to throw off suspicion.
        • Seawin845, on 03/23/2008, -0/+0You still believe in your theory that Clinton had some involvement in this incident. What proof do you have to base your theory? Of course, no matter what I say, you will still believe the lie in your own heart? How about if it was discovered that the third person involved in this incident was an Obama supporter. Would it break your heart if the allegations were true?
  • myladdieduff, on 03/21/2008, -2/+4never a dull moment in American politics. thank God for American Idol to balance the excitement!
  • groverblue, on 03/21/2008, -7/+5Everyone is talking about how this is such a breach of security at the State Dept. Why is no one asking why the State Dept is retaining this information in the first place?
    • ralph12c41, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3State Dept issues passports I believe
    • Leomarth, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1The state department is in charge of passports. They have to retain passport information.
  • turdblossom1, on 03/21/2008, -12/+4***** BUSH
    ***** COMMUNISTS
    FICK RIAA
    ***** McCAIN
    ***** ROVE
    ***** OREILLY
    *****
  • tehjarvis, on 03/21/2008, -2/+19From "Fark It" on Fark

    Fark It: From redlit thread.

    TFA:

    Update #3 - 8:32PM EDT: Keith is citing a release from State that the breach occurred on three different occassions, on 9 January, 21 February and 14 March. They also are saying there is no political motivation behind this breach, it was "...simply curiosity..."

    Jan. 3, 8: Iowa and New Hampshire primaries. Obama destroyed Clinton in Iowa, split New Hampshires delegates.

    Feb. 9-19: Obama sweeps all nine contests during this period, takes lead from Clinton.

    March 4-11: Hillary fails to make up any ground after Texas, Ohio primaries, Obama's delegate count in the month of March, 208, Clinton, 207.
    • runCMD, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1still no mandate : )
    • MacEnvy, on 03/21/2008, -0/+6You need to post this near the top. That's a hell of a coincidence.
  • alphonseragusa, on 03/21/2008, -0/+8"The State Department was looking into possible violations of the Privacy Act."
    HAHAHAHAHAHHA!! Finally!!!
  • Devaney, on 03/21/2008, -0/+18I support Obama and I'll surely get dugg down for saying this, but if the NSA can legally listen to my phone calls and read my e-mails and no one gives a ***** about it, why does it surprise anyone that the next possible president of the USA got his passport file looked at?!?
    I mean come on, it's gonna get a lot worse than this in the general election, if he's got dirt (I suspect he's probably got a lot less than most of the previous presidents) they're going to do anything they can in order to find it.
    • sulthernao, on 03/21/2008, -0/+6I totally agree. If it was an ordinary citizen then this wouldn't even be in the news. There is no accountability and no transparency at all. Who knows what other illegal stuff they're doing that nobody knows of.
    • okcomputer1982, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1I would say it's news because a couple of statement his pastor said was news. I think that ***** was trivial and dirt. I also happen to thing that even the POSSIBILITY that government protocol was breached to find dirt on a leading presidential candidate is just a bit more newsworthy. But hey call me crazy. That guy was reallly black and angry wasn't he. That is much scarier then illegal wiretaps isn't it.
  • junkwheel, on 03/21/2008, -8/+3Hillary is going to jail!
  • credential101, on 03/21/2008, -17/+6Honestly, who cares if his passport was viewed? What does Obama have to hide about what countries he has been to?
    • tehjarvis, on 03/21/2008, -2/+7Let me go through your passport, financial information, phone records and dresser drawers. You have nothing to hide, right?
      • chopperrockets, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1im sure that credential101 is not trying to win the most powerful office in the whole ***** world!
        some one is worried that he is a liar... i mean a politician.
        • tehjarvis, on 03/21/2008, -1/+3Or just looking for dirt. I know it's not exactly a parallel comparison, but it's still the same, it's no one's business, politician or not he's a citizen of the United States.
        • sulthernao, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Ok, but there are still privacy laws, and none of the other candidates had their privacy broken. Even if he "has something to hide", parsing through his records is illegal. I honestly don't see how you can support these insidious actions. Perhaps if you want to see the records you should ask him to release it.
      • Warptaco, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1That is almost what happens everytime we Europeans fly to US.
    • Leomarth, on 03/21/2008, -0/+5Privacy is not about hiding anything. That's just a red herring.
    • motivatedmama, on 03/21/2008, -0/+4 We would have gotten any bad news long before now.
      But just as he has nothing to hide, and neither do I, I STILL expect this corrupt administration, to keep their effin' noses out of my email, my phone conversations, and my passport history, if I had one. It's the principal of the thing.
      The larger ramifications of this will have to wait.
      1) If it's the Republicans, this can serve as a rallying cry to the Democrats. It would be good to focus on the real enemy again.
      2) If it's Hillary, great! She's gone. A win, win situation either way.
      3) Mere curiosity on the part of dumb employees? Nope. Somehow I think there's more to this. Why only Obama's passport?
      4) They try to cover and stall the investigation (typical) Well this is very public and Barack is a fairly powerful person now. There will be answers I think.
  • CrazyZ, on 03/21/2008, -0/+14So how many government employees are getting canned for viewing my personal information "without a need to do so"?
    • vladimirpoopen, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1What about call centers overseas? Which is worse?
  • PHiZ187, on 03/21/2008, -0/+8What about ordinary citizens? Is there going to be any investigation into whether their passport data was spied on?
    • Leomarth, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1You are not a JBT, therefore you are automatically suspect.
  • DreKor, on 03/21/2008, -1/+3Seriously, I've got some kind of deja vu on this. I could have sworn I read about the same thing a few months ago. Does anybody else remember that, or am I going crazy?
  • djdingo, on 03/21/2008, -25/+12What? Another story about Obama on Digg.com?

    *FAP* *FAP* *FAP* *FAP* *FAP* *FAP* *FAP* *FAP*
    • Babazoz, on 03/21/2008, -11/+2How can you possibly be against hope and change, you filthy racist??!!??

      YES. WE. CAN.
      • d03boy, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2dugg for sarcasm... at least i hope it was sarcasm... otherwise the obama crowd is a bunch of idiots
    • TizzleDizz, on 03/21/2008, -2/+1Haha you *****.
  • Leomarth, on 03/21/2008, -1/+5I used to work in a federal prison as a night shift guard. One guy accessed Manson's electronic record without having a need to do so, and the network monitoring service called him up in a matter of minutes to ask what he was doing. He got disciplined for it too.
  • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -22/+8"Quick! We need something to distract people! They're paying too much attention to Obama's connections to black nationalism and Islam!"

    Too late. Stick a fork in him. He's done.

    "But I said I was outraged that my passport files had been accessed! Hope! Change!"

    That's nice. Run along now, Bammie.
    • Kenzan, on 03/21/2008, -1/+6"Run along Bammie?"-The man has more power and respect and guts than you'll ever WISH to have. When's the last time YOU ran for President? Never? Thought so. Like him or dislike him, the man deserves at least some common respect.
      • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1He'd better look for that respect from some people who share his anti-American views. He won't get it from me.
        • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4Ok, RRJ... You tried to convince me before that your Obama views were related to your life sucking balls, but now I'm right back to the idea that you are a KKK leader (or otherwise fervent member or supporter or even just wannabe) and that is really why you hate Obama. I'll admit I hate Bush, but it's because he's verifiably evil and stupid. Obama is the anti-Bush. I think Obama is the only candidate capable of (or even seemingly interested in) any progress toward un-doing the vast damage done by Bush.
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1Wow, those ad hominem attacks really help prop up your argument. "I hate Bush and Obama hates Bush (and everything else having to do with America), so I love Obama! And you only question Obama because your life must suck and you're in the Klan! So there!"

            And this is why so many of us questioned the Obama campaign from the start. It targeted people who were easily influenced by appeals to emotion.
          • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+2Huh? Aren't you the one who spouts "ad hominem attacks" against Obama? "He hates America! He's the son of Islam"... Why would you think that? I happen to think he loves America and that he's not a muslim. So does it come down to a simple matter of which one (you or me) is smarter? How about this.... Do you like George Bush? Do you think we need to stay on the path he's been leading us down? If you answer yes to these, then I guess that could be a different reason (besides race) for you hating on Obama... Other than that, I can see no good reason for it. Especially when overall, you have only spouted blatant lies and obviously wrong opinion of him as your basis for hating him. I can tell you the real reasons I hate Bush, and all but the dumbest 31% of people would back me up for most of it.. Why can't you come up with anything real for hating Obama if you hate him so much??
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1If by, "the path he's been leading us down" you mean the war in Iraq, then yes. I think we need to dig in and stay there forever. It's a middle-eastern stronghold that we've needed to secure for decades, but we were too busy with the Soviets.

            "All but the dumbest 31%"...can't leave those ad hominem attacks behind, huh? I'll play, though. The majority of people on the planet aren't very smart. The planet is made up of a huge majority of B/C/D students and small minorities of F and A students. Showing me that a majority of any population agree on something doesn't exactly inspire confidence. More likely it means that their opinion is one that's simple enough for them to understand. Of course, I carried an average pretty close to 4.0 in college, so I may just be biased. ;-)
          • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+3Well I guess that explains it then. But your thinking is flawed there. Iraq will never be our "middle-eastern stronghold" unless we nuke the ***** place and set up our own direct extension of the US Government there. Short of that, it's only a quagmire that will keep taking more and more of our soldiers' lives while simultaneously piping the wealth of our nation into the hands of the richest few. If you don't believe me, look at the history of Russia in Afghanistan. Compare that with the last 5 years of US in Iraq. It doesn't look good for us if we try to stay there forever and make a stronghold there...

            As for smarts, I wouldn't count grade point average as a measure of intelligence - I would be inclined to go by IQ rather than simply how much information you can retain and regurgitate. Of course that brings up other problems as it's hard to say what anyone's IQ really is. But that's not to say you aren't smart - though I do have to wonder given your view on Bush and the Iraq war.
          • tannerpetry, on 03/21/2008, -1/+1Klan College
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1You're being overly dramatic about our losses in Iraq. Check out this graph I made:

            http://home.comcast.net/~jackson.robert.r/graph.jp ...

            We can keep up this rate of loses forever. And it's costing less than 10% of the federal budget. As soon as we get them up and running with their own government we can start "allowing" them to refund us the cost of "helping" them in the region like we'd always planned to do.

            This will end up being the best thing we've ever done with our military. We're out of Saudi Arabia, so the fundies don't have a reason to be pissed anymore. We've got a foothold in the region now, so Syria and Turkey can't blackmail us every time we need to use their airspace. It's been a mess for decades with crap like the Tripoli riots, the Iran hostage crisis and the bombings in Lebanon. Now we have a projection of the American sphere of influence in the region. It already seems to be having a calming effect on Syria and Lebanon. Nobody wants to be caught between Israel and the United States when the bullets start to fly.
          • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4Ok smartypants, If I add up the all of the deaths in your graph as a total and get the percentage of US population, then take just the soldier deaths and take that as a percentage of troops in Iraq, then the troop-death bar is roughly 28-times taller than the other bar. OUCH!
            And as if that wasn't bad enough, now it appears that your whole viewpoint is based on your perception that the primary purpose and goal of the United States is to conquer and dominate the rest of the world! That seems to me to be incompatible with civilization itself. Are you really that miserable?
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1It's not about conquest. The United States has serious interests in the region, both in terms of energy and tactically. We've kept a hands-off policy with regards to Africa because that's where China is getting a lot of their oil, but we need to keep an eye on the situation. We also need to keep an eye on Russia and of course the middle east itself. We can respond to threats in the region with amazing speed now. Iraq has now become our version of a middle-eastern NATO (only hopefully less useless).
          • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4Ok, so then it's about oil? Then it's still about conquest as you want to control the oil, which means you need to control everyone, no? So we spent a half-trillion on Iraq and how much oil do we have secured there now? These low gas prices have been a real boon to the ol' economey, eh? How much further ahead would we have been to use that half-trillion dollars to develop new technology to reduce our dependence on oil? Seems that money could have gone a hell of a long way and toward a much better result.
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -3/+1Oil companies are making record profits. That's "the economy," Fred. We're creating family fortunes of such vast scope and power that American interests will never be ignored.
          • bsmang, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Oh my. So our country's power and influence are the direct result of how wealthy its wealthiest families are? So then what? Do we start titling those families as royalty and hand over the power of government to them so they can just make the laws directly as they see fit without having to purchase any politicians? Such a society ought to be pretty efficient these days with all the technology we have. Our new masters could exert all sorts of control over us - beyond what the leaders of empires past could ever have dreamed.
        • bsmang, on 03/21/2008, -1/+4Re-reading my last post, the "OUCH" was a bit much. It should have sufficed to show that those numbers are relatively meaningless.
          • RRJackson, on 03/21/2008, -4/+1We lost 18,000 men in '68 alone during Vietnam. The fact that we're doing so well in Iraq is not 'meaningless.' We're losing less than 1000 men a year in one of the most hostile anti-American environments imaginable.
  • sullyz0r, on 03/21/2008, -14/+4I really don't think it's that big of a deal. Two state department, low level employees:

    "I heard Obama was a Muslim!"
    "No he's not, let me show you..."
    *log on*
    "Oh, hey, you're right."

    *fired*
  • chopperrockets, on 03/21/2008, -9/+2seems to me a few state employees were canned not to long ago for viewing data like this for a laugh. its not ethical in that case. but if someone is checking into his past for bad news... im not sure i can say they did something real wrong. what if they found something bad? what if he has ties to those that would like to see us dead? what if? what if?
    • kingUssop, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3Hey can I give you a colon exam to make sure you're not hiding anything? We just need to be thorough...
    • Kzoo, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2"What if" doesn't matter. If someone has reason to look at those files, there must be a procedure in place to do so. If it was followed, then no, it's not wrong. It seems the proper procedure was not followed. It doesn't matter what's in the file, this is wrong.
    • thecatcantalk, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1What if appearances are deceiving? What if judging a book by its cover is naive? What if casual and careless research leads to unreliable assessments of character? And because it's against the law, that's why it's not OK. Appearances can be seriously misleading, and a hostile eye can make innocent actions seem sinister. For example: there are photos that show President Bush not only holding hands with, but kissing Osama Bin Laden's brother, Bandar. Does that mean that the President is a homosexual terrorist, in league with Al-Qaida as a deep-cover agent? Of course not! But the photo I'm talking about ran on the front page of the New York Times.

      If you didn't know that there are dozens of Bin Laden brothers from multiple wives, many of whom probably only barely know their half-brothers, and also that holding hands and kissing other men is normal, in Saudi Arabia, the NYT photo of Bush holding hands with Osama Bin Laden's brother could look extremely suspicious.

      See how the argument that "only the guilty have anything to hide" is *****? Especially with the current administration's filthy habit of twisting everything into cynical *****, with reckless disregard for the (now long-lost) dignity of public office. And they wonder why Congressmen (of both parties!) are less trusted than used-car salesmen...*spits on ground*
  • GorfTron, on 03/21/2008, -4/+2GOD DAMN THE STATE DEPARTMENT!! GOD DAMN THE STATE DEPARTMENT!!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 93 of 93 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.