What is Digg?206 Comments
- oceandead, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8averydedog typed:
"So you're saying we should wait until Bin Laden kills another 3,000 people before we try to figure out who did it. The US is at war. If NSA's gear is up to the task, why buy another setup for the FBI?"
Here in the United States of America we have this little thing called the Constitution. It's a document that clearly states what powers the government has, and what it does not. Government does not have the right to surveill it's citizens without a warrant - and to get that warrant probable cause must be shown first - and the warrant must spell out clearly what is to be subject to that warrant.
Before I go, I'll leave you with some words from of couple of very wise men, both of them some of the greatest patriots this country has ever had.
"I know not what course others may take, but as
for me, give me liberty or give me death." -Patrick Henry
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin - aslagle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Of course, the problem with this article is that it was not secret, Bush notified Congress (oversight) and the Judicial panel that oversees these matters.
This is information designed to promote a book, nothing more. An old story, re-released to coincide with and promote a book release in 10 days from a company that owns both the NYT and CBS.
No digg. - nihilator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"How about this, your wonderful Georgie said that Iraq "DID" have WMDs."
posted by appleluva
Not taking sides, but BILL CLINTON stated it first in his 1998 State of the Union address...Saddam and weapons of mass destruction. - FoneJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3[me]
~I remember back in the day we had these things called rights and privacy.
[grandchild]
really grandpa?
what is that?
yes, and then 3000+ people died because of terrorist attacks staged from within the country... of course billy-boy could have stopped it, but he was busy getting his wick trimmed by some slut intern... sorry, my bad. - Glidedon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This went through the courts and senate security committees.
Just another hate Bush headline to sell the author upcoming book !
Just settle down you nervous nellies. - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Oh, and we were never attacked by terrorists under Clinton! Suck on that, Bush lovers!!!"
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHA I CANNOT BELIEVE HE JUST SAID THAT.
Go back to school. It is so sad that this generation is pathetic in our history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_Bombing - J_Omega, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ lineman: "Oh, and we were never attacked by terrorists under Clinton! Suck on that, Bush lovers!!!"
That's completely incorrect. You're either misinformed, clueless, or outright lying.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing - danesparza, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3NEWSFLASH: Get the whole story before you pass judgement, idiots.
The NSA is an organization SET UP to spy. This isn't a surprise.
The President authorized (with executive order) the spying on all INTERNATIONAL communication.
This executive order has already stopped SEVERAL (not NONE or ONE) major terrorist plans.
If the president gave an executive order to do this, and then briefed the Senate Intelligence commitee, is this illegal? If it's not illegal (after all, isn't the president the law -- by definition -- in this case) ... then what are we getting our panties in a bunch about?
Isn't it ironic that this was known OVER A YEAR AGO, and was reported on the day that the news of the SUCCESSFUL IRAQI VOTE was released? - twist3d, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Doesn't anybody RTF Article anymore? Don't you find it odd that the author says Bush "signed a secret order" but in the fourth paragraph it says the program's ramifications prompted concerns from quarters such as the congress (Rockefeller, a Dem.) and the judge of the surveillance court? How about that the article says they withheld the publishing it because the White House asked them not to for security reasons? How release it now? Could it be because this dill-hole is about to publish a book?
Come on people, stop trusting everything read just because it agrees with your political opinion. - AndrewMayne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Title misleading...
This was spying on outgoing and inbound calls to other countries not *domestic* spying in the original intent of the phrase. If you place a call to Iran, there's no US law that say you can't intercept it somewhere outside our border. Remember, our Constitution protects us inside the US, not outside it. I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but so far most people who are outraged have no idea what their upset about. A good book on the history of the NSA is The Puzzle Palace.
There's a story that the NSA have let the British man eavesdropping installations in the US to circumvent American laws preventing domestic surveillance. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Deer kill more people each year than terrorists... we dont need the NSA we need the NRA
- GutterBumber, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Word. - AndrewMayne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"AndrewMayne: Where does the article say intercepting the call OUTSIDE the U.S they want to intercept international calls from INSIDE the U.S, again yes we are protected against this."
Second paragraph of the original New York Times article. Next question? - justchil, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3This story is ***** pointless.
Bush this Bush that.. who ***** cares.
I know everyone in the world is perfect except Bush.. but let's learn to deal with it. - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ru1dt:
I will agree with you. But you don't see to many Christians going around blowing up innocent civilians. Eric Rudolph was the exception...and he's in jail. You don't see Iran & Syria putting their radicals in jail. - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"You do realize it was acts like iraq & afghanistan (see the first war) that caused these cells to form. These people want your country to suffer because americans have made them suffer."
That is a flat our falsehood. You ever heard of the Cole bombing? Ever Heard of the US Marine bombing in Lebanon? Ever heard of the World Trade Center bombing?
That happened before Iraq and Afganistan.
There was an ex-terrorist on O'Reilly just 2 days ago that talked about his training in the US. He stated he was training future generations of terrorists to come over to the US and attack. As well as he was currently sending people back to Israel for suicide bombings. He stated that its not about the US, or any other country. Those people would slit their own mothers throats if need be. Its about hate and thats a fact. - gandhii, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From the article:
"The Times said it held off on publishing its story about the NSA program for a year after administration officials said its disclosure would harm national security."
Obviously not a trustworthy publication. Its getting real hard these days to find REAL REPORTERS. - mlarsen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yea, very nice- what the post forgot to mention is that New York Times also has ties to a new book that is coming out- Hoe convient, release this the day after Iraq has 70% of the country ( our last election was at best 45%) and prove all the nay-sayers that they do want democracy.
to quote Drudge:
"On the front page of today's NEW YORK TIMES, national security reporter James Risen claims that "months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States... without the court approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."
Risen claims the White House asked the paper not to publish the article, saying that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.
Risen claims the TIMES delayed publication of the article for a year to conduct additional reporting.
But now comes word James Risen's article is only one of many "explosive newsbreaking" stories that can be found -- in his upcoming book -- which he turned in 3 months ago!
The paper failed to reveal the urgent story was tied to a book release and sale.
"STATE OF WAR: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration" is to be published by FREE PRESS in the coming weeks, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
Carisa Hays, VP, Director of Publicity FREE PRESS, confirms the book is being published.
The book editor of Bush critic Richard Clarke [AGAINST ALL ENEMIES] signed Risen to FREE PRESS." - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2linsys:
Racist and a biggot? Tell that to the families of 2000 people that died on 9/11.
As far as I'm concerned linsys...after your comment about Clinton...you have no say in this discussion. Your knownledge of the situation is that of a 2nd grader based off the fact you don't know your own history. - varianallen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5If true, I'm glad to hear that the NSA has been doing this.
The NSA, for the record, isn't spying on just any American. The terrorists that we've captured in the past few years all have computers, mobile phones, and PDAs. From those things recovered, we acquired a great deal of contact information. Basically, the terrorist rolodex was dumped into a database where the NSA and various other intelligence agencies use it to track communications to and from those phone numbers and email addresses. It's also been noted that it helped break up terror plots in the US and Europe.
It seems to me that this leak should be investigated. It's more important to our national security than the bogus Valerie Plame issue.
It's a bit weird that the NY Times, who states that it sat on this story for a year, would come out with a piece like this 1 day after a very successful election in Iraq, and the day the Patriot Act was to be debated in the Senate.
This is interesting as well:
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9nyt.htm - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2nihilator.
Ever hear of Munich 1972?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Massacre
But don't expect lineman or linsys to know that that is either. LOL - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No Linemen:
"Oh yeah? Well at least Clinton didn't go around bombing countries like Iraq! SUCK ON THAT!"
Clinton went around bombing countries like BOSNIA...
HAHAHAHAH - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5You all act like this is affecting you in any way....
99.9999999% of you in your life time will probably NEVER be spied on. Get over it. This is to protect us from terrorist cells, and people that want to harm the United States. As long as the government releases documents to the fact they did it who cares. We are at war and we have to do everything in our power to fight that war. So many of you forget that day they ram thoughs planes into the towers & pentagon. So easily our generation forgets. If we even half of the greatest generation of WWII, nobody would be complaining about this. We are weak generation and our fore fathers are sad that it has come to this. - AveryDeDog, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8So you're saying we should wait until Bin Laden kills another 3,000 people before we try to figure out who did it. The US is at war. If NSA's gear is up to the task, why buy another setup for the FBI?
Say, doesn't Google monitor all your GMail? - Experimental, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Nothing new here at all. No digg.
In reply to some of the leftist nut-jobs who've posted: What rights were violated? Were people (citizens or otherwise) NOT allowed to make a phone call outside of the country? You people REALLY need to grow up. This is something that has been going on since the 40s. Roosevelt started it, Johnson continued it and Clinton made use of it (at least the parts he could read without cum stains...)
You folks want REAL secret police and internal spying? Check out your friendly neighborhood commies! Or rather, TRY to check them out. You at least have the freedom to do so here. - Glidedon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Clinton bombed Iraq plenty, he also bombed Sudan, Remember The "aspirin factory" ?
Clinton bombed the "aspirin factory" because he was convinced Bin Laden( financing) and Iraqi chemists were making WMD ! (VX gas)
Get A clue ! - ru1dt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1msipes:
I would have to submit that you are one of those individuals who doesn't understand the concept of the war we are fighting. This isn't about America. This isn't even about Bush. This is about combating a radical philosophy that exists in this world. You want to keep going after that radical Islamist. You want to go after other fundamentalists. What you fail to realize is that radical Islamists aren't the only problem. Radicalism exists in many different forms. From Christianity to over zealous capitalist...these types of philosohpies will bomb your countries and overthrow your government in a second. Why? Not because [of] how you look, or what you wear (unless it's those towels, because they look funny), but because you're not a Christian and don't believe in money and power. You are considered a heathen. So we aren't just fighting people, we are fighting a radical view in this world. We will have to go to the ends of the earth to rid the world of this hatred...starting perhaps in this country. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If you think this is cool, do nothing. If not, write your senator and your representative and tell them that this isn't cool. Tell them that you only support candidates that give a damn about privacy. Tell them that you dont see this as protecting freedom or saving lives. That it does neither of those things, it only shifts power to the executive branch.
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Folks, This story is all ***** and source from a goofball trying to sell a book.
Liberals taken in again by *****.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9nyt.htm
Nice reality based community you have here. - stedios, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5dam anti bush people.. you overlooked
"A new report indicates President Bush *may* have authorized illegal.."
, after saying that, they can say anything they want.. and you forgot they said "may" and assume its all true. - mcewen98, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A political story on digg, queue the ignorant comments.
"Land of the free indeed.....
OH! CANADA..."
That's why Canada censors even subscription satellite radio? I've heard that Howard Stern would not be available on satellite in Canada. I hope you have fun waiting in line for that wonderful free health care I hear so much about too.
I cringe when anybody gets caught up on trying to relate Iraq to 9/11. 9/11 changed our outlook on how to protect ourselves. Afghanistan was to beat down the people who attacked us. Iraq was to enforce the 14 (or whatever the number was) UN resolutions that Saddam disobeyed for years. Anyone remember those anymore, or are those memories conveniently fading just as 9/11 has in most liberal minds?
Bush has even admitted that the evidence was faulty and accepted blame, what more can be said? You can't just back out of a country after completely decimating it and capturing all of their leaders. This would have made the country even more dangerous than before the invasion. It's a bad situation, but it has also proved a point to the rest of the world that we will not stand to be threatened, and are more than willing to strike back if we are provoked.
What if we did nothing about the 9/11 attacks, or pulled a Clinton and just fired a few cruise missiles from hundreds of miles away into the desert? We probably would have been attacked again by now.
And who is really worried about the government spying on them? Only those who are doing illegal things, and even then I'm sure only those that have connections with terrorists really need to worry about it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6[me]
~I remember back in the day we had these things called rights and privacy.
[grandchild]
really grandpa?
what is that? - bitz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Really and what this is a surprise? The article states some things which should really be considered.
"broad-based surveillance effort directed at people inside the country suspected of having terrorist connections"
"monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program"
"The aim of the program was to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas"
So let's get this straight, there was authorized broad-based rapid monitoring of people within the us by the nsa?
Uh correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this sort of thing part of the fbi's job? Also anyone else find the following disturbing "...the actual work of the NSA is so closely held that it is difficult to determine whether it is acting within the law." So who's to say that the nsa limited their scope to just the suspects and acted within the scope which the law allows?
Seems like recently there has been major new efforts by governments, isp's and various organizations to actively monitor larger and larger numbers of people both online and off.
Welcome to 1984, guess it is happening afterall. - fredgarvin1138, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Here in the United States of America we have this little thing called the Constitution. It's a document that clearly states what powers the government has, and what it does not."
Problem is, the constitution is a living document, interpreted by the Supreme court - so, your opinion of what the Consititution means somewhat irrelevent. The rights of people are NOT absolute:
Freedom of speech - you can't incite a riot, yell fire in a theater.
Freedom of religion - talk to the followers of Santa Ria (sp?) about killing anamals
Freedom of Press - Evening news can't report troop ovements or locations
Freedom of assembly - go get 500 of your closest friends to have a demonstration on the lawn of the Whitehouse and see how far you get.
Get the point? So, giving the NSA the ability to do some snooping (nobody sez you can't sue them later and win) doesn't mean we are now the fourth reich. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I do so love our Ministry of Truth.
War Is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength... - jbstrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Newspaper fails to inform readers "news break" is tied to book publication
On the front page of today's NEW YORK TIMES, national security reporter James Risen claims that "months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States... without the court approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."
Risen claims the White House asked the paper not to publish the article, saying that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.
Risen claims the TIMES delayed publication of the article for a year to conduct additional reporting.
But now comes word James Risen's article is only one of many "explosive newsbreaking" stories that can be found -- in his upcoming book -- which he turned in 3 months ago!
The paper failed to reveal the urgent story was tied to a book release and sale.
"STATE OF WAR: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration" is to be published by FREE PRESS in the coming weeks, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
Carisa Hays, VP, Director of Publicity FREE PRESS, confirms the book is being published.
The book editor of Bush critic Richard Clarke [AGAINST ALL ENEMIES] signed Risen to FREE PRESS. - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1linsys:
I would have to submit to you that you're one of those individuals that doesn't understand the concept of the war we are fighting. This isn't about Iraq. This isn't even about Afghanistan. This is about combating a radical philosophy that exists in this world. You keep wanting to go after people that were responsible for 9/11. What you fail to realize in your mind is that, al-Qa’ida isn't the only problem. Radical Islam exists in many different forms. From Hamas, to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, to Hizballah.... these types of philosophy's would slit your throat in a second. Why? Not because how you look, or what you wear, how rich you are, or what color your skin is; but because you aren't Muslim. You are considered an infidel. So we aren't just fighting people, we are fighting a radical view in this world. We will have to go to the ends of the Earth to rid the world of this hatred....and we have to in this country as well. - robERR, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Freedom is on the march" - indeed it is, marching its way out of the United States of America.
Once an innovative nation that modeled a functional, modern and participatory society in progress, now an empire in decline, struggling (often violently) with the rest of the world (and itself) to maintain its eroding position and reputation...in fact, this struggle is merrily hastening this decline...
To bad, a great people, just gripped with irrational fear and an insatiable love of 'stuff'. - epluribusunum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The NYT failed to inform readers "news break" is tied to book publication
On the front page of today's NEW YORK TIMES, national security reporter James Risen claims that "months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States... without the court approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."
Risen claims the White House asked the paper not to publish the article, saying that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.
Risen claims the TIMES delayed publication of the article for a year to conduct additional reporting.
But now comes word James Risen's article is only one of many "explosive newsbreaking" stories that can be found -- in his upcoming book -- which he turned in 3 months ago!
The paper failed to reveal the urgent story was tied to a book release and sale.
"STATE OF WAR: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration" is to be published by FREE PRESS in the coming weeks, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
Carisa Hays, VP, Director of Publicity FREE PRESS, confirms the book is being published.
The book editor of Bush critic Richard Clarke [AGAINST ALL ENEMIES] signed Risen to FREE PRESS. - zelig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
Oh, Jesus. Digg has become just another lefty-political blogfest. . Ughh.. reading it anymore. How sad. - rc_collins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is all your own doing USA. In the last 15 year we have turned into the biggest group of pansy's. Maybe instead of just 1 jet liner fighting back, they all should have. Your all a bunch of god damn scared sheep.
--dan - dggeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@fredgarvin 1138
All those things you describe put other people/animals in danger. Sorry, but your rights don't extend to harming others. Even demonstrating on the lawn of the White House. The secret service has to be able to protect the President and they have deemed that to do that, no unauthorized personell are allowed past the gates.
Oh, and last time I checked it didn't take two hands to click the spell-check button. - valkyries, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Our government drooped the ball? haha you all must know that the government did know about the terrorist in the country but were unable to tell the higher ups because its illegal to spy on ANYONE in the country. And Iraq did have "WMDs", have you ever tried to look in the desert for baried bombs? Even the UN knew they had them.
just had to fight back against all ya anti-this-anti-that - msipes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Lineman:
Then don't make stupid comments like these:
"Oh yeah? Well at least Clinton didn't go around bombing countries like Iraq! SUCK ON THAT!"
You're only showing this forum your neglect in history class. - kiteflyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So it the New York Times the DrugeReport for liberals?
- msipes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1linsys:
HA! Your obvious assessment of the world just shows the forum how uneducated you are in world history and foreign affairs.
But then again, I don't think anyone in this forum has to "bow down" and prove to you that they are educated after some of the moronic statments you made. - monolith, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hah. Richard Clarke, that bastion of truth telling, may have helped setup the whole times/book deal. That oh so trustworthy Times... they couldn't possibly throw out objectivity for selling a book AND making Bush look bad all in one fell swoop... I wonder if they know how stupid they are making a lot of liberals look.
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I pity the foos who think this is a liberal-conservative thing. The vote in the Senate that rejected the extension of the "Patriot Act" included several Republicans, and conservative. For "strict constructionists," conservatives seem to have an elastic version of liberty and freedom.
- lineman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah you probably need to get on the bus right now.
- SirK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow, Lineman and monolith... You guys are all fired up. Shouldn't you just be smugly satisfied that Republicans control the White House and Congress, etc? Chill out and enjoy your war. I think malv is right. I never said Bush was evil either. It is my firm belief that he is just a moron surrounded by yes-men and that worries me as a citizen. Good job on the reading thing Monolith. You found a book within 3 hours! "Your skill in reading has gone up 3 points." Keep on trolling guys, i'm done arguing.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 193 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is