It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
REPLY: Not true since the '60's. No longer do the authorities have to be that specific as to an exact place or item to be searched for. RESEARCH.
REPLY: Proof?
REPLY: Anything placed in the trash, on the curb, can be taken and read, researched, etc.
REPLY: Most all of what have been called "lies" over the past two years have been proven true, mostly by documents and tapes captured from Iraq, and most of which have yet to be listened to/translated.
REPLY: You haven't yet heard of the terrorists caught who were almost ready to down the Brooklyn Bridge?
REPLY: Not the same; and what's on the OUTSIDE on the letter/package is not a violation.
REPLY: America is not a democracy, and you should hope it never becomes one..... do the darm research.
Now off of the members, to the issue.
I think that this is all getting out of control, we need to start enforcing FISA, but the patriot act I'm sure goes above it. Since when do certain laws become worth more then others? Whats the point of having FISA if their patriot act can just override it anyway?
Originally posted by ceci2006
What I want to know is when they started this program. Because I have the feeling that the Administration was spying on their political enemies and they do not want to be caught. If they were, that would be curtains, most indefinitely.
Originally posted by Seekerof
Originally posted by grover
The right wing apologists keep saying I lie when I call it like I see it but tell me who keeps violating the constituation?
Get off yourself and your hate-filled rhetoric of "right wing apologists," grover.
This is non-news and has been.
You or others do not think so, tell you what, how about type in Buy Phone Records and tell me how many entries you see? Is the ability to buy your phone records ok with you or is that unconstitutional, as well? Let me guess, what was constitutional to you in 1999 is unconstitutional to you today? Perchance, were you a left wing apologist back then, cause apparently most people and individuals of your political leaning and/or make-up had no problem when Democrats supported such programs as Eschelon and Carnivore?
Surprising is that you, as with most other left wing media outlets--who are now condemning Bush's NSA doings, called it a "necessity" back when Clinton was doing the same thing and this nation was NOT involved with the War on Terrorism. How is that what was a "necessity" then, what was considered constitutional then is now, under Bush, considered and deemed unconstitutional, huh? You people and your ilk are nothing but prime Grade-A walking and talking contradictions and hypocrites.
What is most dubious here is that you conspiracy and political rhetoric experts here have failed to see the TIMING of this old news USA article. Ironic, huh?
seekerof
[edit on 12-5-2006 by Seekerof]
Originally posted by ceci2006
Yes, zappafan1. The King is dead. Long live the King. You're right. We're not living in a democracy now. We're living in a Monarchy. King George the second.
But to be more specific: we're living in a petty dictatorship.
But seriously, I knew about Clinton's insertion into government spying business. But the majority of it was done off-shore. You should be bothered that any leader would attempt to do that against a populace of people.
[edit on 25-5-2006 by ceci2006]
Originally posted by ceci2006
But, I have. Thank you though for suggesting. That is why I can separate the wheat from the chaff especially when propaganda is used to refute the insights of other posters.
Originally posted by sagacitygonedaft
Oh balls. -- Do you people really think this is an invasion of privacy?
1) We pay the government to protect us.
2) We've voted the Bush administration into office twice now.
3) The NSA stops its research at call records. They don't look at what you're saying.
4) The only cause for the NSA to look any further than simply who you call would be for you to speak with agents of terror on a regular basis.
5) If you're not speaking with agents of terror on a regular basis, why do you have cause to worry?
[edit on 13-6-2006 by sagacitygonedaft]
TIA Lives On - Minus Abuse Protections
...As National Journal revealed in February, the NSA’s Advanced Research and Development Activity took over TIA and carried on the experimental network in late 2003. ARDA continued vetting new tools and even kept the aggressive experiment schedule. . . documents show.
But it discontinued some programs, most notably a multimillion-dollar effort to build privacy-protection technologies. ARDA also abandoned the effort to build audit trails in TIA, which would have permanently recorded any abuse by users.
...
The National Journal reports the program is now accessed by, among others: the NSA, the CIA, DIA, CENTCOM, the National Counterterorrism Center, the Guantanamo prison, and Special Operations Command (SOCOM).
More...
Originally posted by Thinker_1
Exactamundo? My Royal Canadian ASS !! The world is comming under the control of the Facist regime with Bush as the figure head, fundamentalist, Crusading American and you sit there applauding? Have you been lobotomized? Hugo Chavaliaz is my hero - the mouse that roars against this egomaniacal pimp of the poor to the elite.
Wake the heck up and chisel the scum off your eyes. Go join a cult in the mountains if you want to be a mindless slave. America was built on principles of freedom and safety not servitude and fear of the government that is supposed to protect the rights of the individual. Read your own constitution and wake up to what is being done to you !!! THEN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT ! You are the only people in the world who can do something and you lay there like the dead, allowing this pig to trample the freedoms you claim to want for the world.
Originally posted by Interested009
video.google.com...
Originally posted by ceci2006
What I want to know is when they started this program. Because I have the feeling that the Administration was spying on their political enemies and they do not want to be caught. If they were, that would be curtains, most indefinitely.
Originally quoted by zappafan1
REPLY: Eschelon and Carnivore began and were authorized and used by the previous admin, both of which are NOT being used the same way by Bush. Clinton used it for sure to spy on his enemies, political and otherwise, along with his having those 600 FBI files in the White House.....very illegally by the way. Indeed, sad to say, we'll never know, but it might be that some Republicans have dirt on them, which is why they're not doing what they were elected to do.
It's also the most likely reason ex-president pantload never went to trial.
Originally posted by ceci2006
Originally quoted by zappafan1
REPLY: Eschelon and Carnivore began and were authorized and used by the previous admin, both of which are NOT being used the same way by Bush. Clinton used it for sure to spy on his enemies, political and otherwise, along with his having those 600 FBI files in the White House.....very illegally by the way. Indeed, sad to say, we'll never know, but it might be that some Republicans have dirt on them, which is why they're not doing what they were elected to do.
It's also the most likely reason ex-president pantload never went to trial.
QUESTION: So is that why the Republicans spent time and wasted our tax dollars on trying to get Mr. Clinton for a BJ instead of this?
Come on. We all know that the Republicans smell red meat and attack when they want to. They've been doing it since being revamped in the eighties. I'm sure if they knew this, they would have gotten Mr. Clinton on his "illegal spying" if they had the chance. They would immediately brand him as being "unAmerican" and a " flip-flopping dictator", not to mention the other euphemisms they have introduced to the public over time to describe the former President.
That's what I mean by the use of propaganda. You did say propaganda was either good or bad, right? I guess, propaganda is in the eye of the beholder--especially when it is used to cover up the misdeeds of domestic spying.
[edit on 27-6-2006 by ceci2006]