We Need a lot more domestic spying, not less

[SB88LX]

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_lte.htm?storyid=45179

We need a lot more domestic spying, not less
Published on December 21, 2005


I saw the headlines in The Frederick News-Post that lawmakers were enraged because President Bush had authorized possibly illegal spying on 36 Americans over the past four years.
Well, I am enraged that there hasn't been more! Does anyone really believe there are only 36 people in this country, over a period of four years, who want to do us harm? There are probably thousands -- and lawmakers are enraged over 36? Give me a break.

On a personal note, I have never worried that I was being spied on by my government. Now, why wouldn't I be worried about that? For one thing, I have, and never will, make any plans to do harm to my fellow Americans -- although some of them make me really angry. Can you guess who they are?

So you don't get it wrong I will enlighten you. People who are more concerned for the rights of terrorists than they are with saving the lives of Americans make my list. My list seems to be growing longer day by day.

Am I sad that I have to feel this way? Yes I am. But, we must win by whatever means necessary -- and that is a fact of life.


ERVIN H. HAGY

Frederick

I thought you all might enjoy this little gem from my local newspaper's (Frederick News Post) editorial section.

 

[TxCajun]

Only 36 huh? Yea... right.


Don't be naive.

 

[Iain]

So you don't get it wrong I will enlighten you. People who are more concerned for the rights of terrorists than they are with saving the lives of Americans make my list.

You know, I've been here too long. Until the last few weeks I'd almost forgotten that the majority of people, both here and from what I read elsewhere, over there too, think this way.

Defending civil rights and liberties is 'defending terrorists and criminals'. Since this wiretap business came out I've heard as much 'got nothing to hide, so nothing to fear' coming from Americans as I heard over here when Blair wanted 90 day detention without charge for terrorism suspects.

Although I try not to veer towards pessimism too much, I fear that this argument has already been lost in the court of public opinion. Blair rapped MP's for being out of touch on the 90 day detention issue. He was, I am sad to say, right about that.

 

[taliv]

Thank you for playing "should or should we not, follow the advice of the galactically stupid?"

.

 

[dolanp]

'Win by whatever means necessary'...

As if good old Uncle Sam will just give you those rights back as soon as he's borrowed them.

Who really wins when Americans give up all their freedoms to feel warm and fuzzy?

 

[rick_reno]

36? I'd bet there are at least 40 Senators that want to do us harm, they call themselves Democrats.

 

[Joejojoba111]

On the bright side, he's loud and obnoxious. When his desired police state comes around he's going to get in the face of some agent-of-the-state eventually, and piss them off. Then his pro-torture stance will come back to bite him in the ass, when they use a baton up, well, his ass.

Too bad we all have to suffer so he can get his poetic justice. Or maybe he'd complain there wasn't enough voltage running through his testes, and the cheap-skates were holding back. "What, you think this current is going to make me suffer? You protecting terrorists or something? Give me all you got damnit!"

 

[LAK]

I saw the headlines in The Frederick News-Post that lawmakers were enraged because President Bush had authorized possibly illegal spying on 36 Americans over the past four years .....

So, assuming this statement itself is true, what does it mean?

Only how many American people President Bush himself has authorized spying on. It does not mean that "only 36 Americans were spied on over the past four years".
------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Highland Ranger]

Scariest thing I've seen in a while . . . .

 

[gotcha1911]

that is unreal and obsurd

 

[pmcbooks]

So, assuming this statement itself is true, what does it mean?

Only how many American people President Bush himself has authorized spying on. It does not mean that "only 36 Americans were spied on over the past four years".

The statement is not true. It is an optimistic twist on what Bush said in his press conference. Bush has apparently "re-authorized" his 4th-amendment-free wiretapping program 30-some times since 2001, covering periods of 45 days. The number of people affected is "classified," i.e. when it is revealed it will blow your socks off.

 

[Camp David]

Unreal as it may seem, Ann Coulter's new column makes a number of good points regarding the NSA "Spying" issue... to wit:

"After 9/11, any president who was not spying on people calling phone numbers associated with terrorists should be impeached for being an inept commander in chief."

Agreed! And further,

"In previous wars, the country has done far worse than monitor telephone calls placed to jihad headquarters. FDR rounded up Japanese — many of them loyal American citizens — and threw them in internment camps."

Wonder whether the anti-GWB zealots would also have been anti-FDR zealots?

And further,

"Either we take the politically correct, scattershot approach and violate everyone's civil liberties, or we focus on the group threatening us and — in the worst-case scenario — run the risk of briefly violating the civil liberties of 1,000 people in a country of 300 million."

Agreed.

Read it all: http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

 

[xd9fan]

ok so past wrongs make it OK for current wrongs???? where is the logic?
And this 5 year old mentally of "well Clinton and Carter did it too" that I'm hearing all over the place is ridiculous. They all should be punished.

I'm going to have (and I hate to say this) a "see I told you so" moment when the Govt pulls this crap with the 2nd Amendment and starts destoying it "for your security" because its "post9/11"


Because I AM a anti FDR "zealot" MAKES ME a anti GWB "zealot"
abuse is abuse is abuse

 

[Don Gwinn]

I read it to see whether she'd mention the word "WARRANT." She didn't. No credibility.

Which brings me to this week's scandal about No Such Agency spying on "Americans." I have difficulty ginning up much interest in this story inasmuch as I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East, and sending liberals to Guantanamo.

Yeah, we'll get right on that. . . . glad to see you're taking this issue so seriously, Ann. Some people would be making disgusting and un-funny jokes in your position.

In previous wars, the country has done far worse than monitor telephone calls placed to jihad headquarters. FDR rounded up Japanese — many of them loyal American citizens — and threw them in internment camps. Most appallingly, at the same time, he let New York Times editors wander free.

Clearly, if it's not the worst thing "we've" ever done in the name of war, then it must be OK.

It's one or the other: Either we take the politically correct, scattershot approach and violate everyone's civil liberties, or we focus on the group threatening us and — in the worst-case scenario — run the risk of briefly violating the civil liberties of 1,000 people in a country of 300 million.

Well, when you put it so reasonably. . . . shut up.




Hey, here's a crazy thought: since Ann and Camp David are so certain that these people are in fact terrorists, there must be some evidence of that fact, right? Let's present that evidence to some sort of "judge" and see if he'll issue some sort of official notice that the wiretapping is warranted by the--hey! That's a good name! We could call these notices "warrants."

 

[LAK]

The statement is not true. It is an optimistic twist on what Bush said in his press conference. Bush has apparently "re-authorized" his 4th-amendment-free wiretapping program 30-some times since 2001, covering periods of 45 days. The number of people affected is "classified," i.e. when it is revealed it will blow your socks off.

My guess is that the "number of people affected" runs well over the current number of the living adult population; since it has probably been ongoing since the 1960s.

And my socks are still on
---------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates

 

[The Drew]

This all comes down to who do you trust more, the people, or the government...

I personally, seeing the abuses of power, the complete ineptness in practically all aspects, and utter disregard for civillians... I'm gonna say that I trust the people... and government should keep their damned noses OUT!

 

[Augustwest]

Because I AM a anti FDR "zealot" MAKES ME a anti GWB "zealot"
abuse is abuse is abuse

+1

 

[Camp David]

This all comes down to who do you trust more, the people, or the government...

So how many terrorist attacks have "the people" prevented?

 

[taliv]

doc +1

 

[Fidel Castro]

[Quote:]
I saw the headlines in The Frederick News-Post that lawmakers were enraged because President Bush had authorized possibly illegal spying on 36 Americans over the past four years .....[Quote/]

So, assuming this statement itself is true, what does it mean?

Only how many American people President Bush himself has authorized spying on. It does not mean that "only 36 Americans were spied on over the past four years".
------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

I'm a Dictator not a mathematician or statician so I may be totally wrong.

The program was re-authorized by President Bush without FISA 39 times with as many as 500 taps at any given time.

Here's the numbers: reauthorized 39 times for 45 days= 1755 days= 4.8 years.

As many as 500 at a time. So we can deduce that it wasn't the same 500 at all times during that 45 day span. :
500 taps times 1755 days = 877,500 or

500 times 39=19,500; if each tap was changed 1 time= 39,000; if each tap was changed everyday to a new and different tap: 19,500 times 500=
Are you ready for this?

Possibly 9,750,000 warrantless 'without probable cause' wiretaps on 'Innocent until proven guilty' "Americans".

The ramification of these numbers is staggering. Of course it's 'ALL' a Secret so WE will never know for sure.
Fidel

 

[pmcbooks]

I'm a Dictator not a mathematician or statician so I may be totally wrong.

The program was re-authorized by President Bush without FISA 39 times with as many as 500 taps at any given time.

Well, Bush and Gonzales are making a big deal about catching that "20 second call" so maybe it's

500 taps * 1755 days * 4320 20-second-intervals-per-day = 3.8x10^9 snippets logging voice patterns and building a compendium of every who-calls-whom in America.

 

[xd9fan]

So how many terrorist attacks have "the people" prevented?

WOW just WOW

I dont know weather to laugh at you or cry for you.

Your pro-state all or nothing attitude is short sighted at best
I wonder if you think the American Revolution was just a freak "we the people" event???

 

[Joejojoba111]

When you actually have to debate the merits of a police state...

Well, it was a good run. The first couple hundred sounded like fun, well lots of problems, and lots of work, but rewarding because of the freedoms enjoyed by most. Maybe in another couple thousand they'll colonize a planet in Alpha Centauri or something, and we can do it again.

'Till then, da comrade, jawohl mein fuhrer, hello Cromwell goodbye Washington.

Imagine it, it's crazy, there was once a man who spurned the notion of being given too much power.

 

[LAK]

Camp David

So how many terrorist attacks have "the people" prevented?

Under the current and somewhat varied definition (depending on which government agency drafts the definition of "terrorism"); probably hundreds of thousands a year.

How many acts of terrorism against it's citizens has the government of China perpetrated ... uh .. I mean, prevented?

How less vulnerable to all forms of terrorism are the people of the United Kingdom after having been disarmed by their current and ongoing political machine?
-------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[BullfrogKen]

Ahhh, The Frederick Fish Wrap . . . I recall it and the Hagy's well. I got sick of watching Frederick get overwhelmed with migrants from the Montgomery and Baltimore area. I grew up across from Spring Ridge, remembering when it was a farm to go hunting on - before the County wanted it. Then, after eminent domain procedures proved too costly; they simply condemned it and that was the end of that.

I am a refugee of MD living in PA. Maryland wouldn't have me anymore.

That sorry, lame-ass excuse of if "I'm not doing anything wrong, I have no reason to object" sickens me. OK, you don't care about your rights, so go ahead, forfeit yours. But, I would rather not live in a community that has no restrictions and checks and ballances on power. States that inherently trust its police and courts with no oversight, and distrust its citizenry, are horribly fearful places to live. Those states offer no safety, oppress liberty, and serve only to perpetuate the will of the state.

I still know many folks in the Frederick area. I bet we have mutual friends . . .