Here’s an angle I had not yet thought of. It would be very ironic if the very FISA amendment that Obama now supports will be used against him in the election this year. Will they spy on his campaign with it? Of course they will.
“Would the White House be Able to Eavesdrop on Obama Under the FISA Bill Barack Supports? YES
Senate Democrats and Republicans alike are now poised to pass H.R. 6304, known as the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, a bill touted by both House and Senate leaders to be a compromise proposal to prior Senate Bill 2248. Unfortunately, H.R. 6304 may give the Bush administration, in its last months, the ammunition it needs to hijack the 2008 presidential election.
It has been known for some time that, since 2001, the Bush administration has conducted mass surveillance of the email and telephone calls made by American citizens. All electronic messages passing through switches in the US, regardless of whether they were international or domestic communications, have been systematically intercepted and screened by the National Security Agency (NSA). Technologies, which were installed at major hubs of telecommunication companies throughout the nation copy and deposit all electronic messages into a giant NSA computer network. The NSA then uses complex algorithms to parse through these messages using matching criteria such as key words, phone numbers, and dates, and linking these data to further data–anything from credit card and bank records to movie rentals.
H.R. 6304 does not, on the face of it, require that these complex algorithms that are used to parse through our electronic messages be examined and approved by a FISA Court. The role of the FISA Court seems to be limited to approving the general design of the software used in conducting acquisitions of information. This consists of reviewing the authorizations made by the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence to see if this general design satisfactorily conforms to “minimization procedures,” that is, that they take reasonable precautions to avoid targeting American citizens. However, without access to the algorithm itself, as well as to the actual source code and a representative sampling of the data that ultimately get caught in its electronic net, there is no way to confirm that the actual procedures pass legal muster and are constitutional.
The Act does require that the certification sent to the FISA Court “include the procedures adopted in accordance with subsections (d) [targeting procedures] and (e) [minimization procedures].” However, if this requirement is to have teeth, then it must be interpreted very strictly to include demonstrable evidence that the algorithm satisfies the said standards. Otherwise, the new rule is tantamount to a blank check to invade the privacy of every American citizen.
For example, according to H.R. 6304, an acquisition “may not intentionally target a person reasonably believed to be located outside the United States if the purpose of such acquisition is to target a particular, known person reasonably believed to be in the United States.” This proscription against reverse targeting provides a potentially important protection. However, it means very little unless there is a way of proving that the procedures adopted do not reverse target particular Americans. Unfortunately, the Act does not appear to provide any way of verifying this because it does not require that the government provide particular names, addresses, places, and other details. For instance, the Boolean command, “If x > 0 and y > 0 then Flag Message” takes on meaning only if the variables x and y are given a physical interpretation. Thus, there would be serious breaches of both First and Fourth Amendment rights if these physical interpretations were “x = Name of American Journalist” and “y = Name on Bush Enemies List.” Without such particular knowledge, the FISA Court would be impotent.”
I am so amazed and taken aback. Barak Obama is changing his position on more and more important issues. Who would have guessed? Now that the “Change Candidate” has the nomination all but sown up, we get to see that he is just another politician and not the answer to all our woes. Seems all the bandwagon straphangers are up in arms but are still willing to back him to the end (ie: Buzzflash). His sweet song and smooth rhetoric have done their job so now he can drop the act and be the ordinary pol he has always been. This just goes to show that the American voters can be conned by Dems as well as Repubs. Bush had his “Compassionate Conservative” lie and Obama had his “Change” con. In the end they both said the samething: ‘You jerks will believe anything despite all evidence to the contrary”. Obama likes to talk about Change and how he is the way to bring it about, but think about it. He was enthusiastically backed by Kennedy and Kerry, so where is the change in that? Sounds like the same old shit we have had for decades. Well this is what you wanted America and now you have it. You can elect McSame and get 4 more years of the Bush fiasco or you can elect Obama and get 4 years of a slightly less painful version of the same crap. So choose what you want, to be hung by the neck or a bullet to the head? Either way we all end up as worm food. Thanks again to all you “true believers” for all the trust you put into an unproven politician because he sounded good. Your swiftboat tactics on Hillary were effective and King Karl is proud of you, especially Buzzflash for it’s never ending hit jobs. Have you figured out yet why your fund raising has gotten so difficult? Hillary may not be a perfect candidate but at least you knew what you were getting, a gritty lady who is a fighter. Now we are stuck with a pop star. . . . . .”
Soon to be seen in Minneapolis–St. Paul at the Republican National Convention: people decked out in Elephant Dildo hats.
This is no joke, they are selling these for $10 a pop at the RNC official gear site. Is this what Laura Bush and all good Republican women use to keep themselves warm at night while their men are (getting) off blowing up the world?
I don’t have a great love for Democrats these days, but at least they don’t wear big grey phallic objects on their heads. (Yet.)
The Constitution is in danger . . . from the Democrats.
We have a Democratic majority Congress who can’t seem to stop acting like war-loving, war-funding Republicans. What’s up? They are all corporate politicians, that’s what’s up.
FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - ‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.’
Why do Americans accept the idea that they should be spied on by their own government? Sen. Obama released a very concerned-sounding explanation of his support for the FISA compromise bill yesterday that has apparently mostly placated his sea of supporters. His change of heart on campaign finance, FISA, religion-infused government, and more, doesn’t seem to bother his most passionate supporters whatsoever, but many other people are very much bothered by these things. Here is part of Obama’s explanation as to why he would support this FISA compromise, (vote next Tuesday, the 8th) which many people find to be an illegal, Pelosified, Hoyerized, mess.
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Ben Franklin
OBAMA: “This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn’t have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush’s abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration’s program of [illegal] warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That’s why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.
But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I’ve said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.”
It’s odd he left Russ Feingold off of his list, one of his previously-biggest supporters and currently his biggest critic in the Senate on this issue. (more…)
Look at all the flags! It must mean Obama is very, very patriotic. Look at all the foreign policy advisors from the past! It must mean Obama is going to have a foreign policy much like . . . . the past.
This meeting took place on June 18, 2008. “He stood in front of 17 American flags and a sign that said “Judgment to Lead.” He was surrounded by national security experts who had formerly served in Congress and the Clinton administration and will be advising his campaign — an effort to bring foreign policy experience to a candidate who has served just three years in Congress.” What a photo-op!
What happened to “CHANGE”?
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., participates in a foreign affairs round table discussion with, from right, Susan Rice, former Sec. of Defense William Perry, former Sec. of State Madeleine Albright, Obama, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton D-Ind., in Washington Wednesday, June 18, 2008. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) sits with former 911 Commission chairman and former Rep Lee Hamilton (D-IN) (L), and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (R) as he meets with a foreign policy panel of former U.S. officials at a hotel in Washington June 18, 2008.(Jim Bourg/Reuters)
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., talks with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright after a foreign affairs round table discussion in Washington Wednesday, June 18, 2008.
(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., left, talks with former Gen. Wesley Clark, and other generals and flag officers during a military and foreign affairs round table discussion in Washington Wednesday, June 18, 2008. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
Real Change, as described by Obama himself in the latest issue of Rolling Stone Magazine, involves leading this country based on what the people want, not corporations. Let’s see if he means it. CREDO Action, part of the activist phone company CREDO mobile, is asking you to weigh on about the 4th amendment. If enough of us tell him how to lead, according to himself, he should listen to us and act accordingly. After all, why should Verizon and AT&T influence our surveillance laws?
“Subject: Tell Senator Obama: Don’t cave on telecom immunity
Dear Friend,
This week, Senators Dodd and Feingold won a battle in the fight to stop the FISA capitulation: they’ve delayed a vote on the bill until after the July 4th recess, which buys them more time to shore up the votes they need to defeat the bill.
However, it’s unlikely they’ll succeed without real support from leaders in Congress, most of whom have already abandoned us: Senator Reid caved in long ago, and Speaker Pelosi finally folded last week. There is one major leader left who should support our cause: Senator Barack Obama. Senator Obama said he was “unequivovally opposed” to retroactive telecom immunity last December, but lately, he’s started to backpedal. We need to make sure he does what’s right.
I just signed a petition calling on Senator Obama to stand up for the Constitution by voting no on FISA — I hope you will too.
You can sign their petition and also comment. If you would like to make even more of an impact, you can sign the petition that appears on the blog within Obama’s blog, mybarackobama.com, titled SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA. Please sign it! The Senate vote on FISA has been put off until July 8th, so you have time to give Senator Obama your opinion.
My cousin Larry story was noticed and blogged about on Minnesota Independent. They sort of made it sound like I wrote it to fool everyone, and then only later admitted it was all a spoof. Hee hee. No, I wrote that all at one time, including the admission of fiction. That evening I had read a story about Sinclair, (pictured on the left) and his serial liar tendencies inspired me, so I wrote my own story about him. The fact is, Larry Sinclair, the man who claims he had an affair of some type with Obama a long time ago in the back of a limo, is not related to me at all. Larry Sinclair (more story here) is not my cousin. Here is what I really believe about Sinclair, who is probably still in jail if not a mental hospital:
He’s seriously mentally ill.
He never met Obama, much less done anything with him.
He is doing this for attention or a Republican group has hired him.
None of this is the fault of Duluth, which is a lovely city.
I might as well correct some other things floating around about Obama too. He’s not Muslim. He’s not gay. He’s not liberal. He’s not a criminal, he’s not a terrorist, and don’t believe anything Fox News or the Nobama people say about him. Also, I criticize him a lot but that’s because he’s not liberal enough for me and I find him to be mostly words and no action. Even so, he’d still be a better president than John McCain. By the way, did I tell you John McCain is my crazy great-uncle? Every Thanksgiving he spent at our house we’d end up calling the cops because he’d drink two bottles of wine, have a big drunken temper blowup and starting beating up all the grandparents and sometimes the turkey itself to bloody, wrinkled pulps.
Obama seems to be aiming for the center but he’s overshooting and landing on the right. Did you see this coming? I bet you did, even if you didn’t want to admit it. Now the question is, how much of this is real, and how much is “for political reasons”? We all know that people who don’t worship the “political reasons” God don’t get elected (Kucinich) and don’t get any media attention at all (McKinney) so the game has to be played. “No I can’t stand up for what I believe in, no I can’t say that, I might lose the “X” vote”. So when a politician plays that game . . . what do they stand for?
“You got to dance with the people that brung you.” — Molly Ivins. Who brung Obama? Follow the money.
“Obama’s Rightward Lurch
Barack Obama arrived on the political scene with a smile as beautiful as salvation itself, like a visitor from an idealized future, one where the races have combined to a golden hue, sent here to show us the way. Of course people fell in love with him. Yet now we see Obama drawn into the great room where the Democratic/Corporate establishment dwells, and the door is slowly closing behind him. This is not how it was supposed to be. (more…)
This list is from Moveon.org. It should be useful no matter who you are “for” since it’s against Bush Term #3 = John McCain.
10 things you should know about John McCain
1. John McCain voted against establishing a national holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Now he says his position has “evolved,” yet he’s continued to oppose key civil rights laws.
2.. According to Bloomberg News, McCain is more hawkish than Bush on Iraq, Russia and China. Conservative columnist Pat Buchanan says McCain “will make Cheney look like Gandhi.”
3.. His reputation is built on his opposition to torture, but McCain voted against a bill to ban waterboarding, and then applauded President Bush for vetoing that ban.
4.. McCain opposes a woman’s right to choose. He said, “I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned.”
5.. The Children’s Defense Fund rated McCain as the worst senator in Congress for children. He voted against the children’s health care bill last year, then defended Bush’s veto of the bill.
6.. He’s one of the richest people in a Senate filled with millionaires. The Associated Press reports he and his wife own at least eight homes! Yet McCain says the solution to the housing crisis is for people facing foreclosure to get a “second job” and skip their vacations.
7.. Many of McCain’s fellow Republican senators say he’s too reckless to be commander in chief. One Republican senator said: “The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He’s erratic. He’s hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me.”
8.. McCain talks a lot about taking on special interests, but his campaign manager and top advisers are actually lobbyists. The government watchdog group Public Citizen says McCain has 59 lobbyists raising money for his campaign, more than any of the other presidential candidates.
9.. McCain has sought closer ties to the extreme religious right in recent years. The pastor McCain calls his “spiritual guide,” Rod Parsley, believes America’s founding mission is to destroy Islam, which he calls a “false religion.” McCain sought the political support of right-wing preacher John Hagee, who believes Hurricane Katrina was God’s punishment for gay rights and called the Catholic Church “the Antichrist” and a “false cult.”
10.. He positions himself as pro-environment, but he scored a 0-yes, zero-from the League of Conservation Voters last year.
That’s what I just heard Wolf Blitzer say on CNN. What bloodbath? Obama and Hillary were nearly the same from the beginning, and they barely nicked each other in the primary. It was gaggingly civilized. The CNN talking heads are breathlessly salivating over the new “unity” that was never anything but what it currently is.
Now, Obama and Hillary are uniting in Centrism. Centrism in politics is a like a disease. It means you stand for very little but will make it seem otherwise by reacting to what your opponent does, based on how that reaction will do in the polls. It means a candidate will do anything to get elected, even say things they don’t mean, be for issues and ideas they aren’t for, and generally make a muddled ass of themselves. Bill Clinton perfected this campaign technique and it’s why he was elected twice. Obama is now in the middle of doing him one better — moving to the center right. This causes him to take lots of anti-progressive positions, but that should be no surprise to anyone, because Obama is not progressive on many things. He’s certainly no liberal. He’s even now “for” Americans being spied on by the government with no way of knowing they are being spied on, and no way of ever finding out. (This is the FISA compromise bill). Obama is also “for” the government executing child rapists even if the victim doesn’t die. He is now in the realm of being anti-progressive with that one. Alternet is as confused as I was.
Democrat Barack Obama says he disagrees with the Supreme Court’s decision outlawing executions of people convicted of raping a child. Obama told reporters Wednesday that he thinks the rape of a child, ages six or eight, is a heinous crime. He said if a state makes a decision, then the death penalty is potentially applicable.What legal principle does that fall under I wonder?
I think those who rape children are truly heinous individuals, for sure. But once you start saying the the death penalty is for “heinous” crimes rather than the specifically heinous crime of taking another life, you open up a whole new world of execution worthy categories. There was a time when stealing a horse was considered so heinous that it deserved the the death penalty. Should we go back to a time when the state could pretty much decide to execute anyone it wanted?
Watch out arsonists, you’re next. The government wants to kill you, and though this isn’t a Hollywood movie, now they can!
Hillary Clinton was by far the more experienced, socially liberal candidate and would have been a better choice. But people “fell in love” with yet another politician, this time a ruthless, corporate, inexperienced guy from Illinois, so he’s what we got to pick from. Unless of course you want to pick Nader, or the Congresswoman (McKinney), both better choices, but neither one has any hope of winning. Still, they have good solid liberal democratic ideas and positions on things, which is more than I can say for the guy from Illinois.
Which is worse, the Old guy you know (McCain) or the Elusive Guy who won’t take a principled stand on anything, that you don’t know? (Obama). Give me your 2 cents:
Loading ...
Yesterday, the two former rivals got together for a love fest and today there was more. Is she gritting her teeth? I can’t tell. I only know that these four months are going to seem like an eternity because the excuses for every dumb-ass position Obama takes from now until November is going to be fiercely defended by his followers. Because they have invested in him so much in him they can’t give up on him now, no matter what he says, without looking naive themselves, so I am braced for four months of excuses, twisted explanations and fantastic stories. You see, Obama has a Grand Secret Plan to Do What’s Right after taking Power. Just like, uh, well, every power-mad political leader in history.
The last big question: Can Bill Clinton grow to love Obama? Stay tuned for this silly soap opera, brought to you by the corporate media and paid for by YOU.
“Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton address united democrats from Unity, New Hampshire - where each received exactly 107 votes in the New Hampshire Primary.”
Hmmmm …… they don’t look bad together. I still think things might be acceptable if he picks her for Vice President. If he chooses someone else, I think I will too.
shelly: Not unless she's been in the Marines. I don't see how an unknown governor who h...
Ted: Now that we’re beyond Hillary, we can look forward to the first female VP, Sarah...
Shelly: I have heard so many excuses for this it's shocking. People are so in love with...
Phronima: Obama should be ashamed of himself. How dare he call himself a "Progressive" / "...
Phronima: What a sickening display. If there's one thing that defines him, his campaign an...
shelly: Well I was both surprised and angered! What a fraud he is turning out to be. I'm...
Phronima: Obama is the epitome of phoniness, which I why I'm not surprised nor angered whe...
shelly: What the Rules and Bylaws Committee did was a crime. They reassigned actual vote...
REBEL CENTRAL
is amazingly powered by WordPress and themed by Mukka-mu Original header graphic by Shelly all content copyright Rebel Central 2008 but take what you want.
Loading ...