digg

Join DiggAbout

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

New FISA Law Means Admin ‘Can Listen To Every Single Int'l Call You Make"

thinkprogress.org — The White House has engaged in an all-out spin operation to downplay its new warrantless wiretapping powers. Yesterday, White House spokesperson Dana Perino falsely alleged that the new law returns the FISA law to “its original intent.”

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jamie1415, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Not good at all....
    • usercc, on 10/10/2007, -30/+5Not good for liberals who call and support the terrorists. Good for patriotic Americans.
      A suspected terrorist must be on one end of the call for this to apply.
      • tzonic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Are you British? You have superb sarcasm skills.
      • mightydavefish, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thank God we have such a trustworthy administration in the White House to carefully monitor this program for abuse.
      • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"New FISA Law Means Admin ‘Can Listen To Every Single Int'l Call You Make"

        Good! Lets catch some bad guys and stop sitting on our hands whining about our "lack" of rights.
    • LBTS, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9usercc, if you think this bill was good for patriotic Americans, this may signal that you are the enemy. That may not be the case, of course, but we better be sure. We'll just have to listen in to your conversations, read your mail, and start following your every movement, and we'd better watch the rest of your family, too; you could be passing messages to Osama through them.

      Don't be afraid, though, you're a patriot with nothing to hide.

      In other words, they don't call it a slippery slope for nothing.
    • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about.
      Or does that sentiment only apply to attorney generals employed by republicans?
  • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -12/+18I highly highly recommend Greenwald's blog: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

    One of the best places to find stuff to smack down the "Bush broke no laws" talking point.
  • yakimushi, on 10/10/2007, -9/+36The Democrats really dropped the ball on this one. What the ***** were they thinking? That in six months we'll forget they approved this gross power grab by Bush Co.?
    • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18BTW, you can see how your Rep or Congressperson voted here:

      http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-836
      http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2007-309

      What State are you in? You could see whether any of the ones in your state deserve angry letters.
      • nblsavage, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1*whew* the only yeas in Oregon were from the nitwit repubs (just one in the house and one in the senate)
      • johnpaul191, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2thanks! 2 more people i will be voting against next chance i get!
      • tzonic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thanks McCain for not voting. I'm sure he was really busy campaigning for president so he can...fix this?
      • NinjaBoy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I live in missouri. I just wanted to apologize.
    • gotamd, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Why blame Bush for this? You should blame your Democrat-controlled Congress. Obviously they aren't very principled. It makes me think something else is behind this, such as them believing the next President will be a Democrat. What other motivation would a Democrat-controlled Congress have to bail out a Republican President? This stuff didn't pass when the Republicans had the majority, but somehow now that the Democrats are in the majority it goes through? It doesn't make sense.
      • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2gotamd,
        your statements are way too logical and true so you will be dugg down by all of the Bush haters. I actually saw one article that claimed that Bush strong armed and intimidated the democrats to voting for the bill. Can you imagine? I am sure there will be another "investigation" to find out what fascist tactics Bush used to get his "way" on this one.
        • live52, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The simplest explanation is that there is no longer any difference between the two parties. Most on both sides are bought and paid for by the same lobbyists.
          So do you want to blame the war, torture and shredding of the Constitution on the dems also? Go ahead. They are all a bunch of crooks and liars.
  • LakeshoreBaby, on 10/10/2007, -6/+12So now they listen to both domestic and international. Great.
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4From the TP website:

      "They can listen to every single international call that you make or receive"

      Key word here.... INTERNATIONAL. As in: NOT DOMESTIC.
      • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Note the distinction, however, between "wholly international" calls, and ones where just one end is outside the USA.

        And note that the only person who needs to say "Let's do this" is Alberto Gonzales, no courts or anything. Heh. Would you trust him?
        • itanshi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2this include calls to tech support? man this is scary shtuff
          • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Better be careful.........shhhh..........they are listening......better not talk about blowing people up in your next phone call to Yemen or you could questioned about it.
    • otheruser, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6What if an INNOCENT CITIZEN is speaking to an INNOCENT relative outside the country?

      The citizen, being in the U.S., is being spied on domestically because he/she is making an international call.
      • itanshi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3just don't say any needless keywords, they may still be using datamining
      • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Innocent people calling another country don't have to worry about it. If your calls are being listened to then they will be taped and heard in a court of law. What do you think is going to happen? Some person is going to call Grandma in Iran and talk about the weather and then the FBI will swoop in and haul them off to jail without a trial? Don't worry I am sure the ACLU will be monitoring the government who is monitoring the calls.
    • bitcloud, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1what if you bounce a domestic call through a proxy? does this mean it's fair game? I'm sure the law should be protecting US CITIZENS and not just US dirt...
  • satx, on 10/10/2007, -12/+35I've given up. We officially live in a fascist nation... and nobody gives a *****.

    • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Well, majorities of Democrats voted against it, but yeah... I posted URLs earlier if you want to check how your own congressfolks voted.
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5neocon shills to invade this thread in 3...2...1..
      • Tilon, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Go back to Fark, please. Cliches are so damned tiring.
        • indicas, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6is it a cliche if it's true? it's a bit obvious the right wing has started to troll digg.
          • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2It mixes it up for the 90% liberal trolls of digg.
          • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2How is posting a differing opinion than yours constitute a "troll digg"? Maybe I am unfamiliar with that term, but I thought people were entitled to their opinions.
        • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2ive never been to fark, are you trolls there too?
          • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Digg trolls = high school dropouts
            Fark trolls = PHD in *****
      • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but there are really so FEW neocons out there. There are a bunch of sheep that follow Hannity and O'Reilly, and kids who grew up under Bush and think that neocon means conservative (as a real conservative, let me clear that up for you...it's NOT the same thing). But there are very few real neocons outside of the Washington think tanks. Don't worry...we're all against this wiretap stuff...both on the left and the right. We just need to work together for a short while and let's see what we can do.
  • slackerxpc, on 10/10/2007, -28/+5Who cares? If you are a terrorist you have reason to be scared, otherwise you have nothing to worry about.

    Just go with the flow, its not that big of a deal.
    • Subterfug, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8Yeah I've heard that one before.

      It is a matter of principle, and this can totally be abused.
    • DMCer, on 10/10/2007, -13/+3Subterfug, you're obviously living in some theoretical world. You can take your "principals" and try to use them to defend yourself against those who are trying to kill you, see what happens.
      • thelostemperor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I agree with Subterfug's fears of abuse, but to characterize it as a matter of principle is incorrect. Almost all abuses of power do not occur 'in principle'. If you think, DMCer, that only terrorists need to worry about this kind of surveillance, then it is you who are 'living in some theoretical world'.
      • CatalystGhost, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yep, those guys that tried to kill us... 6 years ago, was it? Seriously, let it die. Not saying we should forget, but honestly, we're not in danger, people... wake up...
    • vegascoop, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10 In theory, only "terrorists" will be listed to. In theory, persons legitimately opposed to our president have nothing to worry about. In theory other types of activists have nothing to worry about. In theory, prosecutors look for "truth" and not necessarily for a conviction. That's great -- in theory.

      The truth is that this new power, like all power, will corrupt. And anyone opposed to anyone in power better watch out.
      • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15In theory, no US citizen has to worry about being jailed with no charges, lawyer, or evidence for years on end in a military prison, but it happened anyway.
    • polyGone, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"Just go with the flow, its not that big of a deal."

      That is the ultimate example of herd mentality. Try thinking for a change.
  • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18the next logical step is listening to ALL domestic calls because obviously theres already al qaeda in the united states.
    • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2except they are not listening to all international calls so your next step concept totally fails
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2did you not read the article, or are you just dumb
      • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I read a non propaganda version, you know a real article.

        thinkprogress as a primary resource for analysis, give me a ***** break.
    • counterplex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I completely agree with spyd3rweb. This is a slippery slope we're on and domestic spying is definitely on the roadmap. After all, we've already given up most of the liberties that make America worth emigrating to - now it's just a matter of time that we'll be giving up the rest.
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4all its going take is one 'Event' to show Al Qaeda is operating in the United States, and your rights are totally gone.
    • bitcloud, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2There's al qaeda in the states?

      shouldn't the army be launching some kind of airstrike on the facilities?
  • blimpmaster, on 10/10/2007, -15/+3Note to self:
    Get tin foil hats for me and Chicken Little.
  • DMCer, on 10/10/2007, -17/+7GOOD!! The NSA doesn't care what you do, do you really think you're that special? Unless you're talking to known terrorists, why do you even give a *****? The NSA isn't even allowed to keep records on a conversation that they have no authority to listen to, but even if they do, evidence can't be used against you in court--unless you're a multinational firm overheard making incriminating statement. This isn't that big a deal, people were bitching about how the government should have done this before 9/11. Get over it.
    • thelostemperor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17"people were bitching about how the government should have done this before 9/11"

      Speak for yourself.
      "The NSA doesn't care what you do"
      But I sure as hell care what the NSA does.
      "why do you even give a *****? "
      Because this corrupt administration cannot be trusted, obviously. And even if YOU trust them, do you know who will be in office in 10 years or 20? Do you want to give these powers to all future administrations?
      "even if they do, evidence can't be used against you in court"
      I'm sure that is a really meaningful protection to a Guantanamo Bay detainee.

    • Water13ottle, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9We give a ***** simply because our nation was founded on the rights we have/had. By the government giving up our rights it is a sure sign that what the terrorists are doing is working. Plus, the government is just capitalizing on the fear that the country is in right now. After the whole terrorism threat goes away the government will still have the same powers. In any situation where a country is in fear they will eagerly give up their rights to be protected until that threat goes away and then we are stuck without our rights, and the government is clearly taking advantage of this or else they would not have attempted to cover it up so much.
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Are you really so dim to think that nothing you do could ever run afoul of some government agency? If the NSA can do it, why not the IRS? Get a grip on reality. Didn't you read about the guy in the Midwest who was shot dead because the SWAT team that came in to shut down his internet gambling site got carried away? We're in an age of wild overreach by some of these agencies, and if you aren't willing to stand up for freedom, it won't be long before you won't have a chance. Even if you trust Bush, do you really want this kind of power in the hands of whoever might be the next president?
  • chrisfnet, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7By the time each six months is up the government can 'make up' enough evidence to warrant an extension..
  • Subterfug, on 10/10/2007, -3/+33Here's an idea: I won't make a fuss about the government being able to listen in on my phonecalls, but in exchange I can listen to the phonecalls of all public officials. Fair compromise no?
    • pujolsthebeast, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2How boring.
      • Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Tell that to David Vitter and Mark Foley.
    • JimXugle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I love it. I'll suggest this in my next ranting to a congress critter.
    • counterplex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I won't even ask to listen in to all their calls - after all some must be private. But if Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, Rice and the rest of the cabinet are ever talking to anyone else within our government, I'd like to listen in :) Excellent point subterfug.
  • rstarr, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Skype.
    • tzonic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7...has a backdoor that belongs to Uncle Sam's key. Think open source.
  • lesty420, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I'm going to have to link up those coke deals on pre-paid cell phones now. Oh wait, i already do!
  • Malakym, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Im confused. I live about 20 miles from the NSA headquarters. Most of my friends and a lot of their parents work at the NSA. I was pretty sure they already had this power. This isn't a big surprise to me at all.
    • onetimer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13Up to this point they've just been doing it illegally....
      • rderveloy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3"I will make it legal!" -Darth Sid... er... President Bush.
        • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I will make it legal.....er.....Congress.
  • usercc, on 10/10/2007, -17/+5Buried as a lie.
    On one end of the call, there must be a suspected terrorist. That means you liberals need to halt communications with your terrorist partners.
    • CatalystGhost, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Care to tell me how they classify a suspected terrorist? *****, we've had 5 year-old kids getting held up on no-fly lists as suspected terrorists. Explain to me how that happens, and I'll let you off.
  • o2o2o2o2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8This technology has been around since 1970, its certainly NOT new.

    Ever call 411 and talk to a computer and ask for a name or business? The computer translates that into text and searches its database for the key word. Now hook that same tech up to all phone calls exiting the USA. Now multiply that tech X 1000 server rooms full of computers doing this. The government isnt really "listening" to you phone calls, computers are. The computers will flag conversations based on a set of rules, keywords, etc, then a real person will look at the logs to see if its worth investigating.

    • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6please stop using the movies as "research"
      • o2o2o2o2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Movies? LOL, no. Current intelligence spending is in excess of $45 billion a year. Computers are cheap. Its been done in secret for many decades, only difference now, it they are telling us they are doing it. Its not a big deal, nothing has changed.
    • otheruser, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4o2,

      And who defines the vagueness of the flags?

      Will someone who says "Allah" automatically be monitored (i.e., the 2.35 million Muslims living in the U.S.A)?
      Will someone who says "Hate" and "Government" automatically be monitored?
      What if they say something about Iraq or Afghanistan?
      God forbid they discuss political issues...

    • Jeffler, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Actually, tweekster, thats exactly how it works. Do you really think the government can do what happened in the simpsons movie?
      • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0enemy of the state is not a documentary.
    • ezstan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Correct. This has been in place for decades. Want proof, mentioning over the phone, that one "unspeakable" (and regardless of your feelings) unacceptable crime against our leader will surely have the NSA investigating you.
  • MaceSoul, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Ah, so the law now makes everything the same as it's been for 60+ years. Great.
  • tzonic, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10I highly recommend calling your (and why not others'?) respective Senators and Representatives and salute a polite ***** you. And have all of your friends and family to do the same. Even if they don't want to.
  • torched, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2i better stop making those dirty phone calls to my ex
  • gixxer07, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I don't speak english. I can only type in english
  • Sunfightersix, on 10/10/2007, -15/+1Nice scare tactic by a liberal site once again.

    Unless youve been calling Jihad Jimmy over in Pakistan several times, youre calls are not gonna get flagged, they dont have the manpower to "listen" to every international call, and frankly they wouldnt want too either, they are only there for useful information. The whole thing is being blown out of proportion for political gain.
    • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Your so dense that your in danger of turning into a singularity.
    • spyd3rweb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What about computer systems with voice recognition that scan for certain keywords, give each call a threat score and upgrade the calls status to the next level if the score is high enough, eventually forwarding to an actual person. Say the wrong word and you've got feds knocking on your door.
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4As a long-time conservative - a typical Reagan Republican, if you will, let me disabuse you of that delusion. This is NOT a liberal scare tactic. If you ask any of the conservatives from pre-Bush, they'll take the exact same position as the liberals on this stuff. This is big government at it's worst. The Bush administration has done more damage to the conservative movement than any 50 liberals could. This, in particular, is among the worst...a complete gutting of the Constitution.
      Just because they don't have the manpower to listen to EVERY call, doesn't mean that they won't choose to listen to yours. And remember, you're putting this power into the hands of our next president...one who is VERY unlikely to be a Republican. Ultimately, this will be used to go after every little petty tax case, every little medical marijuana user, and every investor who tries to shuttle some money overseas when the dollar continues to tank. You've got a very gullible trust in big government...something that is more in line with the Ted Kennedy way of thinking than anything Ronald Reagan would countenance. Think about it.
    • joe7845, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I wonder if you'll feel the same way once Hilary Clinton is running the executive and she has the exact same powers.
  • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/10/2007, -8/+0What about the endless spin by opponents claiming that it's even possible to listen to every international call? Are we supposed to believe that any more than what the administration says? Both sides are giving FUD, and these articles that get submitted daily here sure aren't on the right side of the issue.
    • MutexDeadlocked, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Do you actually believe that this implies an agent is sitting around listening to each international call made. No of course not, the system would be automated. Just like those large systems installed at AT&T switches for Internet traffic, I'm sure they have similar systems for scanning phone calls for "suspicious" activity. The only problem is, what happens if they define "suspicious" activity too broadly.
    • bobzibub, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3They're doing a number of things, I imagine:
      1) building large databases of the interactions of people. aka "Who calls who connects the two." But also his cousin. Like that Canadian Arar guy who was sent to be tortured. He was flagged because he had lunch (discussing computers) with some other dude that was flagged for similar reasons. They were swarthy, but nothing ever proven. It was enough.
      2) voice recognition / key word recognition using audio processing. They don't have enough monkeys to listen to every call, true.
      3) targeted for whatever reason. Such as an administration official (this case Bolton) with a political axe to grind: http://www.spyworld-actu.com/spip.php?article361
      4) industrial espionage. Much espionage is industrial espionage. How *do* they get the caramel inside the chocolate? Never mind WIPO, these secrets must be told.

      The elephant in the room is the US bill of rights that explicitly says governments cannot legally do this. But that is not a problem when you stack the judges and make it a crime to divulge that someone has been wiretapped. Hence nobody has a claim against the government. Betcha you didn't know that your constitution was flammable!
  • ANorton, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1The government can't listen to every international call because most are via SIP or H323 directly to the specific countries.
    • JimXugle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yes, but if you use a commercial product to make those calls, then it has to meet wiretapping standards. Skype does, Vonage does, etc.

      But setting up your own server is a different story...
    • bobzibub, on 10/19/2007, -1/+2I did not know that SIP & H323 were encryption standards...
    • heliox, on 10/19/2007, -2/+2Lol....noob
  • JimXugle, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1So... whats stopping me from running Speex streams through SSL and then to someone outside of the USA?

    When will the government realize that you can't win against a determined individual?
    • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1erm, they crack your SSL key in a trivial manner . If you believe they have the power to do real time voice recognition and automatic flagging, they have the hardware to crack SSL (it isnt that strong....)
  • HolmWrecker, on 10/10/2007, -12/+2So what. No big deal to me. I have nothing to hide and couldn't care less if others are listened to as well.
    In a time of war, we must give up some things in order to survive. Let's see, get my families heads sawed off with a dull knife or give up a few really insignificant 'rights' (i call them privileges) to ensure my families heads are not sawed off with a dull knife.
    Anyone who doesn't like this new law ought to leave. Only people with something to hide would bitch about this.
    • ddxChrist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I hope that was sarcasm.
    • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4What an idiot. You make me embarrassed to be part of the same species.
    • Imus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3It's not sarcasm. I'm sure he's just another statist stooge that will gladly give up his fourth amendment rights because he's afraid. Just like he'll do every time the government asks for more power to monitor its' subjects.
    • faskippy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3My GOD, you are soooo stupid. I hope you don't call yourself a patriot. Geez.
    • Skip742, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I hope I can say this with more restraint than your other answerers, but I have to admit, I'm just as disturbed by your comment. You've just told me that you think George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin were idiots. Because you've just contradicted their very words. Freedom is a value in itself, and I'm thrilled to live in what I hope is still a free country. In recent years, those freedoms have been whittled away little by little, to the glee of the terrorists. Because, you realize, the goal of the terrorists is NOT to kill people...that's a technique, a partway step to the ultimate goal...which is to terrorize you. To make you afraid, and make you willing to live in fear. Apparently, with you, they have won. I suggest that you grit your teeth and NOT let them win. Stand up to all this fear-mongering, and live like a free man! Otherwise, the terrorists win. George Bush is giving them just what they want.
    • CourtesyFlush, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I see lots of trolls, but they aren't right wing.

      You guys DO realize you're trolling anyone with a different opinion, don't you?

      Now digg me down as if it will change the truth.
    • 2hope4, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0No Big Deal to me either....I have nothing to hide and I don't fear the Islarmasists, they are big-time losers, the troublemakers of the world, they need to be caught if we as an honorable fair decent secular society or better yet Judeo-Christian country are not going to officially make a statement that says "We have freedom of Religion here in America and that is good, so go practice your Faith in Peace, no violence, otherwise we must assume that whatever Faith you are embracing is a false Faith, not worthy of Human Consumption and adherents need to be re-educated or eradicated like a cancer"
    • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2holmwrecker,
      I think they are worried that they will be overheard talking about a pot deal or something.
  • Ghoztt, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Can we please, please, please, please, please restore the Constitution?? PLEASE???
  • faskippy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2"Ever call 411 and talk to a computer and ask for a name or business? The computer translates that into text and searches its database for the key word. Now hook that same tech up to all phone calls exiting the USA. Now multiply that tech X 1000 server rooms full of computers doing this. The government isnt really "listening" to you phone calls, computers are. The computers will flag conversations based on a set of rules, keywords, etc, then a real person will look at the logs to see if its worth investigating."

    Well, isn't this just stupid? Anyone actually attempting to plan anything to do with terrorism, or is involved in such, would be speaking in code anyway, don't ya think? So the ones that would tip off the computer system with key words, are those such as you and I who would just be having an innocent conversation regarding the issue of terrorism. Mindless *****.
  • nastronomical, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4ThinkProgress = FUD
  • nastronomical, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3Hey for all you who say "restore the Constitution". I am curious do you mean "The Constitution" as is or your "Interpetation" of the Constitution? You see Libs always trip themselves up...why because if we were to abide by the Constitution a whole lot of your buddies would be tried for treason, gay marriage would be banned and the border would be fixed!
    • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2why would gay marriage be banned? that isnt even in the constitution
      • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It's already on its way, unfortunately.
      • toomanyhandles, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Because the USA gov't has been taken over by christian jihadists, if you haven't noticed.

        Traditional R voters (and congresscritters, but they aren't going to QUIT over it or anything) have mentioned this in the news from time to time. Not enough to ***** off the religious zealots, that would be bad for your health.
  • lordmutt, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2America has been a fascist state ever since CIA/NWO assassinated Kennedy

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON
  • kethraal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3"That in six months we'll forget they approved this gross power grab by Bush Co.?"

    Yep. And they're probably right. After all, there's always Lindsay and Paris... :-(
  • filipf, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Yeah. Good for them - if they can understand my language.
    • jhshukla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2as if only you understand your language.
  • ezstan, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2What people fail to realize is that if you make a call that is to your buddy across town, but the telcomm systems route the call out of the country and then back in, you can be listened to under this kind of fascism.
  • getatmedigg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I think the US is turning into the kind of country in the film "Starship Troopers". Remember those state run ads. "Citizenship through service". Pretty soon, everyone will work for the miltary for a better life. The US will need a slave state just to pay down it's debt. It's scary as hell. No one cares b/c America has forgotten that the gov. serves it's citizens and not the other way around.

    Maybe the Matrix movies (and the comic The Invisibles) are on to something. Hackers will save the world. Sorry McClain.
  • gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Well, whoever is listening in is going to be entertained by the *ahem* intimate conversations I have with my overseas spouse.

  • tomis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Who uses the phone network for international calling anyway. Just use Skype or a similar service, it's much cheeper.
    • JimXugle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sorry to burst your bubble, but Skype is known to have met Federal wiretap regulation... even if it's Skype to Skype calls.
  • gigamugged, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I hope people realize this is all a big smokescreen. Due to the "special relationship" between US and British intelligence gathering operations, the Brits (who can legally intercept US domestic communications under British law) tap directly into our communication networks while we do the same for them. Requests for domestic intelligence are then "washed" of any legal issues by virtue of being handled through a foreign power. The only real answer is to start using encryption and anonymization universally.
  • gotamd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Thank God we have a Democrat-controlled Congress that would never pass anything like this in order to bail out a Republican President.

    ...oh. Wait.
    • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I can't wait until congress comes back in session. Reid and pelosi will run in front of any camera they see acting like victims of the big bad Bush administration.
      Standing up there with torn dresses and smeared makeup: "He was like a madman. He was so powerful. We couldn't defend ourselves."
  • phatt-matt, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4And if you believe StinkProgress...I've got a bridge to sell you...
  • luluinlemont, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I guess we really don't know ''DICK'' .
  • live52, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2WAR IS PEACE

    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
  • FredoBerfil, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Apparently we believe in a nation of men (Alberto Gonzales and the National Security Director) and screw the laws. We're leaving the most demented and evil chickens guarding the henhouse now. Right, law-abiding Americans have nothing to worry about. Sure. Just keep telling yourselves that, you ***** sheeple.
  • Kinjiru, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Not mine they can't... I'm NOT a pussy whipped spineless American that has refused to stand up and FIGHT for his/her rights as Bush and his American Taliban ***** all over such.

    I'm Canadian and no way in hell would i tolerate the ***** Bush has pulled... you all should be ASHAMED!!!!
    • sj200, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1we are ashamed, but we are all too busying playing Xbox, downloading mp3s, and whining to get off our fat asses and DO something about these oppresive assholes that have hijacked our government.
    • hittnrun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1get over yourself canuck. Get off our internet while you're at it.
      • Kinjiru, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1LMAO damn thats the lamest reply in the history of DIGG.
  • nnscott, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2@Terr01

    The site that you posted is an awesome resource, Thank You!
  • ohcoaster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1i thought "1984" was supposed to be fiction.
  • hittnrun, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1When information is obtained by this program and used against a citizen for reasons other than terror-related, please let us know. Otherwise....STFU. You libs make me tired.
    • Travelsonic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Until you are capable of making a logical argument, why not take your own advice you goddamned hypocrite?
  •  

    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.