• news
  • SUNDAY DECEMBER 9 2007 9:00 AM

We Had A Good Run, Didn’t We? So Long, America

Submitted by FearTheReaper

Edited by erin_broadley

Tags: Domestic spying, Bush,



Finally, the government is privitizing domestic spying. I feel so safe now. When I think of America, I usually envision large companies sifting through all of my information, my home and hopefully, my unmentionables. Thankfully, this dream is coming true. Up until this point, information from domestic spy satellites was only used by scientific agencies. After 9/11, the NSA was given powers that allowed it to monitor domestic communications without getting those pesky warrants. And now the Bush administration is blowing it out!


Under a proposal being reviewed by Congress, a National Applications Office will be established to coordinate how the Department of Homeland Security and domestic law enforcement and rescue agencies use imagery and communications intelligence picked up by U.S. spy satellites. If the plan goes forward, the NAO will create the legal mechanism for an unprecedented degree of domestic intelligence gathering that would make the United States one of the world's most closely monitored nations.


Sweet. Monitor the shit out of us. We used to have this stupid law that confined intelligence collection to foreign countries and battlefields. Not anymore. And let's make sure private companies are a huge part of it, because they never do anything wrong and have continually shown throughout history that they can be trusted.


The intelligence-sharing system to be managed by the NAO will rely heavily on private contractors, including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation.


Mmmmm, safety. Nothing makes me feel safer than knowing BAE Systems has my back. Also my front. And my unmentionables.

Last month all the private domestic spy companies went to the intelligence conference in San Antonio and lobbied intelligence officials, in a giant, disgusting, display of everything that is wrong with our country. But, hey, those companies are the ones who told the government that we needed to expand our domestic spying, so bravo.

A study group was put together by a couple of government agencies and they thought it would be a great idea to use former intelligence officers. Many of them just happened to be employed by private intelligence companies, like Booz Allen. Guess what crazy conclusion they came up with?


Not surprisingly, its contractor-advisers called for a major expansion in the domestic use of the spy satellites that they sell to the government. Since the end of the Cold War and particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, they said, the "threats to the nation have changed, and there is a growing interest in making available the special capabilities of the intelligence community to all parts of the government, to include homeland security and law enforcement entities and on a higher priority basis."


Word. We think you should give us money to do stuff. Lots of stuff. Oh, did I mention we’re going to need lots of money? To do that stuff we said should be done? Thanks for asking. Hey, you know that thing I said we should be doing with that satellite? Turns out I can totally do that. And it will only cost millions of dollars. How weird is it that I am the guy who is able to do what I said needed to be done? For money?

The domestic spying contracts are worth billions of dollars and this is a brand new business. The new plan was revealed in August and caught some people off guard. Bennie G. Thompson, a Democratic member of Congress from Mississippi and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee was surprised when he read about it in the Wall Street Journal.


There was no briefing, no hearing, and no phone call from anyone on your staff to any member of this committee of why, how or when satellite imagery would be shared with police and sheriffs' officers nationwide.


Well, that is probably because most Americans don’t want to be spied on. Duh. Actually, maybe I’m just being an alarmist and blowing this all out of proportion.


"It will terrify you if you really understand the capabilities of satellites," warned Jane Harman, a Democratic member of Congress from California. "Even if this program is well-designed and executed, someone somewhere else could hijack it.”


Oh.

So far the NAO has been delayed. It was supposed to kick off on October 1st, but annoying Congress members and civil rights hippies have been making noise. Of course, later we will learn that the Bush administration did not delay the program. And then when we try to investigate, we won’t be able to because all the information is “classified.” This entire program will always be classified, which is awesome, because it is watching us.


America is going forward, and as we do so, we must remain keenly aware of the threats to our country.

Those in authority should take appropriate precautions to protect our citizens. But we will not allow this enemy to win the war by changing our way of life or restricting our freedoms.

- George W. Bush, September 12, 2001.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 14

Next

Comments
scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:23 PM

michael9000000 said:

Formus said:

michael9000000 said:
Zarth, how can you say that Benjamin Franklin was "always an opponent of racism" when he owned slaves for more than half his life? Were his slaves white?


What we have here is the problem of you viewing "racism" through the 21st century post-Civil Rights era lens and applying it to the cultural situation that existed over two centuries ago. The atmosphere is different, and slaveholding was essential for a man to even get respect within the social structure that existed at the time. Had Franklin not owned slaves, it's doubtful that he would have been a figurehead of any kind, let alone one of the chief founding fathers, deputy postmaster, ambassador to France, etc.

I know for a fact that in George Washington's will, he explicitly freed every single slave on his plantation. Now I don't know enough about Franklin to assume he did the same thing, but it does show that Washington, while being at his heart fundamentally opposed to the practice of slavery, realized that it was a necessity to continue in order to not only get himself respected, admittedly a selfish thing but also a very important thing - imagine a United States without George Washington - but hold the United States together long enough to get the upstart country off the ground in the first place.

Slavery is a tricky issue, especially at the time of the Constitution's ratification. You can't automatically decry it as racist, because for many slaveholders (especially in the North), it genuinely wasn't.



Perhaps Ben Franklin never had any malice toward his slaves because they were black. I don't know. I wasn't there. Still, the 'morality' of slavery should never be seen as relative to the social climate or year on the calendar.



which is why he emancipated them and became an Abolitionist. You're not paying attention here, are you? You can't score any points for your toadying up to this administration that's doing its damnedest to become as Orwellian as possible before it has to leave by calling someone out who helped create our government and warned, wrote, and spoke against doing exactly what our government seems hell-bent on doing when he already called himself out on it and changed his ways.

gods, could i have made that sentence any longer? any English majors out there that feel like cleaning that up for some small amusement?

goatinamoat

goatinamoat

New York, NY
March 2006

DEC 09, 2007 09:24 PM

Zarth said:
The government just kidnaps and tortures people without any accountability because we've got such a vibrant democracy.


I will admit that those who oppose the US on the battlefield and who do it without adhering to the Geneva Convention, e.g., not wearing a recognized uniform, are in a world of hurt.

But I think any reasonable person will not say we are living in a police state until the special police go house-to-house and make people disappear.

We are so far from a police state, I think you must just be feeling moody.

michael9000000

michael9000000

New York, NY
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 09:29 PM

scylis said:

michael9000000 said:

Formus said:

michael9000000 said:
Zarth, how can you say that Benjamin Franklin was "always an opponent of racism" when he owned slaves for more than half his life? Were his slaves white?


What we have here is the problem of you viewing "racism" through the 21st century post-Civil Rights era lens and applying it to the cultural situation that existed over two centuries ago. The atmosphere is different, and slaveholding was essential for a man to even get respect within the social structure that existed at the time. Had Franklin not owned slaves, it's doubtful that he would have been a figurehead of any kind, let alone one of the chief founding fathers, deputy postmaster, ambassador to France, etc.

I know for a fact that in George Washington's will, he explicitly freed every single slave on his plantation. Now I don't know enough about Franklin to assume he did the same thing, but it does show that Washington, while being at his heart fundamentally opposed to the practice of slavery, realized that it was a necessity to continue in order to not only get himself respected, admittedly a selfish thing but also a very important thing - imagine a United States without George Washington - but hold the United States together long enough to get the upstart country off the ground in the first place.

Slavery is a tricky issue, especially at the time of the Constitution's ratification. You can't automatically decry it as racist, because for many slaveholders (especially in the North), it genuinely wasn't.



Perhaps Ben Franklin never had any malice toward his slaves because they were black. I don't know. I wasn't there. Still, the 'morality' of slavery should never be seen as relative to the social climate or year on the calendar.



which is why he emancipated them and became an Abolitionist. You're not paying attention here, are you? You can't score any points for your toadying up to this administration that's doing its damnedest to become as Orwellian as possible before it has to leave by calling someone out who helped create our government and warned, wrote, and spoke against doing exactly what our government seems hell-bent on doing when he already called himself out on it and changed his ways.

gods, could i have made that sentence any longer? any English majors out there that feel like cleaning that up for some small amusement?



LOL... I don't toady up to the Bush adminstration... on the contrary, I think his foreign policy is a mess.

Lots of assumptions are being made about me. If anyone wants to argue with me, they should at least argue with the things I've said, not about what they assume I believe in.

Formus

Formus

Milwaukee, WI
May 2007

DEC 09, 2007 09:29 PM

scylis said:
gods, could i have made that sentence any longer? any English majors out there that feel like cleaning that up for some small amusement?


Done:

You can't score any points for toadying up to an administration that's doing its damnedest to become as Orwellian as possible before it has to leave by calling out the "racism" of someone who helped create our government and who warned, wrote, and spoke against doing exactly what our current government seems hell-bent on doing, especially when he admitted his moral shortcomings and changed his ways.

michael9000000

michael9000000

New York, NY
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 09:30 PM

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:
The government just kidnaps and tortures people without any accountability because we've got such a vibrant democracy.


I will admit that those who oppose the US on the battlefield and who do it without adhering to the Geneva Convention, e.g., not wearing a recognized uniform, are in a world of hurt.

But I think any reasonable person will not say we are living in a police state until the special police go house-to-house and make people disappear.

We are so far from a police state, I think you must just be feeling moody.



+1

That goes back to my original post in this thread:

"Aren't we being a bit over-dramatic here?"

scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:31 PM

edited because he fixed it.

damn distracting cats.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:32 PM

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:

michael9000000 said:
There is no police state.


Oh. No, of course not. The government just kidnaps and tortures people without any accountability because we've got such a vibrant democracy.


I will admit that those who oppose the US on the battlefield and who do it without adhering to the Geneva Convention, e.g., wearing a recognized uniform, are in a world of hurt.


Or who just happen to have the wrong name, or be brown in the wrong place and the wrong time. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that you're just deluding yourself into believing that everyone who runs afoul of our security services does so "on the battlefield" in open aggression against the United States.

goatinamoat said:
But I think any reasonable person will not say we are living in a police state until the special police go house-to-house and make people disappear.

We are so far from a police state, I think you must just be feeling moody.


We're a far cry from a Stalinist or fascist state. We're a far cry from where we were during World War II (which had at least the excuse of an existential threat). But it's fair to be troubled by the executive's arrogation of unconstitutional powers. I have no problem calling it a police state, though I'd concede the term's applicability only in a narrow sense.

meatpieboy

meatpieboy

Korea, D.P.R.
June 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:34 PM

Quote newbs.

Actually, the secret police didn't disappear people here, but after Sept. 11, the normal police did. Legal limbo for the innocent.

scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:35 PM

Formus said:

scylis said:
gods, could i have made that sentence any longer? any English majors out there that feel like cleaning that up for some small amusement?


Done:

You can't score any points for toadying up to an administration that's doing its damnedest to become as Orwellian as possible before it has to leave by calling out the "racism" of someone who helped create our government and who warned, wrote, and spoke against doing exactly what our current government seems hell-bent on doing, especially when he called himself out on his moral shortcomings and changed his ways.



sweet, thanks. i always hated English class, with the exception of having to read stuff. i read me some books good.

scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:39 PM

michael9000000 said:
LOL... I don't toady up to the Bush adminstration... on the contrary, I think his foreign policy is a mess.

Lots of assumptions are being made about me. If anyone wants to argue with me, they should at least argue with the things I've said, not about what they assume I believe in.



sorry. you weren't toadying. i re-read your posts and admit that there isn't any toadying done specifically towards the Bush administration. i admit i was wrong there.

your posts are filled with blissful ignorance, not toadying.

michael9000000

michael9000000

New York, NY
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 09:43 PM

scylis said:

michael9000000 said:
LOL... I don't toady up to the Bush adminstration... on the contrary, I think his foreign policy is a mess.

Lots of assumptions are being made about me. If anyone wants to argue with me, they should at least argue with the things I've said, not about what they assume I believe in.



sorry. you weren't toadying. i re-read your posts and admit that there isn't any toadying done specifically towards the Bush administration. i admit i was wrong there.

your posts are filled with blissful ignorance, not toadying.



I'm neither blissful nor ignorant. I simply have the opinion that things aren't as horrible as some folks make them seem. That's why I asked the original question... aren't we being a bit over-dramatic here?

scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

DEC 09, 2007 09:55 PM

michael9000000 said:

scylis said:

michael9000000 said:
LOL... I don't toady up to the Bush adminstration... on the contrary, I think his foreign policy is a mess.

Lots of assumptions are being made about me. If anyone wants to argue with me, they should at least argue with the things I've said, not about what they assume I believe in.



sorry. you weren't toadying. i re-read your posts and admit that there isn't any toadying done specifically towards the Bush administration. i admit i was wrong there.

your posts are filled with blissful ignorance, not toadying.



I'm neither blissful nor ignorant. I simply have the opinion that things aren't as horrible as some folks make them seem. That's why I asked the original question... aren't we being a bit over-dramatic here?



no. because even on the slim chance that our liberties are in no way, shape, or form being (or going to be) violated by this trend of laws and policy, it opens to door to someone in the future abusing it and using it to open the whole of the country and all its law-abiding citizens to even further abuse.

if we make it so that they can cloak their abuses within the seal of "National Security" or "Classified Material/Subject Matter," how are we to know if our liberties are nothing more than an illusion perpetuated by those in power and those who stand by and say nothing, believing that the glass is still half full?

do i really have to pull out that quote about the Nazis and what saying nothing when something seems wrong gets you?

soulcompromise

soulcompromise

I'm lost
November 2006

DEC 09, 2007 09:56 PM

I'm not surprised. There's also a type of spyware now called a keylogger that records everything typed on a computer. I thought that was disturbing just to read about then I found one in my spyware analysis. It is nice to think we're a little bit safer because of it though.

michael9000000

michael9000000

New York, NY
July 2007

DEC 09, 2007 10:00 PM

scylis said:

michael9000000 said:

scylis said:

michael9000000 said:
LOL... I don't toady up to the Bush adminstration... on the contrary, I think his foreign policy is a mess.

Lots of assumptions are being made about me. If anyone wants to argue with me, they should at least argue with the things I've said, not about what they assume I believe in.



sorry. you weren't toadying. i re-read your posts and admit that there isn't any toadying done specifically towards the Bush administration. i admit i was wrong there.

your posts are filled with blissful ignorance, not toadying.



I'm neither blissful nor ignorant. I simply have the opinion that things aren't as horrible as some folks make them seem. That's why I asked the original question... aren't we being a bit over-dramatic here?



no. because even on the slim chance that our liberties are in no way, shape, or form being (or going to be) violated by this trend of laws and policy, it opens to door to someone in the future abusing it and using it to open the whole of the country and all its law-abiding citizens to even further abuse.

if we make it so that they can cloak their abuses within the seal of "National Security" or "Classified Material/Subject Matter," how are we to know if our liberties are nothing more than an illusion perpetuated by those in power and those who stand by and say nothing, believing that the glass is still half full?

do i really have to pull out that quote about the Nazis and what saying nothing when something seems wrong gets you?



Okay... so you feel like something monumentally evil is going on... fair enough...

I disagree with you.

I'm blissful and ignorant as much as you're tortured and paranoid.

Or, we can skip the juvenile name calling and just agree to disagree...

Formus

Formus

Milwaukee, WI
May 2007

DEC 09, 2007 10:02 PM

soulcompromise said:
I'm not surprised. There's also a type of spyware now called a keylogger that records everything typed on a computer.


"What's going on? According to my illegal keylogging software, you've all been giving out personal information over the internet!"

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 14

Next

featured interviews