PDA

View Full Version : What'll be the next W statement about domestic spying?


banyon
05-17-2006, 10:54 AM
Campaign 04'

"[a]ny time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires ... a court order" and that "[w]hen we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." -April 2004

After Wiretapping story is broken (after 1 year withholding from NY TImes)

“If somebody from al-Qaeda is calling you, we'd like to know why. In the meantime, this program is conscious of people's civil liberties as am I. This is is a limited program designed to prevent attacks on the United States of America - and I repeat limited. It is limited to calls from outside the United States to calls within the United States."-January 2006

After Domestic NSA Data collection program revealed...

"We do not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval. What I've told the American people is we'll protect them against an al-Qaida attack. And we'll do that within the law," May, 2006

After (insert your gradual encroachment of civil liberties here) is diosclosed...

"Insert your quote here" Oct-Dec 2006

Pitt Gorilla
05-17-2006, 11:56 AM
Civil liberties? Who needs 'em? What, you have something to hide?!?

the Talking Can
05-17-2006, 01:34 PM
if you're innocent, you shouldn't object to living in a police state...

jAZ
05-17-2006, 02:14 PM
if you're innocent, you shouldn't object to living in a police state...

-- signed Iowanian

Braincase
05-17-2006, 02:15 PM
The policy is simple...

STFD & STFU.

patteeu
05-17-2006, 03:57 PM
Try this one on:

The Bush administration has been consistent all along for cases of domestic spying. Domestic wiretaps require warrants.

WRT the NSA surveillance program, have we ever heard the administration describe in terms of wiretaps? I'm not aware of it if we have.

jAZ
05-17-2006, 04:05 PM
The Bush administration has been consistent all along for cases of domestic spying. Domestic wiretaps require warrants.
Stop making up facts that support the outcome you wish existed...

"[a]ny time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires ... a court order" and that "[w]hen we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." -April 2004

patteeu
05-17-2006, 04:11 PM
Stop making up facts that support the outcome you wish existed...

"[a]ny time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires ... a court order" and that "[w]hen we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." -April 2004

I'm not making up any facts, I'm operating under banyon's criteria:

What'll be the next W statement about domestic spying?

I had two parts to my previous post. The second part covers the NSA program involving international electronic communications.

jAZ
05-17-2006, 04:30 PM
I'm not making up any facts, I'm operating under banyon's criteria:



I had two parts to my previous post. The second part covers the NSA program involving international electronic communications.
So are you coming up with the next Bush quote, or are you analyzing the discussion (with these statements)?
Try this one on:

The Bush administration has been consistent all along for cases of domestic spying. Domestic wiretaps require warrants.

WRT the NSA surveillance program, have we ever heard the administration describe in terms of wiretaps? I'm not aware of it if we have.

banyon
05-17-2006, 09:44 PM
I guess Tom Tommorow and I are on the same page:

Boozer
05-17-2006, 09:50 PM
On a purely intellectual level, I'd really be interested in knowing what technologies they're using to parse their language (pun intended).

Is it really a "wiretap" if you're using computers to develop transcripts, rather than recording audio?

Maybe ChiefsPlanet could hire some NSA guy for a couple of hours to help us more effectively manage our massive database.

patteeu
05-17-2006, 11:32 PM
So are you coming up with the next Bush quote, or are you analyzing the discussion (with these statements)?

I was trying to reconcile the two statements, but I'm not sure how much belief I have in what I was saying (hence the "Try this one on:"). I think that with heavy parsing they are probably technically true, but I can understand why someone would consider the first one false. OTOH, given that the NSA program was supposedly one of the most secret and reportedly useful tools in our counterterrorism effort and given effective safeguards against abuse, I'm not so sure that keeping it secret by treating it as if it doesn't exist in declassified conversations isn't appropriate.