So what was all the fuss about NSA eavesdropping? I guess once they realized it wasn't going to go anywhere and the WH wasn't going to budge, it was deemed important to get someone over at CIA as soon as possible so as to maintain adult supervision. And Hayden doesn't have to give up his military uniform, does he? What about his rank? The daily sight of someone with a 4 stars on his uniform would send a serious message at CIA that we live in serious time . . .

No, actually having someone with stars on his shoulders just shows what all the retiring spooks were afraid of, a consolidation of power within the pentagon, y'know why they put the spooks outside of washington, thats because when we want REAL intelligence its best that it not be clouded by political will, I can't find one sane person who can explain why our military needs to be in control of our intelligence gathering, they have their own.

By the way, has anyone figured out what they are doing with the tens of millions of records for people that aren't somehow linked with Bush's little personal war on freedom? Are they just gonna keep them all tidy and together for me so the next time I forget what my buddy's phone number I can get an email of it, I mean if i'm gonna give up my freedoms, I might as well get something for it besides platitudes that they are protecting me from something.

Third Eye Open

I guess you're a little behind the times. The reporter just made all that up. Where have you been?

On another positive note Brett Kavanaugh has been confirmed by a vote of 67-36 to serve on the second most powerful court in the land. For the libs out there that would be the DC court of appeals.

ok, ill play along, so where has it been proven that this was all a big lie...can you provide some proof...oh wait, the government refuses to confirm or deny the allegation...gosh darn it all!

personally i think y'all are just contrarians, and come '08 you're gonna vote democrat all the way down the line.

its a sad day when the usually staunch constitutional conservatives need to be lectured about infringing government by silly liberals

As a far left wing kook this won't mean anything to you but the telecommunication companies have vigorously denied the allegations. I know, you would rather believe the "unnamed sources" cause it fits into your radical anti American views

so if they aren't involved, and the story's editors are still standing by it, then why haven't they sued for libel?...y'know why, because that would mean they have to actually provide proof they aren't...which means opening books, and the government can't have that now, can they...

man, i wish it was all just about being 'un-american', but I am fighting for the freedoms that were left by our founding fathers, I really hope one day you wake up and realize we dont care who is in office, Bush is already a lame-duck, this is about reclaiming freedoms stolen from us, where is your fire in the belly, what if Clinton had been enacting programs such as this, i'd hope everyone on the right would all over him like ants on watermelon, but instead its just one big rhetorical circle-jerk...you may think im some partisan hack, but I prescribe to only one political theory, its called rational thinking, and im not seeing much of that on the hill or in the whitehouse recently, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it

Thank God there is finally going to be some sensibility at the CIA.

General Hayden will bring to this screwball unit the accountability that has been the hallmark of the Bush Administration.

This should be a call to all CIA losers that if you leak to the world every little illegal or immoral thing this country does, you WILL be fired, no "ifs," "ands," or "buts."

No more aiding and abetting al-Queda, you lefty moonbat psychos!

Clinton did do it dumbass, it was called Echelon. Ever hear of it? Good Lord, are all left wing fanatics this intllectually vacant?

>>"By the way, has anyone figured out what they are doing with the tens of millions of records for people that aren't somehow linked with Bush's little personal war on freedom? Are they just gonna keep them all tidy and together for me so the next time I forget what my buddy's phone number I can get an email of it, I mean if i'm gonna give up my freedoms, I might as well get something for it besides platitudes that they are protecting me from something."

Personal war on freedom? What specific freedom has been lost? Giving up your freedoms? Which specific freedoms have you given up? OR...which "right" have you given up?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess......none.

>>"its a sad day when the usually staunch constitutional conservatives need to be lectured about infringing government by silly liberals"

Bring on whatever lecture you think you can. I'll bring on the law and the Constitution and USSC case-precedence and prove you wrong every time. What right or freedom has the current government been infringing upon? Or is this just more empty claims?

>>"but I am fighting for the freedoms that were left by our founding fathers, I really hope one day you wake up and realize we dont care who is in office, Bush is already a lame-duck, this is about reclaiming freedoms stolen from us, where is your fire in the belly"

Oooooo....you're "fighting" for freedoms? Lemme know how the fight's going...or are you simply making false accusations? Once again...specifically list the "freedom" that has been lost/stolen/usurped.

>>"what if Clinton had been enacting programs such as this"

Echelon...educate yourself......and Echelon is just as legal.

>>"you may think im some partisan hack, but I prescribe to only one political theory, its called rational thinking, and im not seeing much of that on the hill or in the whitehouse recently, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it
"

You are a partisan hack as evidenced by your spewing of complete and blind partisan empty claims and false accusations and a complete non-understanding of the law, the Constitution and what your "rights" and "freedoms" really are.

Clinton WAS ENACTING these programs Third Eye Blind.

Good grief. Why don't you read up on "Echelon" during the Clinton Administration.

Here's a little snippet from the "60 Minutes" in 2000.

----------
But in fact, the NSA had been monitoring private domestic telephone conversations on a much larger scale throughout the 1990s - all of it done without a court order, let alone a catalyst like the 9/11 attacks.

In February 2000, for instance, CBS "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft introduced a report on the Clinton-era spy program by noting:

"If you made a phone call today or sent an e-mail to a friend, there's a good chance what you said or wrote was captured and screened by the country's largest intelligence agency. The top-secret Global Surveillance Network is called Echelon, and it's run by the National Security Agency."

NSA computers, said Kroft, "capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world."

Exactly CJ. This is what drives me batty with left wing people. I'm sure 3rd Eye Blind is a nice guy and good American and the whole nine yards. The problem is that they live and breathe what the pathetic MSM gives them, they don't do any intellectual curious discovery on their own and are so incapably rigid in their hatred of Bush and others that they cannot see through the trees.

I saw a great interview with a military man last night on the Bush / Blair news conference. He was saying how tired and old the two men look. But he then went on to say that the best part of the news conference is that they didn't offer any new items. The point being that STAY THE COURSE is the soundest strategy in military terms and for success.

He said there is this myth that insurgencies eventually when these struggles that is perpetuated by the media when in fact it is the exact opposite. If the military power is willing to string it out, take some losses and stay the course the counter insurgency almost always wins.

It was his belief that we are in such a poisoned atmosphere that it's simply "GET BUSH" right now that people aren't even understanding the stakes involved or what needs to be done militarily to win. They don't care, they simply want to take on Bush.

Lastly, he used Truman as an example. 21% approval ratings during the Korean conflict, yet we all know after the fact that Truman was dead on right. And oh by the way, Truman was a Democrat.

Hey Sarge, its called the 4th amendment...google it

are you guys so thick as to believe that the answer is to introduce MILLIONS of more pieces of information, widening an already huge database, like adding more hay onto an ever growing haystack, thats silly, you just open yourself up to more false positives and junk leads.

Escelon is just as horrible as this new crap, our lawmakers already enshrined the idea that the government shouldn't be spying on its own people, so instead they sidestepped the problem by having other countries do the dirty work for us, doesn't that rub you just slightly the wrong way?

Warriornation,

is the MSM only unreliable when they don't spout your version of reality?

The civil war going on in Iraq right now isnt gonna end by us bringing more force to bear, we are just another militia in that country, they sunnis cheer when we blow up Shia, and visa versa, we are caught in the middle because our guys over there aren't a police force, they arent meant to sit around and get shot at...for instance we have Pace bringing in more troops from Kuwait, what does this say to you, they don't have enough boots on the ground to stop the fighting, we do nothing bu antagonize these people, the insurgency that is supposedly Al Qaida and foreign fighters is BS, these are normal people protecting their neighborhoods from tit-for-tat killings, just as I suppose you would if another country was occupying your lands, and coming into innocent civilians houses and shooting women and children...sound like a benevolent force to you...

Warriornation,

Did you notice you're quoting 60 Minutes? I thought they were supposed to be the epitome of moonbattiness.

Also, from the same transcript:

"Representative PORTER GOSS (Chairman, House Intelligence Committee): Well, I can't get too specific about it, but there was some information about procedures in how the NSA people would employ some safeguards, and I wanted to see all the correspondence on that to make sure that those safeguards were being completely honored. At that point, one of the counsels of the NSA said, 'Well, we don't think we need to share this information with the Oversight Committee.' And we said, 'Well, we're sorry about that. We do have the oversight, and you will share the information with us,' AND THEY DID." (emphasis mine).

What? Congress has full oversight? I'll be darned.

I remember when that story broke, and it concerned me. It should concern everyone, it seems to me. And soon after that story broke the intel big-wigs bent over backwards to explain how the system worked and what oversight mechanisms were in place. You might want to read this. As NSA Director Gen. Hayden explained at the time (he's a Clinton hold-over too, you know) there were legislative, judicial, and executive branch oversight mechanisms in place. That's what's different now. That's what the level of concern should be. Like you said, Warrior, everyone knew we had the capacity to eavesdrop on essentially any kind of signal -- even baby monitors -- well before the Times story broke last winter. The only thing the Times story added was the fact that the FISA court was no longer provided with oversight. And later, we learned, neither was congress. They were only briefed, and only a small number of them, not the entire Oversight Committee.

4th Amendment? Do you actually comprehend the 4th Amendment or just use it to throw around willy-nilly and think you're being sooo wicked-smaht?

>>"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."

With all those freedoms and rights you falsely claim are lost.....which Bush program infringes on your 4th Amendment right? Before you even think of going for the NSA phone list flap....there's USSC case-precedence that says YOU ARE WRONG.

>>"SMITH v. MARYLAND, 442 U.S. 735 (1979)

(b) Petitioner in all probability entertained no actual expectation of privacy in the phone numbers he dialed, and even if he did, his expectation was not "legitimate." First, it is doubtful that telephone users in general have any expectation of privacy regarding the numbers they dial, since they typically know that they must convey phone numbers to the telephone company and that the company has facilities for recording this information and does in fact record it for various legitimate business purposes. And petitioner did not demonstrate an expectation of privacy merely by using his home phone rather than some other phone, since his conduct, although perhaps calculated to keep the contents of his conversation private, was not calculated to preserve the privacy of the number he dialed. Second, even if petitioner did harbor some subjective expectation of privacy, this expectation was not one that society is prepared to recognize as "reasonable." When petitioner voluntarily conveyed numerical information to the phone company and "exposed" that information to its equipment in the normal course of business, he assumed the risk that the company would reveal the information [442 U.S. 735, 736] to the police, cf. United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 . Pp. 741-746."

THere goes THAT non-argument for you.

Before you say the NSA listening in on international phone calls to or from known or suspected terrorists and think it violates FISA....read the definitions section of FISA law to see that THAT NSA flap does not even fall under FISA.
>>>(f) “Electronic surveillance” means—
(1) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire or radio communication sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person who is in the United States, if the contents are acquired by intentionally targeting that United States person, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes;
(2) the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire communication to or from a person in the United States, without the consent of any party thereto, if such acquisition occurs in the United States, but does not include the acquisition of those communications of computer trespassers that would be permissible under section 2511 (2)(i) of title 18;
(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or
(4) the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.(does not apply)

None of those specific instances apply to the NSA international wiretapping flap.

If you're gonna claim that the NSA wiretapping flap is a violation of your "rights" you must first know that you do not have a right under ANY Amendment to communicate with the enemy of the United States and expect that call to not be monitored ON THE OTHER END.

Is THAT all you got? Baseless whining filled with smugness, yet no substance? False accusations? Got any other Constitutional Amendments you don't understand?

Hey CJ, by the way, ill just remind you that personal insults are the last refuge of desperate people...ill share a little bit of wisdom with you: When a man offers you a gift, and you do not accept it, it belong to him...therefore when a man insults you, and you don not accept it, it is his to keep...cheers mate, and peace!

Actually the phone companies had no right to hand over these records without warrant to do so, your case had legal bearing since the police went in with a specific warrant, seaking specific information, they didnt get a list of numbers to go casting nets through, this is why Qwest seemed to find such a problem with the issue, the issue comes down to the government recieving documents that they had no rights to.

dont confuse confidence, with being smug...alright Sarge

Sarge,

Yeah, I've got one for you I don't understand. Maybe you can explain to me how the call monitoring program is not a violation of 18 USC § 3121:

§ 3121. General prohibition on pen register and trap and trace device use; exception

(a) In General.— Except as provided in this section, no person may install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order under section 3123 of this title or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
(b) Exception.— The prohibition of subsection (a) does not apply with respect to the use of a pen register or a trap and trace device by a provider of electronic or wire communication service—
(1) relating to the operation, maintenance, and testing of a wire or electronic communication service or to the protection of the rights or property of such provider, or to the protection of users of that service from abuse of service or unlawful use of service; or
(2) to record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect such provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful or abusive use of service; or (3) where the consent of the user of that service has been obtained.

It's a crime to violate this, by the way. You think a crime was committed here?

"General Michael Hayden won confirmation to be the 20th CIA director."

Good. It's great to have an Air Force general in charge of the CIA. I hope General Hayden whips the liberals at the CIA into shape or better yet, ships them out. So much for the NSA spying scandal. Heh.

Sarge,

"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."

-- Notice the trigger is "but upon probable cause" , meaning that if there is no probable cause, a seizure or search violated your constitutional rights.

I guess you missed that big, huge goofup when hayden answered the reporters and told them that he krew the 4th ammendment better than anyone and that there was no mention of probale cause in there, only unreasonable search and seizure. He knows better now, but it made him look very, very foolish to anyone that pointed it out.

Search through or seizure of phone records, has been interpreted to fall within the scope of the ammendment.

Also, regarding your FISA quotes, I might remind you that while FISA allows the monitoring of international calls, it still requires a FISA warrant to do it. Thats the whole point. They are skipping that step and just doing whatever they want regardless of the law.

If you think they can break that law without any thoughts but they wont break the one that stops them from monitoring domestic calls without a warrant, then you have rocks in your head.

BTW: Have a look at this weeks Business week article here that reports on big brother buying up all kinds of other records, including financial ones, banking records, online transactions, purchases, credit card records and many, many more.

They are spying on americans every, single move.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_22/b3986068.htm

Third Eye, doesn't your keyboard have a "period" button? Did you ever go to school? Why can't you write? And last, why act as if you have a dog in this hunt, when you're clearly either Canadian or British?

Sod off, wanker...

I mean if i'm gonna give up my freedoms, I might as well get something for it besides platitudes that they are protecting me from something.

You need protection...from yourself!!!

Third Eye, doesn't your keyboard have a "period" button? Did you ever go to school? Why can't you write? And last, why act as if you have a dog in this hunt, when you're clearly either Canadian or British?

Sod off, wanker...

LoL, when you dont have a leg to stand on, attack their grammer or typing.

Pop a couple smart pills, maybe it will help you to come up with an agruement.

Bottom line Bush and America wins again, Leftist lose again with Hayden at the controls

same-ole same ole

3rd Eye, I don't trust the media. When Walter Cronkite says "Of course we're liberal".

When Bernard Goldberg works for CBS for 28 years (award winning journalist) and says liberalism is systemic part of the media.

Yeah...let's just say I question a lot of what they do.

Isn't ironic that the people that defend the media are always liberals? Gee...why would that be?