Correction. Reading the wired blog lets me understand – the bottom line of the basket warrants is that the NSA will be collecting the vast majority of everything Americans say to non-Americans. And permanently storing it.

Right?

Example, please?

Read 161.

- I wrote the congressman on this issue a few weeks ago, and the response I received did contain the claim that passage of FISA reform would give foreigners the same rights as Americans

- Hoekstra is not a lawyer and has no legal background, he’s a former corporate executive

- when the secret FISA surveillance first was revealed, Hoekstra called for the imprisonment of the reporters who broke the story – in fact predicted their imprisonment within a year, but then the 2006 elections happened and clipped his wings a bit

- Hoekstra is reportedly posturing for a run as governor of Michigan in 2010; he loathes being in the minority in the House, and he is extremely ambitious, with an arrogance and temper that would get him a FOX News gig if everything else does not pan out for him

Roy at 154 — You mean, such as my direct link to the FISA law itself, my direct link to Rep. Rush Holt’s dissection of the RESTORE Act, which includes a direct link to the Act itself, and my direct link to the 4th Amendment with footnoted and annotated information pertaining thereto on the same page?

Jeebus, try clicking through the actual links before trying the whine and dodge idiocy, would you?

Well, of course I did check the links. In a previous Klein article you said that Bush administration sources were Klein’s sources and then as documentation linked to Glenn Greenwalds Blog. The whole blog.

Look, I can do all the reading on my own. The point is if I do that why do I or anyone else really need to read you.

It is simple, you seem to be educated and I would presume that you understand that when you digest other material you need to give specific documentation. I personally could give hoot. I read enough to know if something smells a little off or not.

My point was that the reason that people believe one line trash like Saddam being involved in 911 is that we Liberals – or progressive if you are to weak-kneed to own up to being Liberal – are so bad at giving factual information. I am not impressed by a show of intelligence – I am impressed with intelligence. If you want people to get it you have to keep it precise and easy to understand.

Of course, that point was made in a previous post that no one read on this blog. You are all too busy letting everyone know that everyone knows everyone, trying to be the first comment, and general name calling and opinion spouting.

The only reason that I am here is that I watched you and others on C-SPAN at the “I am just so popular and my ego is enormous” Yearly Convention in New York. I was favorably impressed and decided to look in.

I must say among the liberal/progressive bloggers there are only a few that are anymore less full of themselves than the MSM.

Just remember you are dealing with the masses. KISS.

Heck is you can’t even win over someone that basically agrees with you what chance do you have with others.

Twice now a person on this site has assumed because I was critical that I did not read or look at the thing I was criticizing. I guess that is “since you don’t agree with me you must not have read what I wrote.”
And yes, it is the direct link to the “whole thing” of anything that is the problem.. That is not documentation, that is a reading assignment. The people that you need to rally to call their congressmen and understand the issues, do not have the time to wade through all that. They work and raise families and if they even bother to read what they think are egg-head blogs, they just need a link to the part that substantiates what you say.

The Republicans give them 30 second sound bites, you give them Dostoevsky. Who do you think they are going to listen to?

Thanks for reading my comments though, I thought no one was listening.

Maybe this is a silly question, but I haven’t seen this addressed.

If the US government can spy on foreigners, what stops foreign governments from spying on me? Don’t we have any treaties or UN involvement? The US government contracts out their torture(rendition) and is not charged with conspiracy(RICO?) Have they contracted out their spying to some other government to get around the Fourth Amendment as they have the Fifth?

I’m certain it has been done in the past. There are intelligence operations where the CIA can’t work domestically and the FBI wasn’t (until late in the Clinton admin) able either. So, using a foreign agency, such as Mossad, to snoop and report to us, would probably have been done. Whether that was what happened in the case of agents tracking the 9/11 suspects isn’t clear. Able Danger might’ve been one breach of the law where our intell. people were tracking the 9/11 suspects in America and that would’ve been useful if done properly, but still probably illegal. We still probably have newbie intell people at the FBI — see Sibel Edmonds stories for more detail.

Hugh–

As for filibusters, why is it that Harry Reid seems willing only to honor those of Republicans and ignore or subvert those of his own party?

I think what is going on is that Schumer and Reid believe that as long as republicans keep voting in a bloc in unpopular ways, they will pick up more senate seats in November.

In their view, the republicans are self-immolating, and they don’t want to get in the way of that.

Their mistake, IMO, is that their first priority is to govern and the politics is a distant second.

If you can make your way of governing work for you politically, then fine. I think we, here at the lake, see that as quite normal. But, to only see the politics is being too greedy by half.

I could keep going Roy. There are a lot of things linked up here — some of which go directly to more posts with even more original information linked up in them as well. I know this, because I wrote a lot of them, including but not limited to this post (also linked above,btw) which outlines the initial FISA law and constitutional framework issues.

Jeebus, try clicking through the actual links before trying the whine and dodge idiocy, would you?

Roy E. Pearson @ 154: I guess that when CHS did research papers in College, when she footnoted and item she just listed the book and said look it up yourself.

Please, if she is going to asert that something is true and wants to make it look like she is docunenting the “fact”, she needs to narrow what she documents to that which is pertinate to her assertion. A quote with a link would be most appropriate.

Otherwise she, Time, and Joe Klein are all cut of the same cloth.

Example, please?