Obama adopts Bush policy on wire taps

[Modelworks]

I guess the only change with Obama is the name on the door.

http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/04/05

Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy
Says Court Must Dismiss Jewel v. NSA to Protect 'State Secrets'

San Francisco - The Obama administration formally adopted the Bush administration's position that the courts cannot judge the legality of the National Security Agency's (NSA's) warrantless wiretapping program, filing a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA late Friday.

In Jewel v. NSA, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging the agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. The Obama Justice Department claims in its motion that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets." These are essentially the same arguments made by the Bush administration three years ago in Hepting v. AT&T, EFF's lawsuit against one of the telecom giants complicit in the NSA spying.

"President Obama promised the American people a new era of transparency, accountability, and respect for civil liberties," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "But with the Obama Justice Department continuing the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a 'secret' that cannot be reviewed by the courts, it feels like deja vu all over again."

 

[bbdub333]

Traitor in Chief

 

[CADsortaGUY]

in my pocket goin' jing-a-ling-a-ling?


Seriously though - I'm not surprised, it was mainly just a political issue to bash Bush with when it was brought up in the past.

 

[frostedflakes]

Yeah, I am extremely disappointed in Obama on this issue. Hopefully the EFF and ACLU will make progress fighting this in the courts, because it doesn't look like any meaningful change is going to come from the new administration.

 

[jpeyton]

This should appease the surprising number of people on this forum who idolize Bush.

 

[JSt0rm]

arent you pussies happy about this kind of shit? I mean terror! And all they are saying is it cant get into the courts for national security reasons.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I guess the only change with Obama is the name on the door.

http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/04/05

Warrantless Wiretapping and Secrecy
Says Court Must Dismiss Jewel v. NSA to Protect 'State Secrets'

San Francisco - The Obama administration formally adopted the Bush administration's position that the courts cannot judge the legality of the National Security Agency's (NSA's) warrantless wiretapping program, filing a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA late Friday.

In Jewel v. NSA, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is challenging the agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. The Obama Justice Department claims in its motion that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets." These are essentially the same arguments made by the Bush administration three years ago in Hepting v. AT&T, EFF's lawsuit against one of the telecom giants complicit in the NSA spying.

"President Obama promised the American people a new era of transparency, accountability, and respect for civil liberties," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "But with the Obama Justice Department continuing the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a 'secret' that cannot be reviewed by the courts, it feels like deja vu all over again."

I suspect some politics playing a role, with one of Obama's areas of political risk being charges of 'not strong enough on security issues'; if an attack happened after Obama had taken the other side against these measures, whether these measures would have made any difference or not, it's pretty obvious how the right could use that in an attack.

It reminds me a little of how Harry Truman bought into the red-baiting hysteria, especially after he was damaged by the public opposed his firing of MacArthur, where Truman instituted things like 'loyalty oaths' under pressure from the right, and yet the right was still able to regain both the White House and Congress largely riding on the red scare.

It may also have something to do with 'preserving executive power', and some concern for the nation's ability to have an effective spying system.

James Bamford's books make clear how challenging it is for the NSA to get useful information as technology develops.

Little doubt this is a disappointment - another disappointment - to many of Obama's liberal supporters.

I lean towards the other side on it, with the EFF, but have to say we don't have all the info Obama does for me to say for sure what I think the right position is.

Yes, there is a difference in using that argument between a president you have some trust in having the right values, and a president you think well sell out those values easily.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: bbdub333
Traitor in Chief

PAGING HARVEY

lulz next 4 years are going to be fun

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
arent you pussies happy about this kind of shit? I mean terror! And all they are saying is it cant get into the courts for national security reasons.

He's just pointing out people like you turning a blind eye

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
arent you pussies happy about this kind of shit? I mean terror! And all they are saying is it cant get into the courts for national security reasons.

He's just pointing out people like you turning a blind eye

people like me?

 

[sciwizam]

Glenn Greenwald: New and worse secrecy and immunity claims from the Obama DOJ

But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

 

[AnnonUSA]

Same old Same old.....

Change we can believe in.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: sciwizam
Glenn Greenwald: New and worse secrecy and immunity claims from the Obama DOJ

But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

Then let's get rid of that part of the Patriot Act.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: sciwizam
Glenn Greenwald: New and worse secrecy and immunity claims from the Obama DOJ

But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's first response to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope -- never before advanced even by the Bush administration -- that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

Then let's get rid of that part of the Patriot Act.

Edit: I've long recommended Glenn Greenwald as the best blog writer. Read the whole linked article, it's worth reading.

He was one of the harshest criticis of the Bush administration on these matters, and clearly puts the lie to the right's projecting that liberal commentators give Obama a pass.

Edit #2: Hit quote instead of edit, so double post instead of an edit before.

 

[SAWYER]

lol, grabs popcorn

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Sawyer
lol, grabs popcorn

No one can tell them anything. They'll find excuses as to why this is acceptable, just like Bush supporters before them.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Sawyer
lol, grabs popcorn

No one can tell them anything. They'll find excuses as to why this is acceptable, just like Bush supporters before them.

Like I said above - you are projecting. I'd say the Glenn Greenwald column is an example of your statement being clearly disproven. Your only contribution is to lie about liberals.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
This should appease the surprising number of people on this forum who idolize Bush.

Where's the outrage from the left?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I lean towards the other side on it, with the EFF, but have to say we don't have all the info Obama does for me to say for sure what I think the right position is.

Nobody here had Bush's information either, but it didn't people from foaming at the mouth. Now it's OK because it's a Democrat. You're such a predictable hack Craig.

 

[SAWYER]

Both sides cheer leaders are despicable

 

[waggy]

fucking disgusting. but no suprise.

once the goverment gets power it is NOT goign to give it up. Anyone who thought Obama was going to reverse many of his policy's are neive and they are in for a shock over the next few years.


As for the patriot act its one of the most damageing laws to the constitution. It gives far to much power to the Goverment. i thought Bush and buddies were bad for doing it..but seems Obama is going to one up him with takeing over the banks and such.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: Sawyer
lol, grabs popcorn

No one can tell them anything. They'll find excuses as to why this is acceptable, just like Bush supporters before them.

Like I said above - you are projecting. I'd say the Glenn Greenwald column is an example of your statement being clearly disproven. Your only contribution is to lie about liberals.

Really?

Originally posted by: Craig234
I lean towards the other side on it, with the EFF, but have to say we don't have all the info Obama does for me to say for sure what I think the right position is.

:roll:

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: waggy
fucking disgusting. but no suprise.

once the goverment gets power it is NOT goign to give it up. Anyone who thought Obama was going to reverse many of his policy's are neive and they are in for a shock over the next few years.


As for the patriot act its one of the most damageing laws to the constitution. It gives far to much power to the Goverment. i thought Bush and buddies were bad for doing it..but seems Obama is going to one up him with takeing over the banks and such.

Well of course they are going to EXPAND power, anyone who thought otherwise is ignorant of history.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: waggy
fucking disgusting. but no suprise.

once the goverment gets power it is NOT goign to give it up. Anyone who thought Obama was going to reverse many of his policy's are neive and they are in for a shock over the next few years.


As for the patriot act its one of the most damageing laws to the constitution. It gives far to much power to the Goverment. i thought Bush and buddies were bad for doing it..but seems Obama is going to one up him with takeing over the banks and such.

Well of course they are going to EXPAND power, anyone who thought otherwise is ignorant of history.

id on't think they are ignorant. they are just blinded by "hope"

people are sick of how the country (and world) is going that they are willing to beleive anything. Some will not see the truth no matter what.

Obama is not much diffrent then bush (ok a hell of a lot smarter) on politics of being the Presidant.

 

[Schadenfroh]

I am not surprised. I wonder how much "useful" intel was gathered from it. It must have been significant for Obama not to reverse it.