dagblog - Comments for "You know it's ugly when a Bush judge smacks down an Obama civil liberties infringement"

If the public is given a

rmrd0000 — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 13:10:40 +0000

In reply to Thinking Americans won't find

If the public is given a different face as the icon for the battle against the NSA, the public will dump Snowden in a hot second. The meme is that he ran to Hong Kong and then to that haven of civil rights, Russia. If he goes to Brazil the country will be reminded of Brazil's racial strife. It will not be a win for Snowden.

You bring racial attacks into everything. Let me state my position again. Hopefully you will be able to understand, no President is going to willingly cripple intelligence gathering. Even if. a President were to say that the operations were going to change, there has to be legislation or laws.

Some democratic and Republican Senators are willing to scuttle talks with Iran so the idea that Congress will come up with legislation is remote. The courts are the only viable option. Instead of jumping up and down about what isn't happening, I focus on what is happening in the fight against the NSA.Tere are four cases pending in US District Courts. That is where support needs to go.

Stop and Frisk was challenged in court. There was a court case in the murder of a Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman got off, but a generation of youth has been inspired to combat immigration laws and Stand Your Ground in Florida. Legal action is pending on voter suppression.

I think that I am consistent in the approach to the NSA and racial issues.. Others have taken the confused position that Zimmerman made a righteous kill and that a racist like Rand Paul is worthy of attention because he talks about easing drug laws.

If someone supports Zimmerman and wonders why Blacks don't rally around Rand Paul, they may have to take a back seat when discussing issues of race. Rand Paul was amazed that Blacks actually knew Black history and could remember the name of the Black Republican Senator that a Rand Paul forgot. Other people are unaware of the specifics of race- based cases that went to the a Supreme Court. These folks are as qualified to discuss racial issues as the Duck Dynasty patriarch who gives his own confused version of racial history in GQ magazine.

Thinking Americans won't find

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 06:58:22 +0000

In reply to Your comment (that initiated

Thinking Americans won't find US government's industrial/economic spying defensible, so won't consider Snowden a traitor for helping a country defend against it.

This is Brazil we're talking about, not North Korea or China - why are we spying? Big terrorist threat coming up from Sao Paulo? Worried about the price of ethanol or what?

You're a great believer in American exceptionalism - you just don't seem to like it when it targets your race, but targeting anyone else's demographics is hunky dory. Seems strange to me, but I guess if I stop to think, not that unusual.

We need to remember that USA

rmrd0000 — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 04:34:47 +0000

In reply to Your comment (that initiated

We need to remember that USA Today exposed the phone surveillance program in 2006.

Your comment (that initiated

rmrd0000 — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 03:21:26 +0000

In reply to Last try & I'm finished. You

Your comment (that initiated the thread)9

Thurgood Marshall is well-known because he was behind a smart calculated widespread strategy with the NAACP to overturn segregation, not just a lawyer for an advocacy group. But surely you're not so dumb as to not realize that more people know Rosa Parks, Marshall's client, than know who Marshall was?

You made the statement that Thurgood Marshall was Rosa Parks lawyer. He was not. Instead of noting your error and moving on, you doubled down and made the six degree of separation argument that Thurgood Marshall was indeed Rosa Parks' lawyer. You posted data that repeated noted that Parks was not a plaintiff in the SCOTUS case argued by Marshall and Gray, yet you continued to argue that Marshall was Parks' lawyer. You were the one who said Parks was Marshall's client.You were wrong.

I contend that if Snowden works for another country to reveal US spy techniques, he will be considered a traitor. The public will look for other heroes to become the icons for the battle against the NSA. The lawyers are a logical possibility. An organization like the ACLU is another possibility. If Snowden is seen as working for another country, he will not be the hero if the courts end NSA current surveillance program.

More: Protecting Citizens,

artappraiser — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 02:11:42 +0000

In reply to New news: Obama review

Protecting Citizens, and Their Privacy
By RICHARD A. CLARKE, MICHAEL J. MORELL, GEOFFREY R. STONE, CASS R. SUNSTEIN and PETER P. SWIRE
Op-Ed Contributors, New York Times, Dec. 19/20, 2013

[....] Our recommendations, as members of the President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies, appointed in August, are designed to strengthen the protection of privacy and civil liberties without compromising the central mission of the intelligence community.

Our major conclusion is that the nation needs a package of reforms that will allow the intelligence community to continue to protect Americans, as well as our friends and allies, while at the same time affirming enduring values, involving both privacy and liberty, that have made the United States a beacon of freedom to so much of the world. We made 46 recommendations to the president. We offer here a summary of 10 of our most significant conclusions, in the hope of explaining our reasoning to the American people and encouraging a public discussion of these vital issues [....]

It sounds like I don't give a

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 01:06:23 +0000

In reply to It sounds like Gray was

It sounds like I don't give a fuck - the point is that Snowden/Parks risked their bloody skins to do something , not the lawyers who might be commendable but didn't risk being disappeared by some racist sheriff or forced into permanent exile.

Last try & I'm finished. You

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 01:03:40 +0000

In reply to Than you for avoiding the

Last try & I'm finished. You started this with: "A larger number of people can tell you that Thurgood Marshall was an attorney in Brown V. Board then can actually name the Brown that gives the case it's name."

This was a cheap trick to slam Snowden & say ACLU/Freedom Watch lawyers would be the true heroes, that they didn't need a test case, the American court system is oh so transparent & open to contest state secrets, ignoring say Gitmo prisoners held for 12 years without habeas corpus or frequently ability to sue or see a lawyer.... And I came up with a civil rights case where the person arrested - the test case whose arrest launched the boycotts, is much better known than the lawyers who litigated the case and the person whose name is on the Supreme Court decision.

Anyway, continue to pick nits and miss the point, I'm through.

Trick question. It was Pete

rmrd0000 — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:54:48 +0000

In reply to Who was the 5th Beatle? a)

Trick question. It was Pete Best.

Like Thurgood Marshall, Pete Best was not Rosa Parks's lawyer

Than you for avoiding the

rmrd0000 — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:51:04 +0000

In reply to Question: 4) Who is most

Than you for avoiding the questions.

You thought that Thurgood Marshall was Rosa Parks' lawyer. He was not

You seem to have thought that Rosa Parks was one of the plaintiffs in the SCOTUS case. She was not.

Thurgood Marshall is more remembered than the Browns who were the plantiffs in Brown v. Board.

It sounds like Gray was

Anonymous PS — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:45:22 +0000

In reply to 6 degrees? Try 1 1/2 max,

It sounds like Gray was Parks' lawyer.