Your mail is no longer private

[CartesianFart]

to think... america the land of freedom... now the land of the paranoid. and dick cheney too.

Or,it can be the case of...america the land of the paranoid...now the freedom of the likes of Dick Cheney to protect it.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Your mail was never private, it's just they, in Shrub's opinion, no longer need a judge's permission to spy on you.

 

[Narz]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=200095

Been done already my good man.

Ok, did I quick search for "mail" (command-F) and didn't see it but thanks.

Mods can close or merge.

 

[Elrohir]

Isn't the New York Daily News just one step up from a tabloid? I'll wait for all the facts from a more reputable source before casting judgement.

 

[Phlegmak]

Isn't the New York Daily News just one step up from a tabloid? I'll wait for all the facts from a more reputable source before casting judgement.

You're thinking of "World Net Daily." Look on Google news for more of this story if you need it.

 

[Elrohir]

You're thinking of "World Net Daily." Look on Google news for more of this story if you need it.

They're pretty trashy too, but the NYDN doesn't strike me as terribly reputable either. Although they beat out the New York Post.

 

[cegman]

It was on my local news as well as I believe CNN or one of the 24/7 news stations.

 

[Psyringe]

What we need is a SC decision saying that "signing statements" have no legal validity.

"Signing statements have no legal validity."

Bush's signing statement: The president will determine whether a given signing statement is valid or not.

 

[GenMarshall]

Ok, now I am teed off. Get Bush out of here!!! I dont want him reading my snail mail!!

 

[Captain Planet]

More fuel for the impeachment!

 

[BirraImperial]

My brother went to Venezuela for new year's. He says that everything, from bank transactions to the stuff you buy is registered by the government, so if you bought toothpaste at some place, or went to the ATM, they will know. It is required to always show your ID for every single thing you do. It's kind of scary, I hope the US government doesn't go that far.

 

[Sidhe]

Nope. Benjamin Franklin said otherwise.

So before terrorism existed BF had already made a law to advocate torture and lack of civil liberties if something that didn't exist came about? I'd like to see this one. Link.

I, and I suspect a good number of the rest of you, have not reviewed the particulars of this case enough to make an informed opinion. On the face of it, this event seems startling, but there is a lot of room for misinterpretation and omittion of certain facts that may be required to understand the situation properly.

Those laws I gave are far worse. If none of them are true why are they in your constitution now backed by the almighty Bush. John the mans not right, defending your president is all well and good, but defending this guy is pointless. He's not a moral person, and he couldn't care less for civil rights.

A reminder.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ng_statements/

Since taking office in 2001, President Bush has issued signing statements on more than 750 new laws, declaring that he has the power to set aside the laws when they conflict with his legal interpretation of the Constitution. The federal government is instructed to follow the statements when it enforces the laws. Here are 10 examples and the dates Bush signed them:
Article Tools

March 9: Justice Department officials must give reports to Congress by certain dates on how the FBI is using the USA Patriot Act to search homes and secretly seize papers.

Bush's signing statement: The president can order Justice Department officials to withhold any information from Congress if he decides it could impair national security or executive branch operations.

Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

Bush's signing statement: The president, as commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

Dec. 30: When requested, scientific information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."

Bush's signing statement: The president can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

Aug. 8: The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its contractors may not fire or otherwise punish an employee whistle-blower who tells Congress about possible wrongdoing.

Bush's signing statement: The president or his appointees will determine whether employees of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can give information to Congress.

Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia at 800.

Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in nature."

Dec. 17: The new national intelligence director shall recruit and train women and minorities to be spies, analysts, and translators in order to ensure diversity in the intelligence community.

Bush's signing statement: The executive branch shall construe the law in a manner consistent with a constitutional clause guaranteeing ''equal protection" for all. (In 2003, the Bush administration argued against race-conscious affirmative-action programs in a Supreme Court case. The court rejected Bush's view.)

Oct. 29: Defense Department personnel are prohibited from interfering with the ability of military lawyers to give independent legal advice to their commanders.

Bush's signing statement: All military attorneys are bound to follow legal conclusions reached by the administration's lawyers in the Justice Department and the Pentagon when giving advice to their commanders.

Aug. 5: The military cannot add to its files any illegally gathered intelligence, including information obtained about Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.

Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can tell the military whether or not it can use any specific piece of intelligence.

Nov. 6, 2003: US officials in Iraq cannot prevent an inspector general for the Coalition Provisional Authority from carrying out any investigation. The inspector general must tell Congress if officials refuse to cooperate with his inquiries.

Bush's signing statement: The inspector general ''shall refrain" from investigating anything involving sensitive plans, intelligence, national security, or anything already being investigated by the Pentagon. The inspector cannot tell Congress anything if the president decides that disclosing the information would impair foreign relations, national security, or executive branch operations.

Nov. 5, 2002: Creates an Institute of Education Sciences whose director may conduct and publish research ''without the approval of the secretary [of education] or any other office of the department."

Bush's signing statement: The president has the power to control the actions of all executive branch officials, so ''the director of the Institute of Education Sciences shall [be] subject to the supervision and direction of the secretary of education."

 

[GenMarshall]

More fuel for the impeachment!

Eventhough I would call for the impeachment and removal of president Bush. I honestly DONT want Dick Cheney to become president.

 

[Psyringe]

And on that note, I'm already waiting to see how GWB will be trying to extend his hold of the power.

Well, the obvious way would be to throw the nation in another war, claim extraordinary circumstances to run for a third term ("Don't exchange the leader when our country is under attack, we must stand together now instead of weaken ourselves with partisan politics" etc.), and use the now granted mail-reading to dig up smut about the democrat candidate.

However, personally I don't think we will see this. Bush is expendable, he'll probably just be dropped by Cheney and his consorts. If things go seriously wrong, I expect them to put as much blame as possible on Bush personally, so that Cheney can start with a seemingly clean record.

 

[Gilder]

So before terrorism existed BF had already made a law to advocate torture and lack of civil liberties if something that didn't exist came about? I'd like to see this one. Link.

No, what I said means the opposite of that. Franklin said something along the lines of "Whoever would give up a little liberty, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."

It's even in CivIV.

 

[Sidhe]

No, what I said means the opposite of that. Franklin said something along the lines of "Whoever would give up a little liberty, to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and lose both."

It's even in CivIV.

Oh I'm sorry, I seem to have a habbit of misinterpretting things at the moment. If it's in CIV as a quote then it's gospel.

 

[Quiet Sound]

He didn't even need to get a warrant. He just had to tell FISA he did it. Since the USPS is a federal agency your mail becomes property of the government. Its only illegal for other people to open your mail not the government.

I don't believe that is correct. Are you able to reference the relevant law?

 

[Shylock]

I grant myself the power to search his daughter's drawers without a warrant, probable cause or even being fully clothed.

Now let's see, women usually keep them in the top drawer...

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

while inspiring terrorism by invading foriegn countries...

Dude, if you're invading a foreign country, then you're not a terrorist. By definition.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Don't worry - the right wing will line up to defend this somehow... probably using terrorism based fear mongering.

Terrorism is a very real fear. Can't be reactive with terrorism. And besides, are you scared the US government is going to steal what they gave you, your identity?

How did they give you your identity you ask? Rudimentary my dear Watson. Every piece of information you (as an American) have to validate they you are really you (officially), was issued by the US government in some form (unless you live in a cave somewhere cut off from the rest of the world). Birth certificate, driver's license, social security number, etc.

BTW, it never was private, and you should only be worried if you have something to hide. And you could possibly get upset by this news, soo.....