Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Which of these things is not like the others?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-20-13 08:41 AM
Original message
Which of these things is not like the others?
If you have ever been a kid, a parent or a grandparent, you will probably recognize that question as one often posed by Sesame Street.

Yet, many of us seem to have a lot of difficulty separating apples from oranges. Hey, they're both round, brightly colored and fruits. Ergo, they are identical right? I have certainly seen and heard people assume identity based on fewer characteristics than three.

This morning, I heard someone on TV somewhere (sorry, no clue who was speaking or what program they were speaking on) say that the NSA is a successor to the ASA (American Security Agency), which was formed to spy on Americans. Hence, while spying on Americans by the NSA is getting "a lot of play," he said, nothing is really new.

The assumption underlying Mr. Asshat's comment was that all spying on Americans is identical to all other spying on Americans. Hence, spying on Americans in 1949 is no different from what the NSA has been up to lately. Can I get a DUH?

Mr. Asshat made no distinction between spying after obtaining a warrant from a court that actually considered the merits versus spying without having obtained any warrant, or spying after having obtained a rubber stamped warrant from a kangaroo FISA court. No distinction between spying because you have reason to believe that one or more named individuals are up to no good, and electronic spying on millions of people (who are paying to be spied on secretly, no less!) just because you can.

IOW, Mr. Asshat made no distinction between spying that complies with the Fourth Amendment requirements and spying that violates the Constitution of the United States.

And, speaking of inconvenient truths, the Bill of Rights limits what the U.S. government may do to anyone. Nothing in the Constitution limits the Bill of Rights to U.S. citizens or to U.S. residents.

* That is exactly what Mr. Asshat said "the ASA--American Security Agency." However, on doing the tiniest bit of research, I learned that Mr. Asshat was wrong about the name of the NSA's predecessor. The correct name was the Armed Forces Security Agency, not the American Security Agency. It was formed in 1949 and renamed NSA in 1951. (The OSS, predecessor to the CIA, had been formed during WWII, and the McCarthy hearings were just ahead on the Cold War paranoia horizon.)

FYI: The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonableprobable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.<1>

Does the above really sound as though the Framers had in mind surveilling anyone who uses a phone or the internet?

Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-20-13 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think I can accurately predict where the Framers would fall on this issue.
TPTB are keeping a close watch on us because they fear there will be an uprising due to the plans they have in store for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-20-13 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Even Scalia said the idea of mass surveillance would be foreign to the founders.
I can no longer find the source on the net though.

Of course, that does not necessarily mean that he would declare it unconstitutional. Inasmuch as the founders could not have imagined the technology to conduct mass surveillance, his statement is ambiguous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan 20th 2018, 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC