Federal government spying on journalists using phone records

  • Thread starter Thread starter Manchot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Government
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the federal government's use of collected phone records from journalists to identify leaks, which contradicts President Bush's claims that intelligence activities target only al-Qaeda. Concerns are raised about the implications for whistleblowers and government transparency, with some arguing that the right to privacy must be upheld and that the actions of the Bush administration threaten national security rather than protect it. The conversation highlights the potential for misuse of power, such as monitoring political opponents and suppressing the media's watchdog role. Participants express skepticism about the justification of these actions under the guise of national security, noting that previous leaks have not posed real threats but rather exposed illegal activities by the administration. The need for accountability and oversight of intelligence agencies is emphasized, alongside fears of a lack of due process for those accused of leaking information.
Manchot
Messages
470
Reaction score
5
According to one of http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html, the federal government is using the collected phone records of journalists to find "leaks." This directly contradicts Bush's http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/11/bush.transcript/index.html/ that "our intelligence activities strictly target al Qaeda and their known affiliates." Since the phone records are probably legal, does this mean that the era of the whistleblower (and subsequently the transparent government) is over? Should we be concerned about this?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Computer science news on Phys.org
Manchot said:
Should we be concerned about this?
No. I don't have too much of a problem if there's a leak that can thearten national security I don't have problem with it.
 
Manchot said:
According to one of http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html, the federal government is using the collected phone records of journalists to find "leaks." This directly contradicts Bush's http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/11/bush.transcript/index.html/ that "our intelligence activities strictly target al Qaeda and their known affiliates." Since the phone records are probably legal, does this mean that the era of the whistleblower (and subsequently the transparent government) is over? Should we be concerned about this?
Uh... YES!

We've already discussed eavesdropping on UN members, tracking anti-war activists and even environmentalists. Of course this would be used to suppress the media from playing a watchdog role in our so-called democracy, since other tactics such as intimidation has been used as well (on the press and government employees). And I have no doubt the democratic party is being monitored in some unethical way. It's the Bush/Cheney dictatorship in action.

This is why the right to privacy must be upheld regardless of whether one has anything to hide, or if it helped prevent another 9-11 (which I seriously doubt it would). There is no excuse to overlook the constitution and bill of rights--EVER. Those who say it's okay are unpatriotic and should be tried for treason right along with the Bush cabal. What is wrong with this friggin' country?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No. I don't have too much of a problem if there's a leak that can thearten national security I don't have problem with it.
Ok, I've got a scenario for you. Let's imagine that Bush notices that the Deputy Associate Director of the FBI is making a lot of calls to the Washington Post, finds out that he is a leaker, and has him tried for treason. Since the information that he was going to leak was important to national security, no one at the trial could find out what the information was, and he is convicted. Would that be acceptable to you?
 
Last edited:
Way back in January, there were rumors that CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour's phone/internet lines were being tapped. The NSA responded quickly by denying the taps.

Now this props up !

PS : Amanpour's husband (Jamie Rubin) was Kerry's national security advisor during the '04 campaign.
 
It seems like common sense to ask, that an intelligence agency with such incredible power have some sort of accountability or oversight system by which the public can verify it is not violating laws. Some basic checks and balances, like judicial oversight (which this program obviously lacks). For some reason, the general public does not demand this; it seems to be a widespread failure of critical reasoning ability. Since when is it sane to let an agency police its own actions, and take it all on mere trust?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
scott1 said:
No. I don't have too much of a problem if there's a leak that can thearten national security I don't have problem with it.
The leaks so far do NOT threaten National Security. Rather they point to criminal mischief on the part of the Bush Administration. :mad:

The Bush administration is a threat to US national security. :mad:
 
Manchot said:
Ok, I've got a scenario for you. Let's imagine that Bush notices that the Deputy Associate Director of the FBI is making a lot of calls to the Washington Post, finds out that he is a leaker, and has him tried for treason. Since the information that he was going to leak was important to national security, no one at the trial could find out what the information was, and he is convicted. Would that be acceptable to you?
Well I asuming that jury would find out but everone elese should not know.
What if every does find out and thoundsands died.
 
Astronuc said:
The leaks so far do NOT threaten National Security. Rather they point to criminal mischief on the part of the Bush Administration. :mad:
Ok how do you know that(can you please provide a link)? It's top secert information and the Terroist want to kill bush too.
Astronuc said:
The Bush administration is a threat to US national security. :mad:
What I don't understand is why don't people treat Bush like he's a person?
 
  • #10
Ok how do you know that(can you please provide a link)? It's top secert information and the Terroist want to kill bush too.
When it was leaked that the NSA was tapping without warrants, there was no threat to national security as a result. People aren't idiots: everyone knows that the government can perform wiretaps (potential terrorists included). It was just assumed that they'd go through the FISA courts to do so. The leaking of the illegal warrantless program therefore was no threat to national security.

Well I asuming that jury would find out but everone elese should not know.
What if every does find out and thoundsands died.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that the lawyers simply tell the jury that the information is simply too vital for them to know about, and they convict the person. What do you think about this situation?

What I don't understand is why don't people treat Bush like he's a person?
No one did so...
 
  • #11
scott1 said:
What I don't understand is why don't people treat Bush like he's a person?
What are you talking about? It's good to be the King.
 
  • #12
Manchot said:
For the sake of argument, let's assume that the lawyers simply tell the jury that the information is simply too vital for them to know about, and they convict the person. What do you think about this situation?
That's assuming there even is a trial. More likely the suspects would be imprisoned without any due process in one of Bush's secret prisons or Guantanamo Bay.
 
  • #13
scott1 said:
No. I don't have too much of a problem if there's a leak that can thearten national security I don't have problem with it.
The leaks Bush is trying to plug are the leaks showing illegal activity by his administration. He is using US law enforcement agencies to try to coverup crimes his admin has and is committing under the guise of national security.

For example
warrantless wiretaping, rendition of prisoners, the defense of torture, the distribution of classified information in order to punish political critics and other abuses of power
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
Art said:
The leaks Bush is trying to plug are the leaks showing illegal activity by his administration. He is using US law enforcement agencies to try to coverup crimes his admin has and is committing under the guise of national security.
Exactly. These illegal activities have been revealed on a general level (with no specifics), and in the case of warrantless wiretaps, the revelation certainly wasn't anything terrorists haven't avoided for a long time. If you want to talk about a national security issue, it is the outing of a CIA agent (Plame).
 

Similar threads

News Should the Times and the Washington post be presecuted
Replies
25
Views
4K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
2
Replies
65
Views
10K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top