Obama Agrees With Bush On Wiretapping

President Obama

U.S. President Barack Obama is reneging on a campaign promise he made regarding transparency in government and honoring the Constitution, by asserting State Secrets Privilege, in having an Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) lawsuit thrown out of court, which was brought on behalf of a group of people, alleging they have been wrongfully, unlawfully and unethically wiretapped.

The mere fact the government is moving to have the lawsuit tossed out of court, lends credence to the EFF's claims. Clearly, something very egregious is going on and this is indeed a cover-up.

Thanks to the New York Times, the public has learned the White House, under George W. Bush, had been engaging in warantless wiretapping. The public learned the U.S. FBI has been reading citizens emails, scanning bank accounts and engaging in warantless wiretapping thanks to the Sound Off Column.

We've learned through Fox News the FBI routinely uses roving cell phone bugs (mobile phones), even when one's cell phone is turned off, to surreptitiously listen into conversations being held in the same room the phone is located. Other items hit the news such as the FBI's spyware program CIPAV.

The public also learned over a decade ago that the NSA routinely spies on select U.S. citizens via Echelon in England, as a technical, but unethical way to sidestep U.S. law, regarding spying on domestic citizens.

As many surveillance tools have now been uncovered, one can deduce, as there are only a number left that remain hidden, this case is based on covering ongoing behavior the government told the nation and the world it denounced and discontinued, but clearly have not, much to the chagrin of the Constitution. Such conduct erodes the nation's name.

I agree with the EFF regarding the current administration's about face, as it is indeed, "Incredibly disappointing." The public expected more.

Obama administration: Toss wiretap lawsuit

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder says a lawsuit in San Francisco over warrantless wiretapping threatens to expose ongoing intelligence work and must be thrown out.

In making the argument, the Obama administration agreed with the Bush administration's position on the case but insists it came to the decision differently. A civil liberties group criticized the move Friday as a retreat from promises President Barack Obama made as a candidate...

The Bush administration invoked the privilege numerous times in lawsuits over various post-9/11 programs, but the Obama administration recently announced that only a limited number of senior Justice Department officials would be able to make such decisions...

The lawsuit was filed by a group of individuals who claimed the government illegally monitored their communications. To proceed with the case, Holder said, would expose intelligence sources and methods...

Kevin Bankston, a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group in San Francisco that is pursuing a similar lawsuit against the government, called Holder's decision "incredibly disappointing."

"The Obama administration has essentially adopted the position of the Bush administration in these cases, even though candidate Obama was incredibly critical of both the warrantless wiretapping program and the Bush administration's abuse of the state secrets privilege," said Bankston.

http://www.google.com

Terrorists Think Beyonce Is The Bomb

…Literally

Beyonce thinks she is the bomb, as the phrase goes. Apparently terrorists think so too, but not in the sense she does, as they want to bomb the weave wearing witch right out of her Dereon duds (Can I turn a phrase or what).

Threats are being issued if she tries to put on one of her usual half naked performances in Egypt. This is after Malaysia protested her planned show as well.

They may even devise a special booty bomb just for her. On the first butt shake it detonates. I know one thing, that weave would survive the blast. In short, don’t come to Egypt with your butt hanging out.

Side Bar: you can’t get this kind of insightful, mature journalism reading the New York Times.

New York Times Slams Obama Praise For FBI

Hear Hear! U.S. President Barack Obama and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller The New York Times slammed President Obama's decision to praise corrupt FBI Director Robert S. Mueller and co. yesterday. Mr. Obama should be careful in his dealings with Mr. Mueller. He and others routinely provided former President George W. Bush with illegally obtained information and a very false sense of security, whilst engaging in wrongdoing and telling the world, "Trust me, I'm the President." Where did that get George W. Bush? He is now ensconced in the anus, excuse me, annals of world history as the worst president ever. When you stand with criminals, you will fall with them as well. In Praise of Help That Hurts Published: October 20, 2009 - Give a president — any president — seven minutes in the office of a law enforcement agency, and you are bound to be splattered by the praise words flying everywhere. You are not, of course, in any danger of being clubbed with candor. So on Tuesday, when President Obama stopped by the F.B.I.’s offices in Lower Manhattan on his way to a political fund-raiser, the accolades were lavished on all present, like a middle-school soccer league awards ceremony where everyone is a winner. Just a few weeks ago, a team of F.B.I. agents and New York police investigators arrested a man who they said was planning a bomb attack. Others were charged with lying to investigators. This was an example, Mr. Obama said, of cooperation among federal and local authorities, a state of grace much discussed and rarely achieved, given the enduring attachment to turf. “You’re showing us what focused and integrated counterterrorism work really looks like,” Mr. Obama said. Well. Actually, there are serious, unsettled questions about whether “integrated counterterrorism work” is really all that we saw with those arrests last month... So was the city’s intelligence division working with the F.B.I., and did it just happen that a reasonable decision to question the imam turned out badly? Or did the division simply jump into another agency’s investigation? That depends on whom you ask. In Congressional briefings, two competing narratives have emerged, according to an official who was present and, because of the elephantine institutional egos involved in the dispute, did not want to be named. The police department said that it was working all along with the F.B.I., through a joint terrorism task force that includes both F.B.I. agents and city police officers, according to the official. But some federal agents were outraged, the official said... For now, the full facts about the questioning of the imam also remain unanswered. Even so, the gloss of unambiguous success was laid on by the presidential visit on Tuesday. “Your collaboration earned the respect and gratitude not just of New Yorkers but of Americans everywhere,” Mr. Obama said. Well, maybe not everywhere. http://www.nytimes.com

Nobel Committee Defends Obama Award

Thorbjoern Jagland of the Norwegian Nobel Committee in Oslo, Norway

The Nobel Committee in Oslo, Norway, have leapt to the defense of U.S. President Barack Obama, the recipient of this year's Peace Prize.

Many have spoken out, stating the President has not done anything of great accomplishment yet, to merit receiving the award. The criticism has been quite heavy and harsh, with some even calling for the award to be rescinded.

The Examiner.com pointed out an article in the New York Times, published days before the award was bestowed upon Obama, hypothesizing when and how the committee should rescind a Nobel Prize given to a recipient deemed unworthy of such an honor.

Yes, it's getting ugly out there.

AP Newsbreak: Nobel jury defends Obama decision

OSLO – Members of the Norwegian committee that gave Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize are strongly defending their choice against a storm of criticism that the award was premature and a potential liability for the U.S. president.

Asked to comment on the uproar following Friday's announcement, four members of the five-seat panel told The Associated Press that they had expected the decision to generate both surprise and criticism.

Three of them rejected the notion that Obama hadn't accomplished anything to deserve the award, while the fourth declined to answer that question. A fifth member didn't answer calls seeking comment.

"We simply disagree that he has done nothing," committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland told the AP on Tuesday. "He got the prize for what he has done."

Jagland singled out Obama's efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe.

"All these things have contributed to — I wouldn't say a safer world — but a world with less tension," Jagland said by phone from the French city of Strasbourg, where he was attending meetings in his other role as secretary-general of the Council of Europe.

He said most world leaders were positive about the award and that most of the criticism was coming from the media and from Obama's political rivals.

"I take note of it. My response is only the judgment of the committee, which was unanimous," he said, adding that the award to Obama followed the guidelines set forth by Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrialist and inventor of dynamite, who established the Nobel Prizes in his 1895 will.

"Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year," Jagland said. "Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?"

Aagot Valle, a left-wing Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that the decision to award Obama was without merit.

"Don't you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?" Valle said by phone from the western coastal city of Bergen. "Well, of course, all arguments have to be considered seriously. I'm not afraid of a debate on the peace prize decision. That's fine."...

http://news.yahoo.com

Should the Nobel Peace Prize Committee have the power to revoke unworthy prizes?

October 11, 6:26 PM Miami City Buzz Examiner Robbin Swad - In an almost eerie foreshadowing of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to President Obama, the New York Times online published an article just days prior to Obama's winning, discussing the suitability of reversing past honorees who received the Peace Prize. Randy Cohen, syndicated columnist and ethics writer for the New York Times' Sunday magazine authored a post entitled, Taking Back Nobel Prizes in which Cohen makes the following argument:

"Past winners comprise a roster worthy of esteem, but the list also includes a few clinkers, people who, in retrospect, seem curious choices at best. On Friday, when this year’s winner is disclosed, shouldn’t the Norwegian Nobel Committee do what we encourage in other realms: acknowledge error, and then rescind those past awards bestowed on the conspicuously undeserving?"

Cohen posted his reflections a week before the world learned that President Obama was to earn the prize. In the past few days, following Obama's "victory", various observers both nationally and internationally have noted that the selection of President Obama was premature, at best and unearned at worst. A surprised Barack Obama additionally echoed such sentiments:

"Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.
To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace."

It is true that awards are usually presented for achievements, as in fait accompli. Despite the Nobel Peace Prize committee's judgment, the jury is still out on the success of the President's actions, as in Iraq and Afghanistan. And who can predict how yet-to be agreed-on talks with North Korea on nuclear issues will fare? Combine all Obama's many international policy question marks to Obama having been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize only weeks after arriving fresh from the campaign trail back in February-- some have argued that Obama's prize is undeserved. Nonetheless, the Nobel Committee has stated, that it is the "hope" for peace embodied in President Obama that impresses them-- indeed, the "world"-- immensely.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population." ...

http://www.examiner.com