OHHHH sure there are no "enemies" lists.

[Amazon 7]

Right out of the Nixon enemies list playbook.... and you right wingers CLAIM its not happening.

OOOOPS

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/06/30/state/n231920D76.DTL&hw=anti+war&sn=002&sc=819

State anti-terrorism agency monitored rallies, protests

Friday, June 30, 2006

(06-30) 23:19 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --


Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's anti-terror office tracked political rallies for several months, a practice the state Attorney General's office says was a violation of free speech rights.


The governor's Office of Homeland Security received about 60 daily intelligence reports beginning in March, some containing details on the whereabouts and purpose of demonstrations throughout California, the Los Angeles Times reported.


State homeland security officials said information in the reports was compiled by SRA International, a company hired to provide counterterrorism analysis. The sources of the information were listed in some cases as federal law enforcement agencies, including the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, an investigative arm of the U.S. Homeland Security department.


When officials learned of the practice, they ordered it stopped, said agency spokesman Chris Bertelli.


Of the more than 60 reports, the Times obtained two — the only ones that contained information on political rallies, homeland security officials said. The office declined to release others.


Among the political activities cited in the reports were a rally outside a Canadian consulate office in San Francisco to protest the hunting of seals; an anti-war demonstration in Walnut Creek attended by Rep. George Miller and other officials; and a gathering at a Santa Barbara courthouse to support an anti-war protester facing federal trespassing charges.


California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's office on Friday condemned the anti-terror office's actions.


"That kind of conduct by anti-terrorism intelligence agencies threatens civil liberties, runs counter to our values and violates this office's policy regarding criminal intelligence gathering," Lockyer spokesman Tom Dresslar told the Times.


The reports are on the letterhead of a California anti-terrorism partnership that includes the homeland security office, the attorney general and the California Highway Patrol. Copies of the reports were shared with both agencies, but nothing else was done with the information about the demonstrations, Bertelli said.


"When we discovered their existence, we informed OHS officials that we had absolutely no use for that kind of information," Dresslar said. "Collecting information on protests has no legitimate anti-terrorism intelligence function. None."


___

[slug 1]

Hey what you complaining about. The gov't is watching out for us.

Haven't you heard about their latest success story The Florida 7 Lucky for us the home grown terrorists got stopped before they learned how to find their way out of a paper sack

Now all we have to do is pay their lawyer fee's times 7, so they can go home.

we're in big trouble if anyone rt, left, middle, belives this crap.

Pass the collection plate and lets pray.

R.I.P.

R.I.P.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Right out of the Nixon enemies list playbook.... and you right wingers CLAIM its not happening.

_

The right wingers never claimed it's not happening. They said it is GOOD for us.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

OOOOPS

We could call this "Filegate", but the name is already taken.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

OOOOPS

We could call this "Filegate", but the name is already taken.

Or this. Didn't hear much bitching when this happened.

Quote

Appeals Court rules against McDermott in taped call dispute
By Matthew Daly

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal appeals court ruled today that Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., violated federal law by turning over an illegally taped telephone call to reporters nearly a decade ago.

In a 2-1 opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that McDermott violated the rights of House Majority Leader John Boehner, who was heard on the 1996 call involving former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

The court ordered McDermott to pay Boehner more than $700,000 for leaking the taped conversation. The figure includes $60,000 in damages and more than $600,000 in legal costs.

McDermott leaked a tape of a 1996 cell phone call involving former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to The New York Times and other news organizations.

The call included discussion by Gingrich, R-Ga., and other House GOP leaders about a House ethics committee investigation of Gingrich. Boehner, R-Ohio, was a Gingrich lieutenant at the time and is now House majority leader.

A lawyer for McDermott had argued that his actions were allowed under the First Amendment, and said a ruling against him would have "a huge chilling effect" on reporters and newsmakers alike.

Lawyers for 18 news organizations — including ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, The Associated Press, The New York Times and The Washington Post — filed a brief backing McDermott.

But Boehner's lawyers said McDermott's actions were clearly illegal.

By leaking the tape McDermott "chilled the free speech of others," namely Boehner and Gingrich, lawyer Michael Carvin said following a court hearing in November.

A spokesman for McDermott said today the congressman had just received the ruling and was studying it. A spokesman for Boehner could not be reached immediately.

[Hawkins121 0]

Pointless thread... Who cares if they were gathering intel at a political rally? If you feel your rights are being violated by this you have far too much time on your hands.

[narcimund 0]

[replyOr this. Didn't hear much bitching when this happened.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Pointless thread... Who cares if they were gathering intel at a political rally? If you feel your rights are being violated by this you have far too much time on your hands.

Stupid right wing response #2:

WAHHHHHH! Little crybaby american thinks human right matter. Boo hoo.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

[replyOr this. Didn't hear much bitching when this happened.

Stupid right wing response #1:

Mommy! Mommy! Little Billy Clinton down the street did it FIIIIIRRRRRSSSSSTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Hawkins121 0]

Quote

Quote

Pointless thread... Who cares if they were gathering intel at a political rally? If you feel your rights are being violated by this you have far too much time on your hands.

Stupid right wing response #2:

WAHHHHHH! Little crybaby american thinks human right matter. Boo hoo.

Who said anything about human rights? Dont be a tool.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

OOOOPS

We could call this "Filegate", but the name is already taken.

Yep, whomever is responsible for this needs to be brought to justice. But to claim this is the result of The Patriot Act or any other recently enacted legislation is about as dumb as it gets.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Yep, whomever is responsible for this needs to be brought to justice. But to claim this is the result of The Patriot Act or any other recently enacted legislation is about as dumb as it gets.

Are you convinced that the information collected was illegal? I'm not sure yet.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Yep, whomever is responsible for this needs to be brought to justice. But to claim this is the result of The Patriot Act or any other recently enacted legislation is about as dumb as it gets.

Are you convinced that the information collected was illegal? I'm not sure yet.

Good point. We are talking about California, here.

Obviously the system works, as this was discovered. If it turns out there was a violation of the law, I hope they throw the book at whomever is responsible. There needs to be an example set, early on, that this type of fishing expedition will not be tolerated.

Keep in mind, 26% of the population think the govt. is wiretapping them as it is. So the lunacy of the paranoid needs to be catered to.

[Hawkins121 0]

lol true... But they are wiretapping all of us. The government really cares who you are fucking, what time your friends are picking you up, how your mom is doing and what you thought of the latest episode of american idol........

[narcimund 0]

Quote

lol true... But they are wiretapping all of us. The government really cares who you are fucking, what time your friends are picking you up, how your mom is doing and what you thought of the latest episode of american idol........

I'm old enough to remember when being conservative meant being AGAINST government intrusion into personal lives.

Now it means to celebrate it.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Hawkins121 0]

Wrong. Just because most conservatives do not think the government is out to get them doesnt mean they want government intrusion.

The government allows me to live my life. Earn a living, live in a decent place, go skydiving etc etc.. The gov provides us with stability that we often take for granted. Its evident by the crap that is written by most of the extreme left wingers on this forum.

Whatever they have to do to protect the freedoms I have I will support. Inlcuding getting information from a frigging protest. Who gives a shit?

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Keep in mind, 26% of the population think the govt. is wiretapping them as it is.

And of those 26%, what percentage would you guess vote democrat? I'm guessing 96%.

. . =(_8^(1)

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

lol true... But they are wiretapping all of us. The government really cares who you are fucking, what time your friends are picking you up, how your mom is doing and what you thought of the latest episode of american idol........

Somehow I imagine you were NOT around in the J. Edgar Hoover and Nixon times. That is EXACTLY the kind of stuff they collected.

Anyone that thinks it can't happen again is still wet behind the ears.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

The government allows me to live my life. Earn a living, live in a decent place, go skydiving etc etc.. The gov provides us with stability that we often take for granted. Its evident by the crap that is written by most of the extreme left wingers on this forum.

Whatever they have to do to protect the freedoms I have I will support. Inlcuding getting information from a frigging protest. Who gives a shit?

And this, my friends, is the new definition of "conservative." Those among us with ANY education will recognize that it's the opposite of the definition as of only 20 years ago.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Whatever they have to do to protect the freedoms I have I will support. Inlcuding getting information from a frigging protest. Who gives a shit?

But this is not something they had to do to protect your freedoms.

Quote

"When we discovered their existence, we informed OHS officials that we had absolutely no use for that kind of information," Dresslar said. "Collecting information on protests has no legitimate anti-terrorism intelligence function. None."

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Lefty 0]

Quote

The government allows me to live my life. Earn a living, live in a decent place, go skydiving etc etc..

I actually prefer to think that its the citizens who allow the government to live, so to speak. At least, that's the way it should be.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Hawkins121 0]

What is your point, sir?

[Hawkins121 0]

The government is there to make our lives better. Sure we can live without it but it would be without roads, precious public programs the left loves so much and we'd all have to have weapons to protect what is ours.

You also wouldnt have time to bitch out petty bullshit on an internet forum.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

The government is there to make our lives better. Sure we can live without it but it would be without roads, precious public programs the left loves so much and we'd all have to have weapons to protect what is ours.

You also wouldnt have time to bitch out petty bullshit on an internet forum.

Now you changed your message. First it was "the government allows me to live my life...". That means you need the govt's permission to live. And you think that's GOOD?

Now it's "The government is there to make our lives better."

So which is it? Why should you have to get the governments permission to live a life?

Why should you need the government's permission at all?

IMO the government should butt out to the maximum extent.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hawkins121 0]

The way you interpret my posts is interesting. Both mean the same exact thing.

Permission? No.. But I know I wouldnt be able to do the things I do without what they provide. and you wouldnt either.

I agree they should butt out and they do.... You fail to understand what I am saying. I want them to provide protection, roads etc... and regulation of SOME of the market, so everyone doesnt get screwed.

this is my last post on this topic.