Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567
Results 121 to 130 of 130
  1. #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Whoa, theeeeres the hoovs we all know. lol
    Put up or shut up, Blaze. Its that simple.
  2. #122  
    I've lost track of this thread, and so this is perhaps no longer germane, but Brian Ross was recently interviewed about this case by "On The Media" -- an NPR radio news program.


    ...in other phone tapping news, ABC News claimed that calls made by their reporters were being tracked. According to ABC, the government knew about calls placed by reporters Brian Ross and Richard Esposito. Ross, who is ABC's chief investigative correspondent, suspects the stories that put the feds on the telephone trail may have been their reporting on seven approved techniques for interrogation or their story on so-called "black site" prisons in Romania and Poland. But Ross never would have known if he hadn't received a call from someone in the know, who rang with this warning.

    BRIAN ROSS: This is a senior federal law enforcement official who told us, "We know who you're calling, I've seen it, you should get some new cell phones quick." And that was essentially it.

    MIKE PESCA: Did he prove, or she prove, that they knew who you were calling by telling you who you were calling?

    BRIAN ROSS: This person did cite one particular contact.

    MIKE PESCA: And that was a call you made, not a call to you?

    BRIAN ROSS: Not a call to me. It was a call made by my colleague, Richard Esposito.

    MIKE PESCA: And from what you wrote, you made a distinction between tracking and backtracking. Just take us through it. What's the difference?

    BRIAN ROSS: I asked another law enforcement official about this, and what he said was, "Well, you're wrong to say it's tracking, think of it more as backtracking." And I said, "What's the difference?" He said, "Well, we're not watching you on a contemporaneous way, but if there is a referral for a criminal investigation into a leak of classified information, we go get phone records, first from the government agency that might be involved," and then what they call the "next logical investigative step;" they go for reporters' records.

    MIKE PESCA: This story came out within a week of that USA Today story about a massive NSA data-mining program.

    BRIAN ROSS: Right.

    MIKE PESCA: Do you have any reason to believe the two things are connected?

    BRIAN ROSS: I don't know. From what I know of the NSA program, my understanding is that really is looking at patterns of phone calls and does not look to detect individual contacts, and it wouldn't be that useful in a way, because the information, as I understand that the NSA getting, is sort of stripped of names and so on and is more really dedicated to determining patterns that connect overseas.

    MIKE PESCA: So if there's any connection, it may have something to do with just the different overall philosophy of government looking into people-- [OVERTALK]

    BRIAN ROSS: Right. Well, I think that you put your finger right on it. I think the connection, as it was described to me by one official, was this used to be difficult for us to go after reporters and their phone records. It no longer is hard. It's easy. We always get approval. The Justice Department guidelines provide for advanced approval from the attorney general. And this person told me this is no longer a problem. It's not a problem to get approval to seek reporters' phone records

    MIKE PESCA: Tell me a little bit about your standard operating procedure. When you hear from a confidential source, do you make it a point to say, "You don't call me from work, or I will call you?" How do you usually do that?

    BRIAN ROSS: Without giving away too much, I don't really obsess about that sort of thing. I guess I have assumed that whoever's calling me, you know, is doing it in a way that is not traceable or at least deniable, [LAUGHS] if they're caught out. A lot of people like to talk at home. Some talk in the office. Some only talk in person. Those are people who would not show up on our phone records.

    MIKE PESCA: How do you think of it now? You've been told you're being backtracked. Do you feel that you're being surveilled? Do you think about it that way?

    BRIAN ROSS: I don't think of it that way. I think that any future stories about the CIA-- likely they will take my phone records and try to figure out who I was talking to. So what I'm changing and which Rich Esposito's changing, we're just going to have to use a lot more shoe leather.

    MIKE PESCA: Do you think if I look at your output over the next couple years, I'm going to be able to see any difference?

    BRIAN ROSS: I think you'll see more, frankly. We're trying to stand up to this, and as a result we are getting more leads.

    MIKE PESCA: Brian, thanks very much for coming on.

    BRIAN ROSS: Thank you very -- it was great. Good talking to you.

    MIKE PESCA: Brian Ross is chief investigative correspondent for ABC News.

    copyright 2006 WNYC Radio
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  3. #123  
    Everything is simple to you hoovs.
  4. #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    That's odd because I don't find that to be true for most of my fellow Conservatives here. I've heard much criticism of this administration and this Congress. At any rate, do you have a scale? I mean, does adherence to 90% of party policies make someone repugnant? 95%?

    The point is that "repugnant" strikes me as a very personal attack. And, as such, is very difficult to defend when the only thing known about a person is his/her party affiliation. It also strikes me that such labels add nothing to the debate about policies. I don't mean to go on about it but so many people--on all sides of the spectrum--use these labels as blanket condemnations of a specific group. When I see them the only thing I can tell about the person who uses them is that he is unlikely to be interested in understanding the other side's point of view.
    Whether somebody adheres to 5% or 95% of the party policies is not the issue - it's whether they hew to the party line and vote without regard to principles or conscience - whether all they seek is to retain their political power by any means possible so that they can ram thru their party's agenda and not entertain dialog or compromise. Yes, I have met left-wing loonies who literally foam at the mouth because of their blind hatred of Bush - but they are mostly pathetic losers and are to be pitied. But the repugnants are scary - they actually believe that the use of torture is justified and do not think that anything wrong was done at Abu Ghraib - they try to whip up a fear against some hapless minority - or they distort and discredit science to suit their agenda - and of course they do not believe in their party leaders being held accountable and answerable to the public for their mistakes or for misleading them.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    ...Yes, I have met left-wing loonies who literally foam at the mouth because of their blind hatred of Bush - but they are mostly pathetic losers and are to be pitied...
    ahh, ahh ---

    never mind ...
    Last edited by BARYE; 05/31/2006 at 07:03 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  6. #126  
    Why do people always think that the people they surround themselves with, represent the looks, views, actions, and attitudes of the world? That wouldn't be so bad if it was just shared as an experience, but it seems like many believe that their experience is fact for the masses?
  7. #127  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    Whether somebody adheres to 5% or 95% of the party policies is not the issue - it's whether they hew to the party line and vote without regard to principles or conscience - whether all they seek is to retain their political power by any means possible so that they can ram thru their party's agenda and not entertain dialog or compromise. Yes, I have met left-wing loonies who literally foam at the mouth because of their blind hatred of Bush - but they are mostly pathetic losers and are to be pitied. But the repugnants are scary - they actually believe that the use of torture is justified and do not think that anything wrong was done at Abu Ghraib - they try to whip up a fear against some hapless minority - or they distort and discredit science to suit their agenda - and of course they do not believe in their party leaders being held accountable and answerable to the public for their mistakes or for misleading them.
    That's a mighty big strawman.
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    That's a mighty big strawman.
    and unfortunately they do exist. I know some personally - and from listening to some folks in the public domain (newsmedia, blogs)
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  9. #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    and unfortunately they do exist. I know some personally - and from listening to some folks in the public domain (newsmedia, blogs)
    If they do, are they enough of a majority on the Republican party to call the whole party repugnant? I think you're talking about a very small minority of uneducated reactionaries. Of course, your definitions might be a bit skewed too. Like, what do you mean by "hapless minority"?
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    If they do, are they enough of a majority on the Republican party to call the whole party repugnant? I think you're talking about a very small minority of uneducated reactionaries.
    you are right about that - but the unfortunate part is that this minority is extremely vocal and is driving many of the Rep party agendas. The rest of the Reps are not doing anything to muzzle them, but in fact exploiting these agendas to garner more votes.

    Like, what do you mean by "hapless minority"?
    Gays/lesbians for example.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567

Posting Permissions