Yikes (via Rondam):

Oregonians called Peter DeFazio's office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

As a member of the U.S. House on the Homeland Security Committee, DeFazio, D-Ore., is permitted to enter a secure "bubbleroom" in the Capitol and examine classified material. So he asked the White House to see the secret documents.

On Wednesday, DeFazio got his answer: DENIED.

"I just can't believe they're going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack," DeFazio says.

Believe it!

Homeland Security Committee staffers told his office that the White House initially approved his request, but it was later quashed. DeFazio doesn't know who did it or why.

Well, it's not like Bush would ever use a terrorist attack for political gain, so I'm sure this is nothing to worry about.

DeFazio's bottom line:

[Welcome Carpetbagger readers, and thanks for fixing the typo. I was so busy fondling my check from Soros that I wrote in haste.... And welcome, Washington Monthly readers.]

Er, can anybody see a flaw in the court's logic, here? AP:

The 2-1 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel vacated a 2006 order by a federal judge in Detroit, who found that the post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance aimed at uncovering terrorist activity violated constitutional rights to privacy and free speech and the separation of powers.

U.S. Circuit Judge Julia Smith Gibbons, one of the two Republican appointees who ruled against the plaintiffs, said they failed to show they were subject to the surveillance.

The dissenting judge, Democratic appointee Ronald Lee Gilman, believed the plaintiffs were within their rights to sue and that it was clear to him the program violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

So, how am I supposed to ever have standing to sue? It's not like this is the Soviet Union, is it, where you pick up the phone in your hotel room and hear the heavy breathing of KGB agents. This surveillance is digital, done at the central servers with the connivance of the telcos, and there's no way for any one of us, personally, to know that our data's been mined by these guys.

If you've got the flag flying today, shouldn't you be flying it like this?

Here's the 'news' report. Barf. Of course, "no drugs or weapons were found," but one never can tell with those people. I mean, look at them! They've got baseball caps on, and they're not sitting on their heads properly. Honey, hide the pearls. As the TechDirt folks point out:

hree years ago, we were a bit surprised that the RIAA had #1a518f; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12.96px; font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">hired a former director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and jokingly (we thought!) suggested that perhaps the RIAA was getting ready to bust down some doors. Not long after that, we were dismayed to hear that the RIAA had taken to dressing up foot soldiers in uniforms that made them #1a518f; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12.96px; font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">look like they were a part of the FBI or some other law enforcement agency in order to intimidate street vendors. When that wasn't enough, Hollywood lobbyists pushed to have the FBI#1a518f; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12.96px; font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">play the role of enforcer, even having them #1a518f; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12.96px; font-weight: bold" class="Apple-style-span">raid a school at one point.

 Read more…

»

• chicago dyke's blog
• Login or register to post comments