X is for infamous.


This website is under construction.

isn't that interesting

<< Jan 12, 2006 @ 13:12 >>

"In August, the previously unknown [Watergate] tape from June 23, 1972 was released. Recorded only a few days after the break-in, it documented Nixon and Haldeman formulating a plan to block investigations by having the CIA claim to the FBI (falsely) that national security was involved. The tape was referred to as a 'smoking gun.' With this last piece of evidence, Nixon's few remaining supporters deserted him."

add a comment... | link

Reader Comments...

January 12, 2006 @ 13:41:18

broccoli.pngnot TKwong (guest)

Homeland Security is going to own you. Possibly the type that involves, "p's," but I don't want to jump to any conclusions.


January 13, 2006 @ 03:12:18

bettie.pngjmullan (#1015)

When did you post this?

January 17, 2006 @ 09:17:53

coleco.pngxopl (#001)

Journalist James Bamford, a plaintiff and author of "The Puzzle Palace: A Report on NSA, America's Most Secret Agency," said that "the spying program removes a necessary firewall that would prevent the kind of government abuse seen during the Watergate scandal."

Some people use the excuse, "hey, if you don't have anything to hide then who cares if they are spying on you? It keeps us safe."

What they fail to realise is, in addition to that argument being completely assinine and unAmerican, it's not really about the spying so much as the spying being illegal. And if we let the government do illegal things "to keep us save" it makes it very easy for them to abuse power by parallel arguments in a myriad of other ways.

February 7, 2006 @ 10:06:59

coleco.pngxopl (#001)

BIDEN: Thank you very much.
General, how has this revelation damaged the program?

I'm almost confused by it but, I mean, it seems to presuppose that these very sophisticated Al Qaida folks didn't think we were intercepting their phone calls.

I mean, I'm a little confused. How did it damage this?

GONZALES: Well, Senator, I would first refer to the experts in the Intel Committee who are making that statement, first of all. I'm just the lawyer.

And so, when the director of the CIA says this should really damage our intel capabilities, I would defer to that statement. I think, based on my experience, it is true -- you would assume that the enemy is presuming that we are engaged in some kind of surveillance.

But if they're not reminded about it all the time in the newspapers and in stories, they sometimes forget.

Add a Comment...

user: (Need an account?)