The Lame Stream Media damn near pissed all over itself when Bush wanted to wiretap telephones....but yet....they have completely ignored this little gem.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002423-38.html

Google and an alliance of privacy groups have come to Yahoo's aid by helping the Web portal fend off a broad request from the U.S. Department of Justice for e-mail messages, CNET has learned.

So....why is it that we have to learn this little tidbit from CNET???

Why isn't the Lame Stream Media all over this invasion of privacy??

Don't look for a rational explanation of the 'why' ... this is just another story the 'media' thinks we're not 'entitled' to be told. It's NEVER okay when someone OTHER than 'their side' does anything ... and yes, it really IS that simple. We also never hear about the other ongoing surveillance programs that go by names like 'Einstein', 'Carnivore' (now re-named), or 'Echelon'. Those are equally as intrusive - but y' never hear about them either. This one may have surfaced 'cuz it landed on C-Net's desk. I think 'WIRED' also covered this as well, but unless you have a subscription or follow 'em online, it din't rise very far on the Attention-O-Meter either. Matter of fact, think about how little notice people took about the issue of 'net neutrality' that was just smacked down by the court. Ignorance is such a 'warm fuzzy' comfort food for some people ...

two important missed tidbits,,,


from your same source


'A 17-page brief (PDF) that the Justice Department filed last month acknowledges that federal law requires search warrants for messages in "electronic storage" that are less than 181 days old. But, Rhyne had argued, the Yahoo Mail messages don't meet that definition. '

(not a law introduced or created by this Administration)


"In a two-page brief filed Friday, the Obama administration withdrew its request for warrantless access to the complete contents of the Yahoo Mail accounts under investigation. CNET was the first to report on the Denver case in an article on Tuesday. "

(no longer NEWS as the details have changed,,,)


I also kind of find it nuts we place so much value on 'privacy' and so little on lives. Information requested about emails(for reasons that werent even disclosed and COULD have been significant) is terrible , yet invasion and the resulting deaths of another country is so commonly accepted and excused so long as the reason has to do with 'terrorists'. For the record, I am no fan of invasion of privacy or invasion of lives, but I do understand there are EXCEPTIONS which could warrant both.

The problem is an invasive government is also a Totalitarian one. Without privacy and due process all we have is a giant with a huge hammer stomping us all out when we get in its way. Everyone has dirty little secrets. One guy likes sheep, another woman has a thing for pooping on guys and burning them with cigarettes. Some of us secretly have relationships or drug addictions, abuses, alcoholism, I mean the list goes on. Unless we are hurting people the government has no rights to just snoop in on our lives no matter how f**ked up and corrupt the person is. Do you honestly want Johnny Law reading all of your emails??? I sure don't. One erosion of rights in the name of safety is a slippery slope to an erosion of ALL of our rights. This is a repeat of the crap going on in the 1950's and McCarthyism. The government was wire tapping anyone it even REMOTELY suspected of affiliations with the Communist party.

Now we have a government that is just borderline to being a "kinder gentler" version of this group...



They are socialist! They also hate everything they can't control. They just wear three piece suits and come from Ive League colleges. Do you really think it is safe putting all of our trust in MEN AND WOMEN? Especially ones with political motivations only in their eyes? The Nazis felt they were the final solution to the problems we face in day to day lives. They are for Social order just like our new political leaders. But social order at what cost? All of our blood and sweat? Our tears? All the while the people running us live lives of decadence and comfort?

Does this not seem like the last days of Rome?

Unless we are hurting people the government has no rights to just snoop in on our lives no matter how f**ked up and corrupt the person is....


I guess it is a matter of whether one is pro PREVENTIVE measures or pro REACTIVE measures,,,

I think there are exceptions. I am opposed to detaining people(although that IS how the 'justice' system works) solely on suspicion,,,,,

reading emails however,,,,if being used to determine a threat and not to publicly disclose potentially embarassing information,,,,seems a bit more reasonable

Again preventative at what cost?

Was Clinton giving the Taliban 53 Million dollars acting to prevent the problems Afghanistan was causing or did it make the situation worst?

Also what is the difference between a 'knee jerk reaction" our government is so good at vs. actually addressing the roots of the problem? Addressing the roots of the problem is FAR cheaper and more cost effective but somehow that point is missed by our government.

So when does it come down that the government can just enter your house and read all of your mail and go through your closets without a warrant too?

Hell, what if I was able to digitally raid your panty drawer? As a civilian that would be unacceptable. Would it make it right if I was a government official? I bet either way you would feel violated. Especially if we found any toys you might be hiding there.

We all have a reasonable expectation to privacy of our emails as well by gratice of the constitution. Just because electronic media was not invented at the writing of the constitution does not make snooping at my emails right by any stretch of the imagination without a legally executed search warrant.

can't you right wingers find something else to cry over?

It's hardly a "right" issue. It's an issue of civil liberties. Both the dems and repubs suck on the issue of civil liberties.