>>>I do, just not sure where's the business end of this weapon aimed. I just assume, just in case, that whatever I say or write anywhere may be collected, analysed and stored somewhere.
>>
>>How would you suggest we follow our enemies movements? Phone records, bank transactions, internet traffic all seem reasonable to me.
>
>I assume these are fair game among spies. It's the illegal part that's illegal. Bypassing the FISA court (which was rubberstamping thousands of orders anyway) is what makes it illegal.
>
Site the case where this has been proven please. Articles and opinions do not count, I'm talking about a legal ruling on the specific issue.

>>Especially considering the congressional oversight being applied. Reviews ever couple weeks, weekly intelligence briefings, judicial oversight. These have all been involved since day one, which by the way is why no legal challenge will hold up.
>
>No they weren't involved from day one. The NSA eavesdropping behind the back of the FISA court went on for more than a year, and only a selected few (six, IIRC) senators knew about it,

This is typical for intelligence operations, the intelligence committee and/or leadership is informed because they "need to know", wheras the house and senate as a whole are not due to security concerns. Concers, I might add, that are being proven daily with the intelligence leaks.

>but were sworn not to tell.

Duh, classified.

>Then they were accused for not telling.

By who? Reporters? Columnists? Bloggers? Is there a legal case against the senators that I'm missing?

>
>>Personally I admit that it is creepy the amount of survailence we are under, but that's the world we live in today. Cameras on every corner and dangerous people using the same institutions we rely on for illicit means. As I repeatedly say, we have choices. If you don't want to be tracked then take all of your money in cash, stuff it in a sack, move to the middle of Montana in a shack with a well and no electricity and raise chickens. That way you'll be sure that the only thing Uncle Sam knows about you is whether you've paid your taxes or not.
>
>There are ways... the best way to lie is to tell 99% verifiable truth and be smart about the 1%.
>
>>What specifically did Bremer's authority not do?
>
>http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/27/133647/157
>http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/25/1343214 for the full interview.

"The book tracks the radical neo-liberal" (I thought he was a neo-con) "economic program the Bush administration has tried to impose on Iraq, which threatens to leave Iraq's economy and oil reserves largely in the hands of multinational corporations."

This is a perfect example of why you need to expand your sources. Sheesh. Imperial America! Globalization! Multi-nationals! The sky is falling!

I'll post another perspective in a new thread.