Terror By Cellphone

The Telegraph, and The Sun are reporting that the Taliban are tapping into British soldiers’ cellphones in Afghanistan, and making threatening phone calls to their families.

The Sun:

TALIBAN fanatics terrorised the wife of an RAF officer by phoning her and saying: “You’ll never see your husband alive — we have just killed him.”The tearful wife rang the RAF fearing the worst after receiving the midnight call — and was told her husband was safe and well.

What fiends.

Intelligence analysts have tracked the hate calls to numbers in Pakistan, a hotbed for Islamic extremism and the Taliban’s prime recruiting ground.

Pakistan’s notorious ISI spy agency — a known supporter of the Taliban — is believed to be intercepting Our Boys’ calls. It is also feared the Taliban may be getting intercept information from Iran.

The Telegraph:

It is a similar ploy to that used by Iraqi insurgents last year who were able to tap in to the phones of British soldiers and make threats to their families and friends.

Last June there were several reports of relatives and friends of servicemen based in Iraq receiving calls in the middle of the night threatening that a son or husband will be killed.

This is the first I’ve heard of it.

Cell phones are now banned in the theatre.

Found via: Hot Air

56 thoughts on “Terror By Cellphone

  1. Again you muddy the waters with your subjective interpretation of facts. The Telegraph article is merely a reprint of the information in The Sun – it even says so if you look at it. So you have 1 source and not 2.

    As for the phone tapping – well, leaving aside whether or not it’s true since there is little evidence to substantiate it – after all let us say a call was made at all how can the wife be sure that it was a Taliban fighter and not simply someone down the road? There is no evidence to suggest that the calls have been traced and it is highly unlikely they could do so. Leaving aside also the probability of the Taliban themselves having high-tech phone tapping equipment that they are able to use there. Again no record of this anywhere else and with mountains and not exactly a plethora of masts around the reception coverage in Afghanistan is hardly widespread.

    The masters of phone-tapping are in fact the Bush government http://www.voanews.com/burmese/archive/2006-01/2006-01-02-voa2.cfm but then what should one expect from one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.

    It really would be nice to feel that you lot on the right at least subjected your ideals to scrutiny rather than blithely just following the politics of the ostrich.


  2. I state that both news outlets are reporting on the story, which they indisputably are. The Telegraph article also reports facts that are not in The Sun article.

    But no, your right, the Bush administration is the one doing the terrorizing.

    The Jihadists are just fighting back against “The Man”.

    /sarc off.


  3. By the way, if you can’t see a difference between tapping the phone lines of persons with known terrorist connections, in order to protect your homeland, and tapping phones of soldiers in order to terrorize their families, you are the one guilty of “ostrich politics”, and are in fact either a commie, or a islamofascist, yourself.

    The rhetoric is often too similar to tell a difference.


  4. but then what should one expect from one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.

    The fact you are able to freely post this without any threat to your life or the lives of your loved ones demonstrates that, with regard to this point, you are quite (and plainly) wrong.

    Your other points are just as utterly ridiculous.


  5. Deb: Your post is very disheartening. But not all too surprising. We are, after all, up against barbarian savages.

    Based on my browsing habits (among other reasons), I suspect various elements of activity by me and/or members of my household might be under surveillance. And, frankly, I like it. I’m not doing anything wrong, so I have nothing to fear. And based on my browsing habits, I would much rather we be safe and paranoid than PC.

    We need to know who is getting what information from whom and for what purposes. Then we can take action against terrorists and potential terrorists as well as taking down their sources of information, inspiration, and influence and directives.

    It is a but sad that the antics of these barbarian savages has caused the banning of cell phones in the theatre. Cell phones are a good way to keep in touch with loved ones, but only insofar as they do not jeopardize operations and smooth functioning.

    Which reminds me…we hear a lot about anti-war people in England, but I do not recall hearing or reading anything from family members of deployed British military members.


  6. Muslihoon, The Telegraph article said:

    ‘A spokesman from the Ministry of Defence said: “Soldiers are specifically told not to take their mobiles phones into the theatre anyway so they should not have them with them in Afghanistan. “There is little reason that they would want them as the infrastructure for mobiles is very poor in the country.”’

    I guess if you want to read anything about the family members of deployed British military members, you have to read the disreputable Sun.


  7. Red Baron is a moron. “There is no evidence that the calls have been traced…”? The article quite clearly states:

    Intelligence analysts have tracked the hate calls to numbers in Pakistan, a hotbed for Islamic extremism and the Taliban’s prime recruiting ground.

    Then he proceeds to try to hijack the thread with some routine and factually incorrect anti-Bush blither. What a waste of thread space.


  8. Again you muddy the waters with your subjective interpretation of facts

    She states exactly two facts moron, one, that she hasn’t heard of this before. Dispute that crackah.

    And two, cell phones are banned in theater. A direct quote in the article from a rep of the Ministry of Defense.

    You’re the stupidest troll I’ve run across in months, and believe me, that is some accomplishment.


  9. Wow. I went to RB’s site. Nice to see a Eurosocialistweenie is siding with the terrorists on this one. He even threw in a “Dissent is not a crime” post. As if anybody in the west is denied the right to speak. For a refresher, this guy should go to China, Cuba or his beloved Jihadistan to see how that whole dissent thing goes over.


  10. Dissent is not a crime, but it’s okay to mock I hope.

    I went downtown and got some pictures of the anti-war protesters outside Bartle Hall, where Bush was speaking before the VFW.

    I’ll be putting the pix up in short order.


  11. Firstly can you state unequivocally that phones are only tapped of “known terrorist connections” (as if that term weren’t ambiguous enough)

    Oh dear if you think the rhetoric of the left is anything like that of Islamic extremists then you are either ill-educated or too dogmatic to accept the truth if it conflicts with what you believe.

    Muslihoon – the fact that I can post is of no relevance to what US foreign policy is doing so your comparison is ridiculously redundant. I do not live in Central or Southern America, nor the Middle East. Were I to do so the situation might well be different. As it is my emails and calls can be logged by the keyword listening post at Menwith Hill and I like over half a million other UK citizens have a file at MI5 purely based on my beliefs – that doesn’t sound like freedom to express to me. Furthermore it doesn’t surprise me that you don’t hear anything from family members unnily enough you will find many of them are the same people you deride as anti-war. Unsurprising really since they are the ones who will suffer for an unjust war based on false intelligence.

    Geoff – nice to know that you like to bring a well-reasoned factual argument without resorting to idiotic insults. I would resent the implication that I were a moron if it came from anyone whose opinion were worthy of respect. I allow you and your type to peddle your fundamentalist tripe and choose to debate and discuss where I disagree, you clearly are not cerebrally equipped to do me the same courtesy.

    Dave In Texas – damn, you too have acomplished something – endowing me with the realisation that in fact Bush may well be considered a dangerous intellectual in Texas in comparison to those such as yourself – after all you can’t even think up a new word to insult me but have to use the one Geoff has already done. Good work fella, you keep rubbing those rocks together, fire can’t be far away.

    and thence to eddiebear who sadly didn’t stay at my site in order to debate and try to discuss issues but scuttles back to home ground in order to fire ill-directioned salvos.

    What possible grounds would I have for rooting for any side in a conflict between religious zealots being myself an atheist? I could were I so to choose to sit at the sidelines and watch you all batter yourselves into oblivion, sadly your conflicts are rarely confined to your own kind and I do believe that life is important, since it’s all there is.

    Finally have you ever been to Cuba, or China? And which ~stan are you referring to here – the repressive regime in Uzbekistan? No sorry silly me they’re on our side in spite of the repression. And why doesn’t your lot go into Burma to sort out the repression of Aung San Soo Kyi. could it be that there is no economic expediency. Why do you continue to conduct a blockade of Cuba despite it being against UN resolutions – or is the whole UN full of fecking lefties???

    There are plenty in the West denied the right to speak, just as there are in many countries across the world – Nigeria executed Ken Saro-Wiwa – where was the US, what about the murder of Archbishop Oscar Romero (one of your own Catholics Deb) or the democratically elected Salvador Allende? Oh yeah, sorry you were on the other side then too.

    But then what am I thinking you live in a country that can’t even investigate the assasination of heads of state or prominent politicians properly. I’d love to fight you with purely the pen but you always choose the sword and I’m afraid as Immanuel Wallenstein has pointed out in his Modern World Theory all Metropoli fade in the end, just a pity that it will be by violent means but that’s your choice, sadly so many will pay the ultimate price whilst all you who are so pro the war sit comfortably in your oppulence.

    Finally here are some quotes from some others which doubtless you will brand as “pinkos”.

    “A society will remain as free or as enslaved as the conscious dispositions of individuals determine it shall be. Just as the roots of oppression are found in passivity, the foundations of our liberty reside in highly energized and focused minds that insist upon their independence. There are no shortcuts, no structures or doctrines that can be erected, no hallowed documents to be revered, to save us the effort of continually challenging those who would presume to exercise authority over our lives.” — Butler Shaffer

    “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
    – Benjamin Franklin

    Franklin was right – and you have neither if only you’d see it.


  12. and my apologies for not noticing the syntax faut-pas of having used finally twice – just because I know someone is bound to pick it up and claim that by it my argument is rendered lesser.


  13. nice to know that you like to bring a well-reasoned factual argument without resorting to idiotic insults.

    Hey, you insulted the host, the Bush administration, and all conservatives in your first comment, all the while basing your argument on an obvious fallacy. You’re a moron.

    I allow you and your type to peddle your fundamentalist tripe…

    You obviously don’t know what my type is, but it’s typical of you to start insulting another group of people, and to be completely wrong while doing it.

    you can’t even think up a new word to insult me but have to use the one Geoff has already done.

    It’s more of a diagnosis than an insult. It’s not odd at all that Dave would arrive at the same conclusion, particularly when the evidence is so manifold.


  14. Firstly can you state unequivocally that phones are only tapped of “known terrorist connections”

    That’s the policy, so yes, we can say that.


  15. after all you can’t even think up a new word to insult me but have to use the one Geoff has already done

    Sorry (it’s such an appropriate word though). I hate using weaker words than the ones that really fit.

    How about euro-fop mangina-flapping gasbag?

    Suck the barbed cock of Satan.



  16. Baron,

    You do realize that your credit card company, your grocery store, your doctor, most of not all of the manufacturers of nearly each and every product you use, even your local convenience store has more information in their databases about you, based on your purchasing habits, than any government would have, right?

    Plus, you really need to get over yourself. Just because maybe there is a file somewhere with your name on it (maybe) does not make you all that important. You are just like all of the other moronic “privacy advocates.” It makes you feel oh-so-important to think that you might be “someone worth watching” when really, you are nothing in the grand scheme of things.

    And that really bothers you, doesn’t it?


  17. RB:

    Try speaking out in Cuba and tell me how it goes.

    As for being an atheist, then why is it the atheists have aligned with islamofascists, the one group who would dispatch an atheist quicker than the evil theocons in Washington?


  18. RB:

    I gave you the attention you crave. But I just wonder why is it many on your side delete and ban anybody from their sites who disagree with them, ala KOS?

    Also, last time I checked, the USSR only allowed one party and one point of view.


  19. Oh, and one more thing:

    I for one have grown weary of trying to comment on lefty sites. All but a few require registrations and have their comments subject to approval by the blog owner. And guess what? Most of the comments are either deleted or blocked outright.

    How is that for freedom and dissent?


  20. Collecting information on someone does not in any way impinge on that person’s freedom to express. The two are separate and different. I really fail to see how the one affects the other.

    My comment about you being able to post is that were The United States one of the most repressive regimes, no one would be able to publicly say so.

    In any case, how is our regime repressive? I fail to see, really, where the repression is. Especially when people openly, publicly, and with impunity endanger our national security by emboldening the enemy and undermining national military policy and programs.

    I don’t care if the government is compiling a profile of me. I always thought no one would worry unless one is doing something wrong. Are you doing something wrong?


  21. Geoff – Actually I don’t believe I insulted the host, I cast aspersions as to the validity of information that is a very different thing altogether. I added a factual account as to what the Bush administration is doing, again, far from being an insult. As for insulting all conservatives, perhaps you’d point out exactly where I did this. I like to debate and I like to call to question my own and others beliefs I find it challenging.

    As regards your diagnosis, it is not for me to assess my own abilities, but I would prefer to trust in the professionalism of bodies that actually know both myself and my capabilities as regards drawing an inference as to my mental capacity. Personally I would consider myself neither a genius nor a fool.

    As regards your assumption that what the policy states is what the policy does I’m afraid that’s naive in the extreme and I’m not even going to start to offer the many rebuttals for that sort of blind faith.

    Dave from Texas, ooh you really are quite the wordsmith aren’t you. The barbed cock of Satan that did make me laugh, made me think of Bill Hicks an erudite man and considerably funnier than you.

    Wiserbud – It is quite true there are many databases that hold certain information on us and I am not especially pleased at this although I would remove medical records from this equation that is a different matter. However I would not be refused a job because Tesco’s know I like to eat pineapple or buy too much milk whilst I would be because of an MI5 file. I am happy to substantiate this information if you wish me to do so but I do not wish to write paragraphs doing so where others may not be interested, feel free to ask if you wish the info. I do not assert that I have any great importance, quite the contrary, so why the need for documentation on who I am, what I believe and what I vote? Just doesn’t seem very free and democratic to me.

    Dave rest assured I will not be seeking any credit from you, I wouldn’t touch your money if you paid me to.

    Eddiebear, the one person who at least came and commented on my site. I can assure you, you are welcome to write what you like on my site as I have indicated in my response to your comment. I would rather you don’t descend to insults or profanities but I won’t censor you for doing so. I am more than happy to engage in debate with you if you choose. I do not require registration and the only reason it requires approval is to safeguard against all the bloody spam which I am quite sure is politically neutral and affects everyone alike, even the Taliban.

    I have not allied with Islamic fundamentalists just as I would not were the fundamentalists Christian, Sikh, Hidu, Islamic etc. Being an atheist this would be lunacy. However I will stand agaisnt the hypocrisy of Christian Fundamentalists accusing Muslims of the same crimes they perpetrate just as I do when the boot is on the other foot. I am no lover of the Taliban (who are only in power in Afghanistan because of US funding) neither was I a fan of Saddam, also put in place by the US, however he was at least a secular ruler which is why the idea of his connection with Al Queda was so idiotic. He was a tyrant and a murdering despot sure but an Islamic fundamentalist no chance. Why don’t you blockade the Saudis if you are so anti-Islamic fundamentalist? Saudi Arabia is one of the most repressive regimes in the Middle East – I criticise it, why do you not?

    The USSR was not communist it was a ridiculous oppressive pastiche of communism, please if you want to discuss left-wing ideology let’s do it properly. And if you hate Communism so much why aren’t you campaigning for the US to go into West Bengal an area of India that has had a democratically-elected Communist party government for 30 years.

    As regards your last comment Muslihoon that is like my saying that just because data is collected on our “secret ballot” does not prevent one from voting – you would of course not think the same of East Germany would you and yet it goes on now uncorrected.

    And if you think your regime is not oppressive that is because you are not one of those whom it oppresses – ask people in the 50+ countries the US has bombed since World War II, ask Central America, South America, The Middle East, Western Europe, Russia, The Far East (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos) – or are we all deluded lefties? Come on get bloody real for pity’s sake you surely cannot be living in fairy tale land.

    Those that you claim undermine you are those who are sick of your unilateral actions, many of whom live in your own country, a country so lacking in proper healthcare and social security that it makes a 3rd world country look progressive in its treatment of the poor.

    As for the hackneyed old I’m doing nothing wrong what do I have to fear shite, I’ve heard that so many times I can’t help but yawn. Wrong is a subjective term, you had better hope that you do not in the future fall foul of it. Perhaps you should remember Pastor Martin Niemoller – he was one of yours too, no ally of mine. Look what happened to him and his kind.


  22. Why are morons so wordy? Do they imagine that’s impressive, wordcount substitutes for reason and thought?

    We’re kicking their ass and taking their gas. Do something about it, euro-fop.

    Oh wait, you can’t. Impotence.

    I’ll bet that really sucks.


  23. Actually I don’t believe I insulted the host…

    Then we can add insensitivity to your list of crimes.

    I’m not even going to start to offer the many rebuttals for that sort of blind faith.

    This from someone who says he’s seeking “debate.”

    Personally I would consider myself neither a genius nor a fool.

    Then we’re halfway to agreement!


  24. Red Baron, you’re making ME yawn. If you think this is the first time we’ve heard most of your leftist prattle, you’d be wrong. We’re veterans of many such debates at AOSHQ, and are really quite bored with it.

    You’re a communist through and through, which is all we have to know about you.


  25. …why aren’t you campaigning for the US to go into West Bengal an area of India…

    Uh oh. How did he hear about the West Bengal invasion plan?


  26. Geoff, I’ve been thinking that we need an equivalent to Godwin’s Law, for when a lefty makes the claim that fundamentalist Christians are as dangerous, and guilty of crimes, as fundamentalist Islam, like Red Baron did, above.

    I think it’s time.

    The discussion should just be over once we reach that point of ridiculousness.


  27. Thank you for not wasting paragraphs on proving to us how so incredibly important you are that MI5 is staking out your home, tapping your phones, reading your mail and electronically monitoring your pets. I’m sure we all appreciate your valiant attempt to avoid any verbosity and, instead, quickly and succinctly make your oh-so-critical points.

    Meanwhile, you still missed my (and Muslihoon’s) point. You are in many, many databases, as am I and virtually every single person who has ever done so much as applied for a driver’s license or attended public schools.

    Yet I am not worried about it because a) I don’t have anything to worry about and b) I am not a delusional, self-important egotist who believes that I am important enough for anyone to really be all that concerned about. I imagine the same applies to you, but you refuse to admit to that, as it would make you feel somehow not as superior as you believe yourself to be.

    And we just couldn’t have that, now could we?

    By the way, Pastor Martin Niemoller was persecuted by the Nazis. That would be the National Socialist party. You know, Socialists? Leftists? Your brethren? Yeah, those guys.

    Way to completely undermine your position as the superior one here.


  28. The discussion should just be over once we reach that point of ridiculousness.

    Not only is it an indefensible and despicable moral equivalence, it is unadulterated bigotry as well. It should be treated just like a racial slur.


  29. Well that about takes the biscuit wiserbud, to consider the National Socialists in Germany anything akin to left-wing simply because they use the word ‘socialist’ in their title is just ignoring history and fact.

    The Nazi party is well known as having been one of the most repressive fascist regimes in history. Hitler’s use of the name of the party which was the National Socialist German Workers Party was designed to capture the votes of people in the Weimar Republic which had been run by the SPD, you clearly know nothing about Nazi Germany or you would know that as well as the Jews being sent to the concentration camps all the Communists, Socialists and Trade Unions were as well. The trials on gas were carried out on Soviet and Polish PoWs, hardly the actions of a government would might be socialist.

    Obviously people here with the possible exception of eddiebear are not prepared to offer any ideas of substatiation for their argument but use hackneyed phrases and brush offs. You make the point that you have heard these ideas I put forward before, I have heard all your insults before as well, however I carry on debating just in case someone is ever offering anything more than mindless drivel. Clearly here is not that place.

    Oh and Dave I use words because I can, it’s called having a vocabulary and you get it by reading books as opposed to burning them.


  30. The Nazi party is well known as having been one of the most repressive fascist regimes in history.

    That has nothing to do with socialism, though the centralization of authority in a socialist state lends itself to that sort of abusive power structure. Watch Hugo Chavez as he crushes the opposition en route to becoming dictator-for-life. Just like Castro.

    I carry on debating

    Yeah, we already saw how you “carry on.” Let’s add “lack of integrity” to the list.


  31. Well thanks Geoff you rebutted wisebud’s point nicely for me about the NSdAP having nothing to do with socialism, glad we got that straight. An authoritarian state can be left-wing, right-wing or in the middle. Authority in a socialist state is centralised in the hands of the government, in a free market state it is no less centralised it is simply in the hands of someone else, usually the unelected oligarchs.

    I wondered when Chavez would come to the fore. He’s got to really get your goat hasn’t he, you hate a democratically-elected left-wing head of state, especially when he starts trying to put money into the barrios and taking it out of the hands of the industrialists.

    If Chavez was as unpopular as you would like to make out then the right-wing coup would have succeeded, it didn’t because people took offence to the elected Parliament, the Supreme Court and the Constitution being suspended. Or are we simply going to discuss another piece of false disproven propaganda namely the film of the protesters firing into the street.

    Lack of integrity – I fail to see what you are basing that on, it never ceases to amaze me how you right-wing idiots are so far up your own arses you are prepared to use factual inaccuracies and insults to cover up for either a lack of ability to argue properly or just a lack of factual evidence on which to base an argument – and you think I have a lack of integrity. You may choose to disagree with what I say and why I say it but to have the temerity to accuse me of lacking integrity is plain old-fashioned horseshit.

    You all sit here amongst your right-wing acolytes slapping yourselves on the back for what you perceive to be cleverness. Try challenging yourselves for once, try debating against a conflicting point of view, you may learn, you may even evolve. Ah no sorry that’s the problem isn’t it, you don’t believe in evolution. You know what, looking at you I have to say I’m starting to wonder about it myself.


  32. Or, is it the rule many kefties hold:

    Insult the right=hard hitting “truth to power”
    respond to the left=”hateful rhetoric”


  33. RB:

    Debate is attempted on lefty sites, but most, nt all, delete anything that deviates from their memes.

    How’s that for diversity?


  34. In the eyes of many lefties, Islamists cannot possibly murder hundreds; it has the be the fault of the evil Bushco and Halliburton.

    Oh, and throw in Israel for good measure. If the “tolerant” world of the left, blaming everything on Israel is OK as well.


  35. eddiebear I don’t believe I accused you of insulting, in fact I excepted you from the comment I made earlier.

    I cannot hold sway over what happens on other sites over which I have no control, I can only ensure that my site remains open for comment. If you were to look back over the archives you will see that there have been times when people have disagreed with me vehemently, those on the right and on the left, those of Christian or Islamic bent. I enjoy the interaction, if my views be proven wrong then I will have learnt which will further me as a person.

    If you read over my previous posts I have on many occasions criticised those on the left and I will continue to do so when I disagree with their actions, but I will also do so for the right with whom I share less ideology.

    I freely admit that a Muslim organisation can kill jut as a Christian one can. Both to my mind are an anathema to their religion. I note you do not make reference to Saudi Arabia or is it only the Islamics that don’t sell you oil that you disagree with?

    Haliburton have not to my knowledge murdered anyone directly, they have merely profitted hugely from a destructive war by being awarded largely non-tendered contracts for rebuilding. Nice little earner for them, pity about the collateral damage.

    You are free to disagree with my opinion but until you offer factual critiques I have no choice but to carry on believing the way I do now.

    And no I would not blame everything on Israel, but I think the arbitrary foundation of a state, the boundaries based on an old text that only a certain group believe in, upon the homeland of other people is bound to create trouble. That was Britain’s fault, but then so, originally was the arbitrary foundation of Iraq. Reap what you sow I’m afraid.


  36. I was being sarcastic about how everything is blamed on Israel or Halliburton.

    As for dictators and their “support”, have you ever heard pf the term preference falsification? The victims of the Iron Curtain used that to protect themselves until it became clear to them that there was no longer a disincentive to opposing the USSR. Same in other dictatorships.


  37. you rebutted wisebud’s point nicely for me about the NSdAP having nothing to do with socialism

    Why are you lying about what I said? I simply said that your reply to wiserbud had nothing to do with socialism. The Nazis didn’t practice a pure form of socialism, but their social welfare system, their wage-fixing, massive employment programs, nationalization of entertainment, and intrusion into companies’ business operations captured the high points.

    You may choose to disagree with what I say and why I say it but to have the temerity to accuse me of lacking integrity is plain old-fashioned horseshit

    Let’s look at your track record: you claim that the cellphone story is nonsense because there is no evidence that they tracked the callers back to their origin. I point out the fact that the track-back is clearly described in the article. See now, that there was a fact used to show how lame your assertion was. And you, like all lib trolls, shifted the argument to avoid getting pinned down.

    Then you tell us nearly simultaneously how much you value debate, and that you refuse to debate your fanciful assertion that the Bush administration is tapping the calls of non-terrorists. After refusing to debate it, you tell us that we are the ones avoiding debate.

    No integrity, intellectual or otherwise.

    And you managed to cheerlead for Chavez without once addressing the point. You’re either smart enough to try to muddle the point (back to integrity!) or not even that smart. But I don’t really care. Every comment you’ve made has been so thoroughly riddled with logical and factual errors that you pretty much mock yourself. I’d do a better job, but I’m willing to live with your second-rate effort.

    I’m done with this one – he’s like a low wattage ergastularius.


  38. >>The masters of phone-tapping are in fact the Bush government http://www.voanews.com/burmese/archive/2006-01/2006-01-02-voa2.cfm but then what should one expect from one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.

    Do yourself a favor. Do a little research on Project Echelon begun under the ever so super Bill Clinton. Your facts suck.

    >>“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
    – Benjamin Franklin

    Are you really so misinformed that you think Franklin would say that spying on people speaking with know terrorists equates to sacrificing essential liberties? Did you not know that Ben Franklin is considered to be the father of American espionage and setup the Committee on Secret Corespondence, Americas first intelligence organization, during the revolution? Look into that one and get back to me. See if you think Franklin agrees that spying during war is a no no.

    As to FISA, you are clearly wrong on the facts. Read the National Security Act of 1947, show me where it talks about congressional oversight. Let me save you the trouble. It doesn’t. How about the 1968 Safe Streets Act? Ever read that one? Doubt it. You should before you ever begin speaking about FISA. It would make you sound less stupid.

    On to FISA. First signed by Carter and his AG stated something along the lines of nothing in the act could limit the executives power under the constitution. He was right, of course. The Clinton administration agreed even as they expanded the act. Of course, this was after they wiretapped and raided the home of Aldrich Ames, a citizen charged and convicted with spying for a foreign gov’t. All without a warrant.

    But if you really want to be accurate, read section 1811 of the FISA act. It clearly states that during a time of war the executive must have the ability to engage in surveillance without a warrant. The Supreme Court agrees, see US v US District Court (Keith case). Then there is the Truong case. In 2002, the FISA court said the executive has the “inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance.” John Jay, first chief justice of the supreme court, would have been proud of them. As he said in Fedarlist 64, the constitution gives the executive the authority “to manage the business of intelligence in such manner as prudence may suggest.”

    I’m pretty damn sure, Ben Franklin, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, the Supreme Court, the FISA Court and the Carter, Clinton and Bush legal scholars have a damn sight better understanding of the powers of the executive than you do. Not one agrees with you. What a surprise.

    You are wrong on the facts and silly in your hyperbole. Now take off the Che t-shirt and get your self some knowledge.


  39. For more of Mr. Baron’s musings, please join him every morning at Regents Park, near the intersection of Prince Albert Road and Albany Street. You will recognize him by his colorful soapbox, his anti-Israel pamphlets and the dozens of cameras we have trained on him while he speaks.

    Be sure to wave at the black van with the interesting antennae nearby. That would be us.

    Thank you for your attention. Carry on.


  40. Who said military intelligence was an oxymoron!

    Yes, just keep assuming we are ignorant, Mr. Baron. You make it so much easier for us that way. While you spend all of your time concerned about the file we tell you about, rest assured that there is another file on you that is much more complete, including, but not limited to, your current weight, your preferred talc, and, perhaps most telling, your seemingly fanatical masturbatory habits.

    (On that topic, while we generally try not to intrude or pass judgment upon the lives of our subjects, seriously, Mr. Baron, you may want to consider cutting back slightly on the onanism, before you hurt yourself. Just a suggestion.)

    Other than that, you are truly one of the most boring people we have ever subjected to our normal, highly intense and intimate level of surveillance, but heck, a job’s a job.


  41. Oh and Dave I use words because I can, it’s called having a vocabulary and you get it by reading books as opposed to burning them.

    You’re awfully needy, aren’t you?

    That makes me sad.


  42. RB:

    Get a job!


    Oh and Dave I use words because I can, it’s called having a vocabulary and you get it by reading books as opposed to burning them.

    Ding! Godwin’s Law! We Have a winner!


  43. Deb:

    Look at it this way. You have been getting a lot of traffic because of unemployed, latte-sipping euroweenies hitting your site. And I have to resort to losers belly flopping into bathtubs.


  44. Yay Mr. Straw!

    It is somewhat unfortunate that counterintelligence and counterterrorism must needs share same techniques. We are listening in on various foreigners of interest as part of our routine counterintelligence efforts; this would include citizens of interest as well. It doesn’t take a genius to see how the permissibility of one can and ought to be extended to a similar (yet different) case: that of terrorists and militants and supporters thereof. Although terrorists and militants and supporters thereof may not be in the direct service of a foreign government, like other governments’ intelligence operatives, they endanger the security and stability of The Republic.

    For that matter, if we were not closely monitoring them (terrorists and militants and supporters thereof) — which the Government must do as part of its duty to protect its citizens and the integrity of the State which it governs — I would call for the immediate impeachment of the entire administration (or, at least, those who can be impeached: the rest should be sent to prison forthwith) for violating the purpose for which their positions exist (namely, the protection and governing of the State).

    Of course, when it comes to free speech, you Brits have problems we certainly do not. Whereas our government and Constitution protects the freedom of any person to say anything (within reasonable limits, of course), and such has been enshrined in our Bill of Rights, your country has no Bill of Rights (except for the European one, which everyone violates anyway) and, more ominously, is in the most fiendish grip of political correctness which has made the expression of various opinions and perspectives a virtual crime (especially under so-called “hate speech” codes).


  45. ^also, we now know what has become the defacto state religion in England and the rest of Europe. I guess all it takes is a group to threaten to murder innocent people over a cartoon, and we see what happens.


  46. Pingback: The Hell Correspondent « tales of ordinary madness

  47. In the preceding trackback, Red Baron scurries off to his friend’s blog and spins his lame comments here into a self-aggrandizing story of his heroism in the face of Christian fundamentalism.

    I expected no less.


  48. Cherem on you all!

    See: that’s the worst a Jewish fundamentalist can do. But, of course, seeing as you all are goyyim to begin with, even that is useless.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s