Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (10445)	1/31/2006 3:27:26 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 541430

Powell, Tenet, others told Bush he was breaking the law by ordering NSA spying By DOUG THOMPSON Publisher, Capitol Hill Blue Jan 31, 2006, 09:06 capitolhillblue.com Top-level administration officials four years ago told President George W. Bush he as “breaking the law” by ordering the National Security Agency to spy on Americans and warned the President that his actions could bring his administration down. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet and others begged Bush to reconsider his executive order giving the NSA authority to wiretap phone calls and monitor emails of American citizens but their pleas fell on deaf ears. “Mr. President, I fear you are heading down a course that could doom your administration,” Powell told Bush in a meeting in early 2002. “I urge you to reconsider.” Powell also argued against Bush’s plans to turn Pentagon spies loose on American antiwar groups, saying “such actions don’t belong in America.” Powell wasn’t the only one worried about the legality of wiretaps. Then deputy attorney general James D. Comey, acting as attorney general while John Ashcroft was hospitalized, refused to sign off on Bush’s executive order, prompting then White House Counsel, and now attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, to visit Ashcroft at his hospital bed in a failed attempt to get the AG to overturn his deputy. Ashcroft, however, stood by Comey and told Gonzales that he could not condone the spying, even though he had authored the controversial, and rights-robbing, USA Patriot Act. “This is not legal and the President is exceeding his authority,” Ashcroft said. “Jim (Comey) is right to oppose it.” Then CIA director George Tenet, in a stormy meeting with Bush, told the President that use of the NSA to spy on Americans was a direct violation of the agency’s charter. “This is illegal and a flagrant misuse of the agency and its technology,” Tenet said. Those who opposed Bush on his actions, which the President claimed were justified under his powers as a “wartime commander-in-chief,” are no longer part of the administration. Bush fired Tenet (publicly, the CIA direction was allowed to resign). Powell and Ashcroft resigned shortly after Bush began his second term. Comey quit in disgust. Those privy to the contentious White House meetings where all tried in vain to talk Bush out of his reckless course of action say the President’s allies in using the NSA to spy on Americans were Vice President Dick Cheney and White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, the man Bush tapped to replace Ashcroft. Powell, top aides say privately, considering resigning early in Bush’s first term because of what he considered the President’s “reckless and irresponsible actions,” but stayed on because he still felt he could play a moderating role with the extremists in the administration. “As a career soldier, Gen. Powell felt a duty to serve is country even when that service meant answering to those he considered wrong,” says a longtime aide who served with the general at the State Department as well as when Powell chaired the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “He was a moral man trapped in an immoral nest of vipers.”

To: JohnM who wrote (10445)	1/31/2006 7:13:02 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541430

You might argue that k-12 public schools have monopoly control and that's tantamount to socialism. No monopoly is required by or mandated for socialism in education. Socialists generally dislike fee-paying education [because almost by definition those with riches can afford the better education for their children]. But that's nothing to do with a monopoly or otherwise. Of course, very few bodies besides the state can afford to provide education without direct payment. But some charities will, and some schools are generously funded or endowed by private benefactors even so. AFAIK it's only totalitarian or dictatorial countries that completely bar schools not under state control: and for them it's the control rather than the funding that's important.

To: JohnM who wrote (10445)	2/1/2006 11:14:39 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541430

The school board must sponsor public boro wide votes each year in which the budget must be either approved or disapproved. Which makes it socialist system. A democratic socialist system since people are voting, and one that is voted on a very local level, so it might possibly be very responsive. But the school board is as much a government institution as the office of the mayor or a city council, or a state legislature or a court. The school board is elected by the voters and they are expected to set policy parameters. Which makes them a government institution. But it's been my experience, just recently renewed with some participation, that the only real power they have is to hire and fire the top most rank(s). An adept and able superintendent of the system is easily able to manipulate school board members who know little about the intricacies of operations. And Hoover manipulated several presidents in a row. Does that make the FBI something other than an arm of the government? If the bureaucrats are really in charge it doesn't make it a private organization. Its still part of government. You might argue that k-12 public schools have monopoly control and that's tantamount to socialism. Not really. A monopoly isn't automatically part of government (although more often than not it is maintained with government help). Also while government organizations often, perhaps usually have little or no competition it isn't an essential part of them being government institutions. Karen tried another argument. While recognizing that the public schools are a government institution she argued that "socialist" shouldn't be used if the good or service is usually provided for by the government. She gave the example that you usually don't talk about a socialist defense system. I don't really buy that argument either but I find it somewhat interesting. I think you don't normally talk about a socialist defense system because defense is so commonly provided for just by the government that "socialized defense system" is largely redundant even if it is technically accurate. Tim