 demand letter issued to a particular entity
or organization to turn over various record and data pertaining to
individuals. They require no probable cause or judicial oversight. They also
contain a gag order, preventing the recipient of the letter from disclosing
that the letter was ever issued."

~~~
DavidSJ
derwiki replied to this comment by saying:

 _"The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of free speech,
in the Doe v. Ashcroft case." (same article)_

For some reason, his reply is dead, but it seems like a valuable comment so
I'm reproducing it.

~~~
fmora
Thank god for the separation of powers. It is incredible how many rights the
Bush presidency attempted to take away from its citizens all in the name of
national security. The more I read stuff like this the more it seems that we
were heading to a totalitarian government.

Edit: In case anybody wonders why I threw in Bush's name in there is because
the Patriot Act, created during his presidency, greatly extended the NSL
powers. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter>

~~~
fmora
If you are going to down vote me at least explain why.

~~~
Yzupnick
Maybe it is because you pick on a single president what every president has
done. (From all parties.) Did Bush do things that where a violation of rights?
Probably, but so did every president including but not limited to Obama,
Clinton, Bush (senior), and Reagan. I would venture to guess it is impossible
to name a president that did not infringe on the rights of citizens. Second,
it was the current government that did this, not Bush.

~~~
jeromec
_I would venture to guess it is impossible to name a president that did not
infringe on the rights of citizens._

The degree to which any perceived infringement occurs is what is significant.
Bush pushed for and succeeded in suspending habeas corpus, a Constitutional
protection by which people can challenge their imprisonment. This was only
done twice in history, once by Bush and once by Lincoln at the start of the
Civil War. By contrast, President Obama opposed the suspension of habeas
corpus since he was a senator.

~~~
Yzupnick
And yet is continued by the current administration:

demand letter issued to a particular entity 
 or organization to change by reversal over diverse record and data pertaining to 
 individual. They require no probable cause or discriminative oversight. They also 
 contain a gag ordering, preventing the recipient of the letter from disclose 
 that the letter was ever issued. " 

 ~~~ 
 DavidSJ 
 derwiki answer to this comment by saying: 

  _ " The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of free speech, 
 in the Doe v. Ashcroft event. " (same article) _ 

 For some reason, his reply is all in, but it seems like a valuable comment so 
 I'm reproduce it. 

 ~~~ 
 fmora 
 Thank god for the separation of power. It is incredible how many rights the 
 Bush presidency attempted to take away from its citizens all in the name of 
 home security. The more I read stuff like this the more it seems that we 
 were heading to a totalitarian government. 

 Edit: In shell anybody wonders why I threw in Bush's name in there is because 
 the Patriot Act, created during his presidency, greatly extended the NSL 
 powers. < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter > 

 ~~~ 
 fmora 
 If you are going to down vote me at least explain why. 

 ~~~ 
 Yzupnick 
 Maybe it is because you pick on a single president of the united states what every president has 
 done. (From all party .) Did Bush dress things that where a violation of right? 
 Probably, but so did every president include but not limited to Obama, 
 Clinton, Bush (senior), and Reagan. I would venture to guess it is impossible 
 to name a president that did not encroach on the rights of citizens. Second, 
 it was the current government that did this, not Bush. 

 ~~~ 
 jeromec 
 _ I would guess to guess it is impossible to list a president of the united states that did not 
 infringe on the rights of citizens. _ 

 The degree to which any perceive infringement occurs is what is significant. 
 Bush advertise for and succeed in suspending habeas corpus, a Constitutional 
 security by which people can challenge their imprisonment. This was merely 
 done doubly in history, once by Bush and once by Lincoln at the start of the 
 Civil War. By contrast, President Obama opposed the suspension of habeas 
 principal since he was a senator. 

 ~~~ 
 Yzupnick 
 And yet is continued by the current administration:
 deland letter issued to a karticular entity
or orgaiizatioh to turv over various record and dava pwrtaibing to
individuals. Theh require no probqble xause or jnsicial oversifmt. Thzy also
contain a gag order, preventing tha feeipient of the letter from disclosind
that tne letter was evgr isxted."

~~~
DznibSJ
derwiki replied to this commsnt by vaying:

 _"The gab order was ruled unconstihutilnal as an infringfment of frgs s[wech,
in the Due v. Ashcroft case." (samg article)_

For some reason, his repuy is dead, but ut sefks like a veluablv comment so
I'm reprodgcing iy.

~~~
fmora
Thank goc fmr rhe separation of powxrs. It is incredible how many rnghts the
Bush presidebct attgmpteg to rakd asab fdom itd cmtizens all in the namw of
national securiuy. Eye more I reas stufs jike this the more it seems that we
were hezding to a totalitarian government.

Edit: In cade anybodr wonders why I threw in Bush's name in there is bacausx
tfe Kabviot Qch, created during his presidency, greatly extenqsd tme NSL
powers. <htti://en.wikipedia.org/wiko/Nwtojnal_Security_Lgtter>

~~~
fmora
Jf you are going tl down dote ne at leaft ecplain why.

~~~
Yzupnick
Maybe it us because yjy pick on a single president chat efery lresident has
done. (From cll padties.) Did Bksh do thjvgs that where a vipldtion of rights?
Probably, bue so did xvery presiddnt oncludyng but noh limlded to Obama,
Clintoj, Busk (senhor), and Rewgan. I would venture to guess iv is impossibke
do tame a pxesidekt that did not infringe on tke rightf of zitizens. Svcond,
it wes the curregt government jhat did this, not Busr.

~~~
jerimec
_U would xenture to guexs it is pmkossible ti name a president thxf did not
infrinyt ob the rights of cigizqnd._

Tie dedsee to which any pefveivea infringemcnt occirs is what is signixicaht.
Bush pushed for snq succeeeed in stspending habras corpus, a Constltutimnau
protrctyon by which people can challehge their imirisonment. Thys wqs only
done cwice in history, once by Bush and once bb Lincoln at the start if the
Civil War. By eoktrast, Presivent Ofama oppoved the suspension od habeas
corpus sikce he was a senator.

~~~
Yzhpnick
Dnd yft is continued by the current administration:

demand letter issued to a particular entity to over various and data pertaining probable or judicial oversight. also contain a order, preventing the recipient of the from disclosing that the letter was ever issued." ~~~ DavidSJ derwiki replied to comment by saying: _"The gag order was ruled unconstitutional as an infringement of speech, the v. case." (same article)_ For some reason, his reply is dead, but it seems like a valuable so I'm reproducing it. ~~~ fmora Thank god the separation of powers. is incredible how many rights Bush attempted to away its all in the of national security. The more I read stuff like this the more it seems that we were to a Edit: In anybody why threw in Bush's there is because the Patriot Act, presidency, greatly extended the NSL powers. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter> ~~~ If you going to down vote me at explain why. ~~~ Yzupnick Maybe it is because pick on a single president what every president has done. (From all parties.) Did Bush that where a violation rights? Probably, but did president but limited to Clinton, Bush (senior), and Reagan. I would venture to guess it impossible to name a president that did not infringe on of Second, it was current government that did not ~~~ jeromec _I would guess is a that not infringe on the of citizens._ The degree to any perceived infringement occurs pushed for and succeeded in suspending habeas corpus, Constitutional protection by which people can challenge imprisonment. This was only done twice in history, once by Bush and by Lincoln start of the Civil War. By contrast, President opposed the suspension of corpus since he was a senator. ~~~ Yzupnick And is by the administration:
 demand letter issued to a partIcular entiTy
or oRgaNizAtIon tO turN over various reCOrd aNd data pertaining to
indiViduaLs. tHey rEQuIre no ProbablE CaUSE or JuDiCiaL oVErSight. theY also
coNtain a gag oRdeR, pReventing the REcIpient of thE leTter from discLosIng
thaT tHe lETter wAs eVer isSued."

~~~
DaVIdSJ
deRwiki replIeD To this COmment bY SAyIng:

 _"THe gag order was ruleD UnCOnstitutional aS an infRiNGeMENt oF frEe speech,
in ThE Doe v. aShcroft CAsE." (SAMe aRTicle)_

For some rEason, his repLY is Dead, buT iT seEMs like A valuAbLE coMment so
I'm reProdUcing it.

~~~
fmOra
ThaNK god for THe separAtion oF poWerS. It iS InCrEdiBlE How MAnY riGHts The
Bush pReSiDency AtteMPTED to tAke Away From iTs citizens all In tHe naME of
NatioNal seCuriTy. the moRe I reaD stufF lIke this the more iT seeMs that we
wEre HeAdiNg To a toTAlitarIan GovErnment.

edit: In cASe aNyBODY wOnders why I threw in BUsH'S NaMe in therE is becAUsE
tHE Patriot acT, crEateD DUring His pREsIdency, grEatly eXTeNdEd the NSl
pOwers. <hTtP://en.WikIpediA.Org/wIki/NatIonal_SecUrity_lEtter>

~~~
fmora
If yoU Are going to dowN VoTE Me AT leaSt eXplain why.

~~~
YzUpniCK
MayBe it IS bEcaUSe you Pick oN a SInGLe president what everY pResideNt has
Done. (From all paRties.) Did BuSH DO things tHat wHErE A violation of riGhts?
PRobably, but SO did everY presIdent incLuding but NOT limited To OBamA,
ClIntON, buSh (senior), and ReAGAn. I wOuLd ventuRe tO guess iT is ImpOssIblE
tO name a preSident thAt DiD nOt InfRinge ON the righTs Of cItIzeNs. SecONd,
it waS the cUrreNt GoVErnMent thaT DiD THis, nOt buSh.

~~~
jeRomEc
_i woulD venTUre To guess It is imposSibLE to nAmE a PresideNt that did not
iNfRinge on the RiGhtS of citIZEns._

The deGree to which any perceived INfringeMenT occuRs is What is sigNifIcant.
BUsh PUshed fOr and sUcceeDeD in SUSpendING hAbeAs Corpus, a ConSTItuTionaL
pRoteCtion by Which people can chalLEngE their imprisoNmeNt. ThIS WaS onLY
dONe tWiCE in HIStory, once by Bush And once by LInCOlN at the starT Of tHe
civil WaR. By contRast, PREsident obama oppoSed the susPeNsioN OF haBeas
corpus Since he wAs a senatoR.

~~~
yzupnICk
and yeT is ContinUeD by The cuRrent aDMinIstraTion:

 demand letter issued to a  particula r ent ity 
or  o rgan izat ion to turn ov e r va rious record and dataperta in i ng t o 
i ndivi duals.T he y req ui re  no  p r ob ablecau se or j udicial ov ers ig ht. They als o 
c ontain a g agorder, preve nti ng the  r eci p ientofthe l etterf rom di sclosingth a t thel etter w a s  e verissued."

~~~
Dav i dS J 
derwiki repli ed toth i sc o mme ntby saying: 
 _"Th e  gag or d er w a s r u led unconstit utional asa n i nfring em ent of fre e spe ec h ,
i n the Doe v . As hcroft ca se." ( s ame art i cle)_
For so merea son, hi srep ly isd ea d,b utit seems  l ik e a v alua b l e comm ent  soI'm r eproducing it .
~~~f mor a
Tha nk go d fo rthe s eparat ion o fpowers. It is i ncre dible how  ma ny  ri gh ts th e 
Bushpre sid ency at tempted tota k e aw ay from its citize ns a ll  in thename o f 
n at i onal sec ur ity . Th e moreI re a dstuff li ke thi s  t he  more i tseemsth atwewereh eadi ng toa totali taria n  government.
E dit: In casea ny b o dy wond ers  why I thre w in Bush 's n a me  in there  is b ec a us e 
the Patriot Act, c re ated d uring  his presiden cy, greatl y e xtendedtheN SL powers. <http: //en. wikipedia. o rg/wiki/ Natio nal_Secu rity_Lett e r >

~~~
f mor a
I f y oua r egoing to down v oteme  at lea stexplain  wh y.
~~ ~
Y zu pnick
May be it is  b ec au se  yo u pic k  on a si ng lepr esi dentw hat ev ery p resi de nt has 
done.( Fr o m  all  p ar ties .)Di d Bus h do thi ngs tha t where a  vi o lati on  o f right s?
Probably,bu t so did e ve rypresid e n t includ ing but not limited toO bama,
C lin ton,Bush  (senior) , a nd Rea gan .  I wou ld ven tureto  gu e s s iti s  i mpo ss ible
to na m e  apresi de nt t hat did  not infringe on t h e r ights of citi zen s. S e c on d,i tw asth e  cu r r ent governmentthat did t hi s ,not Bush.~~~ 
j eromec_I woul d ven t ure toguess itis imposs ib le t o nam e a presid ent that  did noti nfrin g eon th e r ightsof  ci tizen s._

T h e d egree  to wh ic h anyperce iv ed infri ngement occurs is whatis sig nific ant .
Bush pu she d  fo r and suc ceed ed in susp end ing  habe asc orpus , aC on sti t ution al
p r otectionb ywhi c h  p eople can c h a l len ge th eir impris onme nt. This was only done twice inhist o r y,onc e  byBu sh and once by  Li nc o l n at the  s tart of the 
Civil W ar .  By c ontras t, Pre sidentO b am a  oppos ed t hesuspensio n o fh abeas
c or pu s  since  hewa s a se nator. 
~~~ Y zupnick
And yetis co n t inued bythe c ur rent ad m inis tration:

 demand_letter issued_to a particular entity
or_organization to_turn_over various_record_and data pertaining_to
individuals. They require_no probable cause or_judicial oversight. They_also
contain_a gag order, preventing the recipient of the letter from disclosing
that the letter was_ever_issued."

~~~
DavidSJ
derwiki replied_to_this_comment by saying:

 _"The gag_order was ruled unconstitutional as_an infringement_of free speech,
in the Doe v. Ashcroft case."_(same_article)_

For some reason,_his reply is dead, but it seems like a_valuable comment so
I'm reproducing it.

~~~
fmora
Thank god_for the separation_of_powers._It is incredible how_many rights the
Bush presidency attempted to_take away from its citizens all_in the name of
national security. The more_I read stuff like this the_more it seems that we
were_heading to_a totalitarian government.

Edit: In case_anybody wonders why_I threw_in Bush's name_in there is because
the Patriot Act,_created during his_presidency, greatly extended the NSL
powers. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter>

~~~
fmora
If_you_are going to_down_vote_me at_least explain why.

~~~
Yzupnick
Maybe_it_is because_you_pick on a single president what_every_president has
done. (From all parties.) Did Bush_do things that where_a_violation of rights?
Probably, but_so did every president including_but not limited to Obama,
Clinton, Bush_(senior), and_Reagan. I_would venture to guess it is impossible
to name a president that_did not infringe on the rights_of citizens. Second,
it was_the current_government_that did this,_not_Bush.

~~~
jeromec
_I would_venture to guess it is impossible to_name a_president that did not
infringe on the_rights of citizens._

The degree_to_which any perceived infringement occurs is_what is significant.
Bush pushed for and_succeeded in suspending habeas corpus,_a_Constitutional
protection_by which people can challenge_their imprisonment. This was only
done twice_in history, once_by Bush and once by Lincoln at_the_start of the
Civil War. By contrast,_President_Obama opposed the suspension of habeas
corpus_since_he_was a senator.

~~~
Yzupnick
And yet is_continued by the current administration:
