Someone leaked a classified three-page order from the special court established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, to Glenn Greenwald of the Guardian newspaper, who is a committed anti-antiterror partisan....I suspect it was someone who wanted to distract us from the IRS scandal (and other scandals) so that the scandal of the moment would be one that's about Bush. I supported Bush's war on terror and resisted the "committed anti-antiterror partisan[s]." It became very important to fight terrorism after 9/11, and one reason I decided to vote for Barack Obama in 2008 was that I thought it would be helpful for Democrats to be put in a position where they would need to endorse things Bush chose to do to protect us from terrorist attacks. This is what we are seeing now. It's also important not to violate constitutional rights, but questions of rights and national security need to be analyzed. Don't assume Glenn Greenwald has it right. He's an advocate for one side of a difficult argument.
Back to the WSJ:
The outrage this time seems to stem from the fact that the government is widely collecting call records, not merely those associated with a particular suspect or group. But this fear misunderstands how the program works. From what we know, the NSA runs algorithms over the call log database, searching for suspicious patterns over time.Here's where the other Obama scandals come in. How do we know the government is dutifully concentrating on national security — fighting terrorists and not political enemies? That kind of mistrust matters, but it's not specific to the NSA program. It undermines everything government does. What would you like government to stop doing now that you can't trust it with anything?
If the NSA's version of a computer science department operates like the rest of FISA, the government is cautious to ensure that its searches are narrowly tailored and specific protocols are reviewed by FISA judges.If... That's an important if, but that's not the focus of the criticism by people like Greenwald.
The real danger from this leak is the potential political overreaction....
পোস্টগুলি
২৪৪টি মন্তব্য:
«সবচেয়ে পুরাতন ‹পুরাতন 244 এর 201 – থেকে 244"I suspect it was someone who wanted to distract us from the IRS scandal (and other scandals) so that the scandal of the moment would be one that's about Bush."
Anne, you have hit on a very interesting aspect of NSA/Verizon story. Who leaked the FISA court order? Likely only 4 entities had copies of it: The FBI which requested it, NSA, Verizon and the FISA court. This is special intelligence and handled in a far more secure manner. And the Comint Statutes apply here which makes it a crime to publish it, where the Espionage Act of 1917 does not.
I doubt Verizon leaked it because it simply had too much to lose, both civilly and criminally. It is incomprehensible that the FISA court would do it. That leaves the FBI or NSA, and of the two the FBI is far more political. Perhaps Justice received a file copy also. If they did, that would be an even more likely source.
The leaking to a UK paper fits your suggestion that it may have been a US government leak. If so ham handed Holder grossly miscalculated, as he did with the AP phone data grab.
I truly think Holder is becoming senile.
"NSA is a military operation, run by military officers who are willing to die for that clause in their oaths about 'support and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.'"
Yep...they've gotta destroy the Constitution in order to save it!
Jay - "Since you have a demonstrated inability to understand how these programs work, and what the difference between "foreign surveillance" and all domestic phone call meta data is, you should probably shut up now.
You have no fucking clue what you're talking about."
Au contraire, you foolish asshole. The storage is needed to be able to not just track some Islamoid that some warrant was issued on but:
1. People not on the radar screen that don't have a Mighty Judge issuing the precious warrant that set off a bomb and we would like to know all the people that helped them.
2. The way cells work, Jay, for terrorists or Chinese espionage rings ..is you may get one that has "probable cause", but to wrap up the whole cell and discover foreign connections...you need preserved data that can be used as evidence. Person A sets off the weapon that kills and maims 100 Americans..you discover through records that Person K in their inner circle had 14 calls to Saudi Arabia the day before and of the bombing. You track those calls and find the Saudi person of interest.
There. Your education session is done for now. But like other obtuse assholes, it is pearls before swine.
For an advanced class, read what Drill SGT said.
If Ann is right about the Choom Gang leaking this on purpose, here may be a couple of reasons why:
Unexpectedly Unemployment is up again!!!!!!!
NSA (and don't forget the FBI) data collection included credit card transactions
IRS in Cincy says Tea Party vendetta directed from DC.
"Meanwhile, the other scandals fall out of focus."
Specifically Benghazi, where lies the knowledge lethal to this regime.
Since Benghazi, each "scandal" is backfire against the main blaze, Benghazi. See Benghazi and see why all the fuss. The backfires are draining time, energy and money. They are working.
Jay said...
Cedarford said...
I think most Americans have no problem killing a US citizen in the enemy camp in war
Idiot:
Yemen is not an "enemy camp of war"
==============
Read the AUMF, you weasel-mouthed libertarian.
It allows striking Al Qaeda wherever they may be - and we use law enforcement where that is possible - say France or Jordan - and military where it is not - such as the tribal wildlands or Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen.
I take it you are in the pack of leftists and libertarian psychotics that weep for al-Awlakis "precious rights being discarded" - when no one PROVED in a court of law that he was actually working with recruits like the Christmas bomber and Major Nidal Hasan to kill Americans.
Cedarford said...
Read the AUMF, you weasel-mouthed libertarian.
It allows striking Al Qaeda wherever they may be - and we use law enforcement where that is possible - say France or Jordan - and military where it is not - such as the tribal wildlands or Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen.
France = enemy camp of war!!!!
Idiot
The storage is needed to be able to not just track some Islamoid that some warrant was issued on but:
That's funny.
We now need to store every Verizon record to find "connections"
You're a fucking demented homo, dude.
.you need preserved data that can be used as evidence.
Actually, this can be done with a probable cause warrant in a standard prosecution.
Idiot.
Cedarford said...
Person A sets off the weapon that kills and maims 100 Americans..you discover through records that Person K in their inner circle had 14 calls to Saudi Arabia the day before and of the bombing. You track those calls and find the Saudi person of interest.
This is laugh out loud funny.
You seem to think you're presenting some sort of scenario that would be troublesome under either a probable cause standard or the FISA court.
This is like talking to a retarded 4th grader.
I thought the IRS scandal was supposed to distract us from the Benghazi scandal, which was supposed to distract us from the Fast and Furious scandal, which was supposed to distract us from the Green Jobs Scandal, which was supposed to distract us from the banker/GM bailouts scandal, which was supposed to distract us from the Black Panthers scandal, which was supposed to distract us from the.... never mind, you get the picture.
I love the fact that this demented Jew hating homo cederford trusts the government to define and redefine terrorism and to kill people only in enemy camps of war.
Again, this is like talking to a dumb 4th grader.
Corky Boyd - Nice analysis by you at 10:55 AM.
Useful to remind people of the groups that had the info on what was collected, and who within a group would have a strong interest in betraying the FISA Court seal, the NSA sources and methods.
Plus the FBI and private companies.
The Court is likely furious the seal was broken by a government agency outside the FISA Courts consent, or a private firm. But the FISA warrant to each private firm does not contain the names of other companies also accessed and the leaks had info on separate firms.
Leakers do not spontaneously arise independently at several companies and all decide to leak to the same progressive jew gay activist working for a foreign newspaper at the same time.
You can probably leave them off the suspect list. Only government had the comprehensive list. NSA, FBI, Holders Justice Dept.
As others said, NSA people live and die by their oath..the NSA goes after leakers like the US Army is now going after the traitor Bradley Manning. They are highly unlikely, as unlikley as a FISA judge or that staff at FISA to leak.
That leaves the FBI - that have a long history of betraying secrets if it boosts FBI power. And Holder's people at Justice. (Many with a past history of being al Qaeda lawyers or Terrorist's Rights activists.)
My bet is on Holder's folks.
To help the demented homo out:
This:
warrantless wiretapping, targeted at agents of Al Qaeda is good
This:
capturing all data from every customer of Verizon Business Services not good.
If you think that you need the 2nd part (without a warrant) to stop a terrorist attack, you're a fucking authoritarian goof.
Who thinks this is limited to Verizon? What logical basis would suggest that Verizon was some special terrorist electronic gathering place? One Order was leaked -- who says there is not another order for each of the other telecoms? The Order does not mention why it was issued -- I'd like for someone to leak the application and supporting affidavits.
Racist.
@phx,
I notice that you claim you want an intellectual discussion. When offered one, however, you prefer to trade insults with Jay.
Good to know for the future, in case you ever attempt that dodge again.
In case you want another chance, here you go:
the question is how much is Obama responsible for all these things that are happening in his administration. Previously, it was enough to blame Bush for something if it just happened on his watch, no direct connection necessary. Now, you are implying that unless a direct connection to Obama giving an order or proof of knowledge can be established, he cannot be blamed at all.
My point is: he's the President of the United States. He is the Commander in Chief of the military forces. He has complete command of the entire executive branch. He chooses his advisers. He sets the tone and parameters of how his subordinates pursue their daily duties.
Is there an explanation where President Obama not knowing what was happening is actually any better than him directly ordering it? If so, please detail it.
Simple question.
Note, it isn't necessary to argue what he knew, or when, or who knew. All that is an explanation of how a leader isn't responsible for long-term, ongoing actions, directed by people who had constant, ongoing interactions with his top Staff, and carried out actions consistent with his speeches and statements.
Did Obama directly order these illegal and unConstitutional actions?
Who knows? In then end, that matters less than:
What did he do or say that led his subordinates to think it was a good idea?
How did the illegal activity continue on for such a long time?
How did he choose his subordinates?
How much delegated authority did he allow them?
Why did he not have regular updates of all significant activity?
Why did the huge number of visits by top IRS staff to the White House not result in the IRS illegal activities being shut down?
What did he do to curtail the activity when he found out?
What punishment did he impose on those responsible for the illegal actions?
What punishment did he impose on those who blocked the information from reaching him?
If they are still on his staff despite preventing him from knowing about illegal activity by his subordinates in his authority, what does that imply about his approval/disapproval for their decisions to allow the activity to continue without informing President Obama?
All leading to:
How does being completely clueless about what his subordinates were by his authority make it any better than if he ordered it directly?
@Cedarford: I think Jay is right about the idiocy of needing widespread surveillance to catch people like the Tzarnaev brothers. Our intelligence had specific and ample warning from the Russians but ignored it.
And as I recall, you were one of the biggest supporters of jailing the filmmaker in the Benghazi case.
So you sort of blew your credibility wad in two looping spurts.
If only we would have gotten information on the Boston Bombers to the FBI ahead of time!!!
Oh wait, the FBI interviewed them twice prior to the bombing.
So lets give the NSA unlimited phone call meta data.
Or something.
Beach Brutus said...
Who thinks this is limited to Verizon?
It wasn't.
Note:
WASHINGTON—The National Security Agency's monitoring of Americans includes customer records from the three major phone networks as well as emails and Web searches, and the agency also has cataloged credit-card transactions, said people familiar with the agency's activities.
And if you don't understand the government needs all that information to stop the Tzarnaev brothers (whom the FBI talked to twice) then you're a big wingnutz dummy!!!
Machiavelli pointed out that the Prince's first job is to stay in power. Whether he's a good Prince or a bad Prince, a benevolent Prince or an oppressive one, a benefactor or a robber baron, wise or clumsy, all that is secondary; none of it matters if he's dead or deposed and no longer the Prince. Staying on top is Job No. 1.
The history of the Roman emperors illustrates the same thing. Staying alive is the first and by far the most important job. Everything else is secondary at best.
We seem to be seeing the same thing in Washington today. The government is now run by people who think that their real job is to keep running government. The fact that this is not an American government that the Constitution or We the People recognize is irrelevant. The Democrats are intent on gaming the system so that Democrats remain in control for the next generation. As we are seeing today, they are using the machinery of government to cripple or castrate their political foes or anyone else who might threaten their plans of perpetual power. Their polices, both public and secret, from socialized medicine to immigration "reform" to the perversion of the IRS and DHS, all are oriented toward that goal. It is foolish to think, as the WSJ apparently does, that they are serious about anything else. That other stuff is secondary, tertiary, or worse. They are fighting Republicans, the Tea Party, whoever; it is rash to assume that they might also be seriously interested in fighting terrorists or any other real enemies.
This is all becoming truly alarming.
Jay said...
I love the fact that this demented Jew hating homo cederford trusts the government to define and redefine terrorism and to kill people only in enemy camps of war.
Again, this is like talking to a dumb 4th grader.
====================
I'm not the one that starts with 4th-grader ad hominem attacks at anyone they disagree with Jay.
That has long been your pattern here.
Childish insults or the HAHAHAHAAHAH!
HAHAHAHAHAAA!
routine.
Grow up baby boy, and realize that you don't win arguments by calling people homos.
Or win arguments by claiming that Jews and blacks are immune from criticism or you are a HATER! - but it is OK to criticize Muslims, Christians, Chinese and so on because you think so..
I'm not the one that starts with 4th-grader ad hominem attacks at anyone they disagree with Jay.
You're not "disagreeing" with me.
You're attacking things I never said and revealing a deep and broad ignorance about the topic.
Machiavelli pointed out that the Prince's first job is to stay in power. Whether he's a good Prince or a bad Prince, a benevolent Prince or an oppressive one, a benefactor or a robber baron, wise or clumsy, all that is secondary; none of it matters if he's dead or deposed and no longer the Prince. Staying on top is Job No. 1.
The history of the Roman emperors illustrates the same thing. Staying alive is the first and by far the most important job. Everything else is secondary at best.
We seem to be seeing the same thing in Washington today. The government is now run by people who think that their real job is to keep running government. The fact that this is not an American government that the Constitution or We the People recognize is irrelevant. The Democrats are intent on gaming the system so that Democrats remain in control for the next generation. As we are seeing today, they are using the machinery of government to cripple or castrate their political foes or anyone else who might threaten their plans of perpetual power. Their polices, both public and secret, from socialized medicine to immigration "reform" to the perversion of the IRS and DHS, all are oriented toward that goal. It is foolish to think, as the WSJ apparently does, that they are serious about anything else. That other stuff is secondary, tertiary, or worse. They are fighting Republicans, the Tea Party, whoever; it is rash to assume that they might also be seriously interested in fighting terrorists or any other real enemies.
This is all becoming truly alarming.
Next up, the Hubble telescope repositioned to aim directly at United States. WSJ: program began during Bush administration.
The Democrats are intent on gaming the system so that Democrats remain in control for the next generation. As we are seeing today, they are using the machinery of government to cripple or castrate their political foes or anyone else who might threaten their plans of perpetual power.
At first glance that sounds paranoid, but if you think about, the sorts of long term changes the Democrats foisted will require a lengthy period of stewardship to fully implement them--programs like Obamacare, and the grievance-based reparations programs like Pigford--to truly entrench them. The donkeys now seem surrounded by hostiles. They should have offered a few more sacred calves at the altar--things like carbon-based energy vilification, gun control, affirmative action, late term abortion, unfettered immigration and voter ID. They should have ceded ground on some of those issues just for the sake of health care reform alone. Instead, they bit off too much.
Mr. Ahoy just refined 225 heated, lengthy comments into two concise lines.
El Pollo Raylan said...
@Cedarford: I think Jay is right about the idiocy of needing widespread surveillance to catch people like the Tzarnaev brothers. Our intelligence had specific and ample warning from the Russians but ignored it.
And as I recall, you were one of the biggest supporters of jailing the filmmaker in the Benghazi case.
So you sort of blew your credibility wad in two looping spurts.
----------------
Pause and think for a moment.
How did we get the Tsarnaevs? Something about intrusive Big Brother CCTV cameras and "creepy fascist" facial recognition tech and disseminating those photos of possible suspects have anything to do with it?
How did we get all the evidence of Tsarnaev associates and through preserved databases get 2 years of contacts with other like-minded Islamoids?
How were we able to get phone evidence of another Chechen not on any Russian warning - that from the phone calls preserved and their locations and times - is looking to have gone with Tamerlan Tsarnaev and slit the throats of three Americans???
Do not be myoptic and think fighting the Islamoids is only about 100% perfect prevention - after a strike, we need to use every means we have to find their support network here and abroad and roll that up, too. It is better for us that if terrorists strike - we have the means to get evidence to roll up and destroy their cells, even whole networks revealed in Islamoid carelessness.
As for Nakoula, giant red herring, chicken raylan. That scumbag career criminal is back in jail because he violated specific terms of his probation. And when his probation officers shook him down, they found evidence of other scams, more identity theft, and 6 forged passports. They could have burned him for that, but faster and easier to just toss the scumbag back in the hole to serve out his whole sentence for past fraud convictions. Though I suppose if they wanted to they could also burn him for conspiring to kill or maim Americans abroad as he ststed on camera was the prime objective of his video. Incitement to riot is as much an exception to the Holy 1st Amendment as falsely shoting fire in a theater in hopes of seeing ticketholders trampled to death in the panic.
Yes they just want to whine and cry and ...... "Because Obama did it!"...... "but I really like it when MY party of choice does it."
{facepalm}
Althouse got this thread off to a great start by pointing out that we can't trust this government to do anything right, so what do we do? I don't recall any suggestions by thread lefties about how to solve this problem across the fed gov (but there was a lot of feces flinging).
What I would like for lefties on this thread to acknowledge is that centralizing so much power in the fed gov is intrinsically disastrous cuz it invites abuse of power, there have to be checks and balances. One obvious solution is to is to radically decrease the size and power of the fed gov by transferring most government responsibility back to the states. The governmental model that we should adopt is the constitution cuz it works, is already the law of the land, is clearly defined, and has great stature. What is the alternative?
How were we able to get phone evidence of another Chechen not on any Russian warning - that from the phone calls preserved and their locations and times - is looking to have gone with Tamerlan Tsarnaev and slit the throats of three Americans???
That can be done with a warrant, you dope.
It was all done after the fact.
You calling two unlike things the same reveals you're an idiot.
Cedarford writes: Do not be myoptic and think fighting the Islamoids is only about 100% perfect prevention - after a strike, we need to use every means we have to find their support network here and abroad and roll that up, too. It is better for us that if terrorists strike - we have the means to get evidence to roll up and destroy their cells, even whole networks revealed in Islamoid carelessness.
How many bombings like that occur every year? How many suspects come with red flags from the Russians? I think we should have been all over that guy's ass a lot more before the bombing occurred. But for some reason, it wasn't considered or it was considered and not allowed. In any case, it didn't happen. Why? How many suspects come so gift wrapped?
And I still think you're full of shit about Benghazi.
And as far as ad hominem expressions, I got a few choice ones from you directed at Sarah Palin and her family bookmarked in case you'd like to revisit them.
Cedarford is now claiming that searching the phone records of a dead terrorist, or his brother in custody, is now the same as capturing the data of every phone record in the Verizon database.
The idiot just won't stop.
fter a strike, we need to use every means we have to find their support network here and abroad and roll that up, too.
Uh, ^ that - when you have known terrorists in custody and can get warrants for their phone and other records is not this:
The National Security Agency's monitoring of Americans includes customer records from the three major phone networks as well as emails and Web searches, and the agency also has cataloged credit-card transactions, said people familiar with the agency's actions
"My bet is on Holder's folks."
Seems most likely, but if the leaker is Mohammedan, as I suspect, they could be from NSA, a paper-shooting Hasan. DOD and all the executive departments are full of Moslem Brotherhood/CAIR minders. Soldiers wouldn't do the leak, but a soldier-mole would.
Besides denying fuel to Benghazi, the "scandals," and especially this one about NSA, can have another purpose: embarrass the military, demoralize them (e.g., DNI last evening), just as continuing OEF is meant to, and does.
"... it is rash to assume that they might also be seriously interested in fighting terrorists or any other real enemies."
Not if they take Republicans and TEA Party movement as terrorists, as Drill SGT pointed out earlier that, by their own words, they do. I think when they use the word that is who only they mean.
But your point there and larger point are eloquently made. Thank you.
David R. Graham said...
Since Benghazi, each "scandal" is backfire against the main blaze, Benghazi. See Benghazi and see why all the fuss. The backfires are draining time, energy and money. They are working.
I agree ... Benghazi is to be covered up at all costs. That may earn me a tinfoil hat, so be it. Benghazi began as a lie and no truth has been told yet.
Tom Swift said ... [vis a vis Machiavelli]
The government is now run by people who think that their real job is to keep running government. The fact that this is not an American government that the Constitution or We the People recognize is irrelevant.
Agree again. I've spoken several times about the culture of lying within government, including the military. It has never ever been more rampant that it is today, where getting caught lying is no longer worrisome to government perpetrators....just tell another lie until that one is revealed then lie some more.
Forward! [we'll all be numb soon.]
I suspect the leaker is a Mohammedan mole (Moslem Brotherhood/AQ), probably in uniform at NSA, working for Jarrett.
wyo sis said...
Using Sykes 1's definition of regime, which I like, it's amazing how little the regime seems to care about showing us their hand. Every new thing that's revealed has been going on in secret for many years and now that the structure is in place what difference does it make that the subjects are informed? Learn to love your chains.
They certainly aren't transparent about the tyranny they want to impose are they.
"How were we able to get phone evidence of another Chechen not on any Russian warning - that from the phone calls preserved and their locations and times - is looking to have gone with Tamerlan Tsarnaev and slit the throats of three Americans???
Jay the Libertarian asshole extremist - That can be done with a warrant, you dope.
It was all done after the fact.
===============
Poor libertarian asshole...he forgets that the whole fucking point of data collection and preservation is so when a precious judge's warrant is issued after Muslims leave a pile of dead bodies we have the evidence preserved, not destroyed by the companies.
All so we can track years of who the Islamoids were in contact with and go from them to others in their network we had no suspicions of.
And find stuff from their records like preserved evidence placing Tamerlan and the other Chechen 20-100 yards from where 3 Americans (2 US Jews, 1 Israeli) were murdered on Sept 11, 2011.(Interesting date, huh?)
And from Todeshevs records we can look at HIS associates as well and delve their phone and internet activity and credit and debit card data.
Because those records are now preserved and not destroyed.
I detest the libertarian "slipperly slope" argument though.
Our resident national socialist dislikes libertarians? You could knock me over with a feather. :)
I doubt Verizon leaked it because it simply had too much to lose, both civilly and criminally.
While "Verizon" as a corporate entity had nothing to gain (and plenty to lose) by leaking it, the employees OF Verizon are quite another matter.
Meade: Shouldn't we narrow the search by asking: Since government can't be trusted, is there anything we would like the government to do?
I always thought that this was the idea that drove the designers of the Constitution. They had experienced the impact of unaccountable government for themselves and had attempted to established a federal government that was a weak as possible, but found that it needed to have more powers to keep the states in check from interfering with the national interests in their competition with each other, and to have powers needed on a national level, such as insuring for the common defense. The Constitution wouldn't have been ratified if they hadn't added the Bill of Rights, specifically the 9th and 10th Amendments, which should answer Meade's query.
I generally trust the military, since it knows that it's subject to civilian authorities, but I don't trust Congress much, since the press hasn't really been providing voters with the kind of information we need to keep it and the President accountable. The Press is supposed to provide a broad spectrum of political opinion and coverage, but it has become so uniformly partisan that I distrust most of its reporting, particularly regarding Barack Obama.
Given that Obama's regime is now investigating the Press on the charge of espionage, one must wonder if it realizes how good it has it. I doubt that he could have been elected without the adulation of the national media.
It's a quandary for us in the age of international terrorism that our protectors need strong investigative powers to detect those who operate in secret against us, but they've now shown that they're willing to use those powers for political ends. The answer is to elect people who respect the limits on power. I trusted George Bush with these tools, but I sure don't trust Obama or the left. They don't even really believe in democracy. Many would like to see the abolition of the state.
Meade: Shouldn't we narrow the search by asking: Since government can't be trusted, is there anything we would like the government to do?
I always thought that this was the idea that drove the designers of the Constitution. They had experienced the impact of unaccountable government for themselves and had attempted to established a federal government that was a weak as possible, but found that it needed to have more powers to keep the states in check from interfering with the national interests in their competition with each other, and to have powers needed on a national level, such as insuring for the common defense. The Constitution wouldn't have been ratified if they hadn't added the Bill of Rights, specifically the 9th and 10th Amendments, which should answer Meade's query.
I generally trust the military, since it knows that it's subject to civilian authorities, but I don't trust Congress much, since the press hasn't really been providing voters with the kind of information we need to keep it and the President accountable. The Press is supposed to provide a broad spectrum of political opinion and coverage, but it has become so uniformly partisan that I distrust most of its reporting, particularly regarding Barack Obama.
Given that Obama's regime is now investigating the Press on the charge of espionage, one must wonder if it realizes how good it has it. I doubt that he could have been elected without the adulation of the national media.
It's a quandary for us in the age of international terrorism that our protectors need strong investigative powers to detect those who operate in secret against us, but they've now shown that they're willing to use those powers for political ends. The answer is to elect people who respect the limits on power. I trusted George Bush with these tools, but I sure don't trust Obama or the left. They don't even really believe in democracy. Many would like to see the abolition of the state.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন