http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/09/2121225

This makes me sick.

If you are not pissed off, you are not paying attention

Well, it sounds like the law was not followed by the whistle-blowers and their co-workers who were sharing the intercepts they were assigned, but I don't think even you would suggest that NSA policy allows for people to pass around juicy bits just for laughs.

So why do you (or more precisely, the ABC report) suggest that they have implemented an illegal program? The monitoring of government employees is probably allowed, and there was no reason given to suggest that legal proceedures were not followed for the rest.

If you want to argue instead that it is a waste of money, fine. But that's a discussion about data mining and the value of archiving. If you are going to delete every transcript that doesn't appear to mention terrosism in an obvious way up front, then you probably won't go far in finding any threats. Spies and terrorists are a little cleverer than that. And you certainly won't be able to go back over the data on an individual later should there be reason for an after-the-fact investigation.

If you want instead to argue that the net is too wide, employees of NGO's would never be infiltrated by terrorist sympathizers, and their employees should therefore be exempt from any kind of intelligence investigation, that is yet another discussion. But it hardly makes it illegal as long as the approvals are obtained.

Privacy is overrated. Hey, if you have nothing to hide........

It's just not legal to do that type of surveillance, period.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_...09----000-.html

Bush broke the law, plain and simple.

... let there exist some corrupt goverment official or law enforcement officer who will abuse these surveillance abilities to film your wife naked in the shower legally?

No really, finish the sentance.

... let there exist a president to has full surveillance ability and turns the whole country into slaves and no one can coordinate or rise up to stop him because he's got wiretaps on every phone and in every meeting hall?

Read your own link. Are you saying FISA is not authorization, or that you have reason to believe that it was not followed? You can say Bush broke the law all you like. Heck, throw in Pelosi and Obama and McCain too - they all reauthorized FISA. But untill there is reason to believe that it was not followed, and not followed as a matter of policy, you've got nothing.

Maybe that's what this country needs. Someone who will watch over us. Look at the mess we are in now. Don't you think if the President had REAL power, we wouldn't be in this mess? I know I would sleep much better if I knew President Bush, McCain or Obama was there tucking me in every night. Wouldn't you.

Unless your doing something you shouldn't be doing.

0_o

Are you to say that leaders are always very smart and always know what is good, and never become corrupt or hateful? Is that what I'm reading?

This is a joke right? Parodying a Liberal? Poking fun at the OP?

I think he's serious.

Wait? Are you saying liberals (and I'm not one and hate them), like surveillance? Cuz I could swear they are the ones trying to get rid of GW's patriot act.

What do you mean by "corrupt" ? That's an awful strong word to be just throwing out there. I trust them, so should you.

Liberals are historically the big government types. I thought that was maybe his approach. He could simply be an idiot.

Do you not understand the point of democracy? Do you not understand why people left England and Europe and came over here to start a new country where power was balanced and no one man could make every decision?

It's because those people realized that no one man could be trusted. No one man should be given so much power over other and be beyond reproach. No one man in power should go unquestioned and no such made should be given such trust.

I do not trust them, not McCain not Obama, not Bush, not Marting Luther King Jr. not Abe Lincoln... none of them. Any man can change at any point. None with that amount of power is to be fully trusted ever.

Democracy, and the reason why the United States of America is so great. Go read a damn history book.

You make too many generalizations on liberals. Giving health care to those that can't pay for it is a heck of a lot different than a video camera in my living room being watched by the local FBI.

What's with the name calling? Let's have a civil discussion. For the record, I have NOT choosen a candidate yet. With the way the world has become, could you actually trust yourself to make the right decisions that are best for you and your family, when you don't even know all that's going on in the world that may or may not effect you.

How can you make the right decisions when you don't have all of the information?

So liberals only want big government for health care? Screw it, it isn't like the Republicans are conservative nowadays. I guess it is abortion (will not be resolved in my lifetime in all likelihood), gay marriage (will not be resolved in my lifetime in all likelihood), GWOT (will not be resolved in my lifetime in all likelihood), and the economy. Sadly, it seems the latter will also not be resolved in my lifetime in all likelihood.

It is PPP, don't take insults personally. Lie down with bitches and you get crabs...or something like that.

IMO either candidate is the wrong choice.

Ooops I missed this post, sorry.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intel...urveillance_Act

ABC and the people testifying are saying this was U.S. citizens communicating with other U.S. citizens, having nothing to do with foreign powers.

Yes, and I hate Obama and McCain and all of them for reactivating FISA. That really pisses me off.

oh golly. I just saw this, .. I'm in no mood to do such reading.. but I bet this has plenty of info in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantle...nce_controversy

Gotcha.

I obviously do not want the gov't in my living room. I also don't wan't a bunch of greedy "capatilists" ruining this great country. I guess to much of anything is not good.

How does ABC know they have nothing to do with a foreign power? Do they know something we don't? From your link:



It asks that probable cause be presented to the court before surveillance is allowed. Common sense says that operators would have nothing to do with the court approvals, common sense says that the operators know nothing about whatever may be known or suspected through other means (they are just linguists and transcribers doing high volume work), and common sense says that even if the target is indeed an agent of a foreign power, 99.99% of their calls would be seemingly irrelevant chit-chat. That's the nature of surveillance.

Don't get me wrong - I have no idea what's going on other than the ABC report, and for all I know they may be trashing FISA. But there is absolutely nothing presented that say's that they are.

FISA is authorization, but the White House is on record saying that they didn't get and don't need FISA approval.

The logic is that the domestic laws against wiretapping are just that: domestic. There is no law that prohibits signals intercepts outside the boundaries of the US...so that if any call has either end in a foreign nation, that end of the call (and thus the whole call) can legally be monitored.

Logical? Sure. Splitting hairs? Absolutely. Legal? Probably not...it's certainly a sound argument, but it's fundamentally an end-run around the Fourth Amendment, trying to qualify a protection that as stated is absolute ("The right of the people to be secure...shall not be infringed.")

Clinton started this crap and Bush has magnified this crap into flaming bullsh*t.

I think it started in the late 60's.

Not that I don't hate both Bush and Clinton with every fiber of my being.

So you like Reagan? Bush I?

Reagan was the last president I liked.

I can see that. He seems to have had good people working for him.

This could be the most friendly and agreeable anyone's ever been with me on PPP.

I usually only hack on the big names. Even then it is more a sense of perversity (definitions 1-3) as they did the same to me.