Originally posted by: daniel49
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: daniel49
Originally posted by: techs
That law is an act "to make clear a telecommunications carrier's duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for law enforcement purposes, and for other purposes." The act made clear that a court order isn't the only lawful way of obtaining call information, saying, "A telecommunications carrier shall ensure that any interception of communications or access to call-identifying information effected within its switching premises can be activated only in accordance with a court order or other lawful authorization."
That is exactly the point. It is UNLAWFUL for the government to violate the Constitution. Which is what Bush did.
The idea that a law passed under Clinton can allow a violation of the Constitution is ludicrous. Only a Constitutional Amendment can do that.
And the idea that a "court order" isn't the only lawful way to get this info, as the article states, may mean things like a Presidentially signed, NSA drafted letter. Which has always meant a single individual or small group of individuals whose records are being requested or the National Security Act that allows getting this info for up to a short time until a court order can be gotten. These acts have been held to be Constitutional by the courts because they are urgent and limited.
Your post is completely erroneous in the criticizing the media on this. Many Republicans and Democrats and Constitutional scholars have called what Bush did outrageous and illegal. In fact outside of the Bush administration there haven't been many supporters.
Lastly, the whole idea that if it ok for one person than we can do it to everyone is dangerous. An example would be if we can torture suspects in emergency situations to get information than we can just torture everyone to get information.
When the Nazis came to get my grandparents they had no trouble finding them. Seems the Nazis has spent the last few years finding out everything about everyone in Germany. The phone company in Germany was an excellent source. Of course the Nazis justified it with the same rationale as the Bushies. Enemies of the state have no rights. How can it be the the USA is doing what the Nazis did?
and from Wiki on the New York Sun:
The paper's owners include Hollinger International, the company once led by Conrad Black until his arrest warrant following numerous indictments by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. Other Sun owners are a group of New York City businessmen, as well as the paper's two founding editors. The paper's staff include many well-known political conservatives. Major backers of the paper include Bruce Kovner, a billionaire financier who is also a backer of the neoconservative Manhattan Institute and American Enterprise Institute, as well as Roger Hertog, a trustee of the American Enterprise Institute, which is associated with the Project for the New American Century.
Not a newspaper but a PROPAGANDA source itself!!!
section 103(a)2. of the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Acts specifically states a court order or other
lawful authorization
My guess is that intercepting communication of an enemy hell bent on destruction of the United States would fall under National Security that would clearly give voice to the words
other Lawful Authorization
Since security of the US is clearly a Govermental mandate.
Now we can certainly argue that this is a bad law, poorly worded and without proper safeguards, but please can we give the full story USA today?
And that is that this phoney outrage of Democratic senators is in response to something thier party made law 12 years ago.
I will be equally interested in seeing your blow by blow breakdown of the New York Times owners and staff:Q must be a few skeletons in that crew.
Many republicans and democrats are outraged about many things in front of the camera..take it with the grain of salt.
They are all outraged about our borders as well as they sit there and do nothing, except keep mexico informed of where minutemen are.
in conclusion you sound pretty worked up about it. Perhaps putting more safeguards in the law is what is needed? I dunno. I do know we can not defeat an enemy if our attemps at subtrafuge are constantly splattered all over the National Headlines in an attempt to get more Democrats in congress?
My guess is that intercepting communication of an enemy hell bent on destruction of the United States would fall under National Security that would clearly give voice to the words other Lawful Authorization
You guessed wrong. There are lawful means to get this info but the idea you are proposing you can just get them whenever you want is not supported. And the government is getting everyones records. Getting everyones phone records has nothing to do with catching terrorists.
I do know we can not defeat an enemy if our attemps at subtrafuge are constantly splattered all over the National Headlines in an attempt to get more Democrats in congress?
You have completely missed the point. Getting EVERYONES phone records is a ridiculous way to try and "defeat" and "enemy". This is just snooping. If the government has the least amount of evidence that someones planning an attack they can easily get that persons and any person they have been in touch withs phone records.
The government is getting EVERYONES phone records. Think of the abuse this can cause.
It is literally spying on every US citizen, without ANY cause, and is EXACTLY what the Nazis and Communists did and do to subjucate their people.
I think you are falling prey a little to the media hype.
Here are the facts as we know them:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12734870/
USA Today reported Thursday that the National Security Agency has been building up the database using records provided by three major phone companies ? AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and BellSouth Corp. ? but that the program ?does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations.?
Instead it documents who talks to whom in personal and business calls, whether local or long distance, by tracking which
numbers are called, the newspaper said.
....The NSA has ?access to records of billions of domestic calls,? USA Today said. Although customers?
names and addresses are not being handed over, ?the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information,? it said (a strict safeguard would be needed here, in my opinion)
And this would be done when they saw suspicious activity. We know that the 911 perpatrators communicated with each other while in this country. In planning the murder of thousands of people at the world trade center.
So just for the sake of argument, lets sat muhammed's number was 555-4567.
Would it not be nice to know everyone that Muhammed called while he was here?
At that point I am assuming that a court order would be obtained to actually get the conversations and see what was said to Muhammed pals.
Now if my number was in there.....(which its not, as I use Qwest) I don't feel real worried that I called my kids 8 times this month, my mother twice, and the local autoparts store to see if they had a thingamabob for a Ford.
As was already stated by someone else we are all now already in so many databases of private buisness..that really is more worrisome then this in my opinion.
Facebook
Twitter