Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Telcos Lobby Congress For Warrantless Surveillance Immunity » First Admendment Right
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Telcos Deserve Immunity »
AuthorAll Replies


Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA

reply to TransitMan
Re: First Admendment Right

The article is about warrantless wiretaps, and you think this is a FIRST Amendment issue? I weep for our (clearly underfunded) schools.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?


karlmarx

join:2006-09-18
iraq
·Fairpoint Communic..

Umm, NO!
Verizon claimed it was a first amendment right, the people who are suing are correct in that it was a 4th amendment violation. You should read it..

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Verizon and the others ILLEGALLY provided data and communications to the government WITHOUT a WARRANT. What part of 'unreasonable searches' and 'but upon probable cause' don't you understand. I'll summarize it for you. The government has NO RIGHT to monitor you UNLESS they have SPECIFIC information that you are engaged in criminal activity. That's why we have the justice department, to put a muzzel on 'heil bush', who quoted the bill of rights as 'just a piece of paper'.

The problem is that these companies KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY violated ALL our rights. They should be sued into oblivion.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs.

jimbo2150

join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH

said by karlmarx See Profile :

Umm, NO! Verizon claimed it was a first amendment right, the people who are suing are correct in that it was a 4th amendment violation. You should read it..
I agree, giving away customers' personal data is not protected by the First Amendment! It is not freedom of speech nor press. It does, however, violate their customers right to privacy (Fourth Amendment) which is something the bush administration and numerous major corporations have been doing lately! Now they just want immunity from the law? I'm rather appauled by this.
Forums » Telcos Lobby Congress For Warrantless Surveillance ImmunityTelcos Deserve Immunity »


Wednesday, 09-Dec 23:12:40 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [200] Sprint Sued For Distracted Driving Death
· [107] AT&T Launching New 24 Mbps U-Verse Tier
· [82] 3G Network Test Says AT&T Is Tops
· [72] Mediacom Unveils 105 Mbps Pricing
· [66] Sprint Poised For A Turnaround?
· [64] WPA Cracker: Test WPA-PSK Networks In 20 Minutes
· [60] AT&T Hints At Usage-Based iPhone Data Pricing
· [51] The Future Of Wi-Fi Is Bright
· [47] Site Leaks Yahoo, Verizon Fed Data Share Pricing
· [44] Microwaving Your Innards Is Not 'Extreme'
Most people now reading
· Adobe Flash Player version 10.0.42.34 [Security]
· ICC Strats??? [World of Warcraft]
· Hot Girl falls face first down stairs [56k Lookout (Broadband Heavy)]
· ICC strats [World of Warcraft]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Man Downloads Child Porn "Accidentally," Faces 20 Years [Security]
· Is sleeping similar to being dead? [General Questions]
· RG Firmware update to VDSL2 this morning [AT&T U-verse]
· Cross Server Dungeon Experience [World of Warcraft]