wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: Good luck.. But a Longshot... The government had every ability to do that prior to 9/11. They just didn't pay attention to the info they had. Now you're going to tell us that they are going to start paying attention to that data, AND all of the noise they are getting?? Collecting both international AND domestic calls adds value? And all without any probable cause or due process?
You justify your own police state. The real Americans here aren't buying into it.
cw |
|
|
|
| I agree. They fought terrorists just fine before, adding all the extra "spying" ability did nothing but start producing a huge number of false-positives and allowed our nation's top agencies to become politicized. So far I see no evidence that the extra spying assisted in any way. What I did see was a serious increase in US-loving citizens who actively protested becoming labeled terrorists. Is that what this country is coming to?
--
- "Techie" Jim |
|
| Yes it is. Therefore, please stand by patiently, for the reeducation team to arrive. We can't have people questioning the U.S. That is anti patriotic. Please proceed to line A to pick up your flag, ball cap, and a serving of freedom fries.
Btw, poor Ohio. I am from there (born and raised) but moved some months back. If you want a picture of dead, Ohio and Michigan... Sigh, maybe we should be wasting money on building stuff and creating jobs.. and not on big brother central. |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
1 edit | reply to wentlanc
Every ability except where they were prevented from sharing non-domestic information with domestic agencies.
A past failure shouldn't be used to setup a future failure.
I'm a real American, I'm here, and I'm not buying what you're selling either. Let's not forget that during WWII the democrats controlled the house, the senate and the presidency. We were more like a police state then than now.
Roosevelt with the consent of the democrat majority:
Herded Japanese Americans into concentration camps, read peoples mail, tried and executed German nationals in the US through the use of military commissions, and extinguished several hundred thousand lives through the use of the first WMD.
Correction: After assuming the presidency upon FDR's passing Truman used the first WMD. |
|
| reply to jimbo2150
said by jimbo2150:I agree. They fought terrorists just fine before, adding all the extra "spying" ability No additional SPYING ability was added. It has been there for decades. It is just that the terrorist sympathizers are now making a crusade about getting rid of it.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to jimbo2150
said by jimbo2150:adding all the extra "spying" ability did nothing This is a classic case of backseat driving. You don't know that it did nothing. If their aggregation of data turns up a suspect, they don't announce it in the paper. They just use the information to focus traditional surveillance resources. If they find something, they may just deport the individual instead of prosecute.
I'm personally aware of someone here on a green card who left the country on vacation, and was unable to return due to "problems with his immigration papers. It didn't surprise me because he was supportive of Osama, Hamas, etc.
Another guy was kicked out of the country. He went to Australia and was deported to his home country (Saudi Arabia). He was put in prison.
Mark |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | said by fAcEtIOUs:No additional SPYING ability was added. It has been there for decades. It is just that the terrorist sympathizers are now making a crusade about getting rid of it. said by amigo_boy:This is a classic case of backseat driving. You don't know that it did nothing. If their aggregation of data turns up a suspect, they don't announce it in the paper. They just use the information to focus traditional surveillance resources. If they find something, they may just deport the individual instead of prosecute. One says no additional spying capabilities were added, the other argues that we cannot confirm that the additional spying has NOT turned up leads... Come on guys. Talk to each other before you post. Were additional abilities added AFTER 9/11 or not?
cw |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to wentlanc
Re: Good luck.. But a Longshot... said by wentlanc:One says no additional spying capabilities were added, the other argues that we cannot confirm that the additional spying has NOT turned up leads... I agree with TK. Nothing was added. 18 USC 2511 existed for years.
All we know is that it was exercised between 9/11/2001 and Jan/??/2007 (the date range which so-called immunity applies). We don't know how effective it was because it wasn't used as the basis of prosecution. Just the basis to obtain probable cause in order to direct traditional surveillance. And, since the terror they sought to prevent had direct correlation to immigrants, it's entirely credible that the result of traditional surveillance would be quite expulsion due to inexplicable "problems" with a person's application for residence.
Mark |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | reply to lesopp
Politicize much?
So the failure was not lack of ability to get the data, but failure for agencies to communicate to each other. How is adding the ability to listen to every conversation both foreign and domestic, and without oversight or warrants going to help government agencies communicate better? Oh yeah, it won't.
I don't pick labels. Democrat, Republican, Independent, they are all Americans, and all are paid to work in the rest of our best interests. The failure was our government's ability to communicate to itself, not their ability to get the data they needed.
cw |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | reply to amigo_boy
If it was lawful, then why do they need immunity?
cw |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
Probably cause, witch hunt, what's the difference. Let me walk into your house, look around, and find probably cause to arrest you on anything. I'm sure I could find SOMETHING illegal you are doing at any given point, and stir up dirt. Give me a break. We're witch hunting, spying on soldiers, aid groups, activists, etc. We're big brother central and we are trying to hide the program behind immunity now. Get over your blind faith for everything stupid Amigo. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to wentlanc
said by wentlanc:If it was lawful, then why do they need immunity? Because personal-injury lawsuits can take years and billions of $$$ to conclude.
It wasn't really "immunity." It was just a fast-track of the discovery process which was already implied by 18 USC 2511.
That's why I call it "so-called immunity." It didn't grant the telcos anything they weren't already granted by 18 USC 2511. It even referred to 2511. And, it said telcos were only immune from prosecution if they could prove they received certification from the executive branch a warrant was not necessary (the exact requirement of 2511).
All the telcos received was a fast track to that judicial finding of whether they indeed received that certification. We know they did. So, it was just a formality to keep the details out of the public eye. The civil court judge ruled that the information had to be public because the government had discussed their data-mining operation publicly, and therefore had no credible argument that it would harm national security.
Congress essentially legislatively over ruled that trial judge's decision. Beyond that, there was nothing new in the so-called immunity deal.
Mark |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | Why do they need to keep the details private? This should be printed for every customer to understand how their privacy, or lack thereof, will be handled by a company. Seems like they did not want people to know what was happening to their calls and other data.... People with something to hide, will often try to hide it.
cw |
|
 hpguruCurb Your DogmaPremium
join:2002-04-12 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:...the terrorist sympathizers... You should refrain from using such inflammatory language as "terrorist sympathizers" to describe liberals. After all, terrorists are right-wingers, terrorists are conservative and terrorists are fundamentalists. They'd make great republicans I think because republicans and terrorists share a common foe in atheistic/humanistic Liberals. Remember: The enemy of your enemy is your friend."  Wasn't the late great Ronald Reagan a terrorist sympathizer when he assisted Osama & Co. during the Afghan/Russian war? He even praised them as "Freedom Fighters".
Republicans and terrorists: Birds of a feather. Allies in the art of governance by Fear.
--
Christianity is harmful to children.
Beware of those whose banner of worship is a symbol of death.
|
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to wentlanc
said by wentlanc:Why do they need to keep the details private? This should be printed for every customer to understand I believe it was the government who wanted to keep it secret due to national security reasons. Not the telcos.
I don't know why the government felt there was a national security issue involved. But, whether there should be is a different argument. It's not about whether the executive branch has always had this power. Nor whether Congress did anything drastic with so-called "immunity."
Mark |
|
wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | "National security reasons" Is now the defacto standard speak for "trust us... we promise we won't screw you in the ass". While I understand that spying and surveillance are necessary evils, the extent of which they have done it is potentially unconstitutional. If that is in question, they should be FORCED to provide the details to be scrutinized. Maybe not to the entire world, but there needs to be some investigation and oversight. |
|
Talis
join:2001-06-21
Houston, TX | reply to hpguru
said by hpguru:said by fAcEtIOUs:...the terrorist sympathizers... You should refrain from using such inflammatory language as "terrorist sympathizers" to describe liberals. Apparently you've never read one of TK's posts before. He is mostly all about inflammatory language. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to wentlanc
Re: Good luck.. But a Longshot... said by wentlanc:While I understand that spying and surveillance are necessary evils, the extent of which they have done it is potentially unconstitutional. If that is in question, they should be FORCED to provide the details I understand. However, realistically, the so-called "immunity" only applies to a specific period of time. FISA was amended to better accommodate the Executive branch's activities. The fact that the law was amended tends to support the belief that the law was lacking, and the Executive branch's actions were justified considering the circumstances.
We've had other examples like this. Such as Roosevelt violating the Neutrality Act when he transferred ships to Britain in return for bases. A few months later Congress amended the law with the Lend-Lease act to make Roosevelt's actions legal.
Mark |
|
