 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 | AT&T being good citizen after 9/11 attacks I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. |
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | reply to Linklist
Re: AT&T being good citizen after 9/11 attacks said by Linklist:I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. Here, let me fix this for you:I do not believe in the rule of law |
|
 dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO
kudos:2 | reply to Linklist
I remember when AT&T actually stood up for its customers rights. I remember when AT&T followed the letter of the law instead of rolling over when ever the govt. asked. |
|
|
|
| reply to Anon
Re: AT&T being good citizen after 9/11 attacks said by Jim Kirk:said by Linklist:I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. In many cases the FBI never got subpoenas, and therefore broke the law. You are trolling. What required the FBI to get supoeneas? Are you ignoring the role of 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(a)(ii)(B)?
Also, don't forget 18 U.S.C. 2702(a)(3) & (c). It recognizes telcos legitimate participation with law enforcement due to exigent circumstances.
And, that law was even broadened by the Patriot Act. Instead of a "reasonable belief" in "imminent danger," it was changed to merely "good faith belief" in danger (not imminent.).
That and how 2511 was used as the basis of so-called "immunity" goes a long way to prove that the Executive branch was acting judiciously during that period between 9/11 and amendment of FISA via the Patriot Act.
If the Executive wasn't, those laws wouldn't have been expanded and used the way they were.
Mark |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: AT&T being good citizen after 9/11 attacks said by Linklist:I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. I see an organization that was determined to help itself to heaps of taxpayer money (you know they were paid for this, don't you?)
I also see someone who can't RTFA. |
|
1 edit | reply to dib22
said by dib22:I remember when AT&T actually stood up for its customers rights. I remember when AT&T followed the letter of the law instead of rolling over when ever the govt. asked. Really? When was that? |
|
 NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | reply to Linklist
Are you also OK with the supposed paperwork not even existing?
It's not a matter of not dotting i's and crossing t's in this case. It's a matter of outright violation of the law. Those agents who played a role in this should find themselves in prison wearing some black and white stripes. And hopefully they will be readily identified and introduced to all the other prisoners as FBI agents too.
And their cronies at AT&T, as well as those from the Bush administration who helped and those from the Obama administration who are still helping, should find themselves sitting in jail for this as well. Perhaps if consequences for breaking the law were enforced there would be less lawbreaking.
--
Ted Kennedy is dead, and now so are his dreams of an impoverished enslaved America beholden to its government. Congratulations to Scott Brown for keeping the American Dream alive! |
|
| reply to dib22
said by dib22:I remember when AT&T followed the letter of the law instead of rolling over when ever the govt. asked. But, they did follow the law.
1. The Executive Branch possesses an inherent power of surveillance.
2. The Legislative Branch is co-equal to the Executive. It cannot legislate away the Executive's power. It can only create a framework (FISA) for the Executive to operate within, without impeding the Executive's power.
3. The Executive retains the power to conduct surveillance which the framework (FISA) does not accommodate.
4. 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(a)(ii)(B) is a recognition of that power, and how FISA wasn't intended to be everything.
5. That law was the basis of so-called immunity. Even if there had been any doubt about Congress's intent concerning that law, such doubts were eliminated when Congress said telcos were immune from prosecution if they adhered to that law (only between 9/11 and passage of the Patriot Act to better provide for new circumstances).
If you don't like the law, then you should work to get it repealed. If you don't like that the balance of powers between the Executive and Legislative is imperfect, you should work to call a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the Constitution.
All I hear are people complaining that, essentially, an imperfect system *worked*.
Mark |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | reply to Jim Kirk
In a drug induced coma fantasy. |
|
 FBGuyPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
 ·Comcast
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by morbo:In a drug induced coma fantasy. in an episode of LOST
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. and what happens when were all terrorists
then what |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:I just see an organization that was determined to help the US defend itself against terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. And if all the paperwork was sometimes delayed and not all the i's dotted and t's crossed, I am ok with that. I guess you'd be ok with being falsely accused, convicted, and possibly executed based on sloppy police work, lost paperwork, 'little white lies' between LEO's and prosecutors, and who know what else in the way of illegal and shoddy adherence to the law.
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out.
Feel free to add your own verse. |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to NOVA_Guy
said by NOVA_Guy:Those agents who played a role in this should find themselves in prison wearing some black and white stripes. And hopefully they will be readily identified and introduced to all the other prisoners as FBI agents too. So, for trying to protect you and other US citizens from evil terrorists, you feel they should be sent to prison, outed to other prisoners, and maybe be murdered. Is that your idea of justice?
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Linklist
Re: AT&T being good citizen after 9/11 attacks said by Linklist:So, for trying to protect you and other US citizens from evil terrorists, you feel they should be sent to prison, outed to other prisoners, and maybe be murdered. Is that your idea of justice? no, they should be sent to prison for breaking the law.
do you even believe in the rule of law? or just law for the little people, not corporations?
so if I robbed a bank and donated the money to charity, that would be OK? It sounds like you are saying the ends justify the means and the law doesn't matter. |
|
| reply to amigo_boy
I bet you can recite that quote forward and backwards WHILE under the influence.
Since you skirted my question the last time (Here) lets ask it again and this time WITHOUT you asking me a question as a response.
said by Skippy25:So by your train of thought what was the FISA court setup for? Sounds like everything was in place and there was no need for this court and yet it was setup for........... ? |
|
| reply to Linklist
No, for violating the laws that they are suppose to be following.
So you don't mind if all law enforcement officials dont follow the law as long as it is to protect us right? Screw Miranda, burden of proof, and any other little inconvenient technicality of law. It's for your protection.
Sometimes you simply amaze me at the shear stupidity in your comments. Do you honestly think before you post? |
|
