Page 10 of 28 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141520 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 546
  1. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #181  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Regardless, there is no reason not to go through the FISA courts.
    Unless there is no requirement to go through the FISA courts. Why get more departments involved then needed? It has been stated and verifed through the court systems that the president does not need FISA approval to gather intelligence data.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  2. #182  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Unless there is no requirement to go through the FISA courts. Why get more departments involved then needed? It has been stated and verifed through the court systems that the president does not need FISA approval to gather intelligence data.
    I thought the key word was 'foreign' intelligence data.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #183  
    Clarification: If I thought the NSA actually WAS wiretapping at random, without cause, 'average joe' Americans, e.g., fishing for trouble, I'd have major heartburn.
  4. #184  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Sure they do, at least I'd certainly hope that they'd have that capability. But try this reasoning... doesn't it make sense to focus that capability on those that are possibly plotting to do us serious damage? International phone calls to/from jihad headquarters are what some of us would call 'indicators', after all.
    I wouldnt have a problem if the information gathered was from terrorists to terrorists. The risk here is that 'innocent' people will get swept up through these intelligence procedures. Part of the rationale for getting a warrant is that you have to be able to legally justify it to a federal judge.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  5. #185  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Clarification: If I thought the NSA actually WAS wiretapping at random, without cause, 'average joe' Americans, e.g., fishing for trouble, I'd have major heartburn.
    I don't think it's completely random, but the risk that innocent people will be surveillanced may be increased without having to get a warrant first.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  6. #186  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    According to the New York Times, the federal government was able to disrupt a terror plot aimed at the Brooklyn Bridge by using information gleaned from intercepted phone calls that originated in the United States.
    I don't think there are too many people here that would argue that this method is not effective in gathering important intel...just that we could still do it and get a warrant.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  7. #187  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Unless there is no requirement to go through the FISA courts. Why get more departments involved then needed? It has been stated and verifed through the court systems that the president does not need FISA approval to gather intelligence data.
    For awhile, I have been leaning towards the tap-now...get the warrant from FISA afterwards as a means of appeasing those who think the President doesn't already have the authority to gather international calls.

    (Aside: if you're wondering what constitutes an international phone call, ask your cell phone provider... I think we all know this definition.)

    Let's say that the tap goes through right now and then they go to the FISA court for a warrant afterwards. Almost all of them have been approved to date (so I read). Let's say that, this time, the warrant is not approved. If the goal was a criminal prosecution, the NSA wouldn't be able to use any of the evidence collected. If the goal is military action to stop impending terrorist activity, what does a warrant really mean?

    So, starting at the end and working backward... If the NSA isn't looking to use the info for prosecutions, getting a warrant would be an unnecessary, administrative step. If they might use the info for legal prosecution (known US Citizen), a warrant after the fact would be useful and easy to get.

    Neither scenario has anything to do with anyone's civil liberties, only legal protection from improperly gained evidence. The eavesdropping WILL happen either way.

    Where's the argument here?
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
  8. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #188  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I thought the key word was 'foreign' intelligence data.
    OK Foreign intellgence data. That is what they are doing, remember the key part is international (more than one country) yes the call may originate in the US but it is going outside the US so it is no longer domestic, or it may originate outside the US and be made to the US but it is still international (foreign). They are targeting KNOWN terror suspects.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  9. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #189  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I don't think it's completely random, but the risk that innocent people will be surveillanced may be increased without having to get a warrant first.
    Do you think one more person knowing the data would really change the possibility of a random innocent person being monitored? The system looks for key words, and contact information.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #190  
    With all due respect, but did you miss the gaping hole in Manhattan a few years back? Nobody is surveilling without due cause. It's called 'war'. This is a far cry from the Japanese American internment camps. And the Supreme Court supported FDR's authority to implement them.
  11.    #191  
    I disagree. When the media and libs make the issue that Bush is acting as a King, a liar, etc. the focus is not on the good these wiretaps has been, the focus is on Bush the Horrible. I don't pretend to know the law, but it sure seems that the legality has yet to be decided. Again, this is all political, trash anything Republican.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I don't think there are too many people here that would argue that this method is not effective in gathering important intel...just that we could still do it and get a warrant.
  12. #192  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I don't think it's completely random, but the risk that innocent people will be surveillanced may be increased without having to get a warrant first.

    I got nothing to hide.

    surveillance me.

    If it means that someone that is planning to do something bad is stopped, do it.
    Unlocked -1.51---117-CNG
    Handspring Deluxe w/phone->Treo 180->Treo 650
  13. #193  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I stand corrected. Not only did Clinton believe he had the authority, he had Aldrich Ames' (a US citizen on US soil) door kicked in so a warrantless search could be conducted. I'll also remind everyone that Clinton did this during peacetime.
    I am not sure that this is completely true. I have searched a little on google for this and here is what I found:
    Thanks to a warrant authorized by Attorney General Janet Reno, a team of agents from the sprawling National Security Agency had permission to enter the Ames home in Arlington, Virginia. There was only one minor problem. The attorney general of the United States does not have the authority to order a warrantless physical search of a citizen's home, argued Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University NationalLaw Center. “The Aldrich Ames search, in my view, was obviously and egregiously unconstitutional.” Other civil liberties lawyers agree with this evaluation, and the Justice Department itself was concerned enough about the question to refer to this problem when it negotiated a deal with Ames in order to avoid trial. Now with FISA amended via EO 12949 it is legal for the Attorney General to order searches and seizures of anyone, anytime in the name of National Security.
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Can we now please agree that Bush is not ursurping the Constitution, at least no more than previous administrations.
    That still doesn't make it ok IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    He is clearly acting within powers he and previous administrations believe lie in the Presidency.
    I think the difference now though is that Pres. Bush has done away with FISA.
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Can anyone now believe the vocal Democrats really have the best interest of the nation in mind when they criticise Bush and hint at possible "impeachable offenses"? Or did we impeach Clinton for the wrong crimes?
    Pres. Clinton is just a different thread all together. Impeachment talk isn't what we need, we need debate on this issue. More debate!
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  14. #194  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    fn hearings. Senators will hold hearings on anything. The hearings should be to find out who leaked to the NY Times and may cause the lack of preventing another horrible event.
    Hearings? I suppose, but can't we logically infer that Rockefeller is the leaker (or at least one of them)?

    Follow me: The NYT writes a story on the 15th with the following quote:
    "According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee ..."
    On the 19th Rockefeller releases his CYA letter he claims was sealed and under lock and key in the offices of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He goes on to claim that he couldn't speak to anyone - not even other Senators about his reservations.

    So how could the Times know about his feelings when they wrote their story unless Rockefeller himself was the source?
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  15. #195  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    OK Foreign intellgence data. That is what they are doing, remember the key part is international (more than one country) yes the call may originate in the US but it is going outside the US so it is no longer domestic, or it may originate outside the US and be made to the US but it is still international (foreign). They are targeting KNOWN terror suspects.
    I am not saying that this guy was a result of FISA (or lack of following FISA) but this is the type of scenario where someone would be surveillanced and possibly prosecuted. link

    Im sure the federal government thought Mr. Al-Arian was a 'known' terrorist too.

    (Just so no one is confused...I just like making the counter argument and playing devil's advocate. IMO I think if this is ever challenged, the Roberts court would probably uphold Pres. Bush's decision. )
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  16. #196  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I think the difference now though is that Pres. Bush has done away with FISA.
    You exaggerate. He hasn't "done away" with FISA. He's gone around it in one specific set of circumstances. It is equally arguable that FISA itself is an unconstitutional overreach into the power of the Executive branch. I'd like to see the Supreme Court resolve the issue. That is after all why we have a Supreme Court (rather than deciding who can play on the PGA tour, for example).
    Impeachment talk isn't what we need, we need debate on this issue. More debate!
    Absolutely. But as long as the President's detractors continue to make outrageous charges you will not get such a debate (in the public, anyway).
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  17. #197  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Do you think one more person knowing the data would really change the possibility of a random innocent person being monitored? The system looks for key words, and contact information.
    I was referring to the human decision on whether to order the wiretapping....not the program that the NSA uses to automatically pick up calls.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. #198  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    That still doesn't make it ok IMO.
    But it should help to bring the targetted attacks into perspective.
  19. #199  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    With all due respect, but did you miss the gaping hole in Manhattan a few years back?
    You don't have to bust out the 9/11 attack on me...Im fully capable of understanding what committed terrorists can do. (But that type of 'scare' tactic is used an awful lot in the political arena.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Nobody is surveilling without due cause.
    If there really is due cause, why not get the warrant or get it after the fact?

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    It's called 'war'.
    Yes, the Pres. has the authority to prosecute the war but that isn't a blank check to *potentially ignore the constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    This is a far cry from the Japanese American internment camps. And the Supreme Court supported FDR's authority to implement them.
    You do realize that as a nation, we appologized and paid reparations for our crimes against them (I think $20,000 per person.) Yes, the S.C. did uphold that decision, but it has been severely criticized by many in the legal field.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  20. #200  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I am not saying that this guy was a result of FISA (or lack of following FISA) but this is the type of scenario where someone would be surveillanced and possibly prosecuted. link

    Im sure the federal government thought Mr. Al-Arian was a 'known' terrorist too.
    Uh... and despite being a racist jag he was acquitted. So the system works, apparently.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...

Posting Permissions