Page 16 of 28 FirstFirst ... 6111213141516171819202126 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 546
  1. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #301  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I may be misreading your article but I don't see where it says every President has authorized warrantless wiretapping.

    Have physical searches been done for foreign intelligence without a warrant...yes. Is it constitutional...not sure. The Ames case never went to trial and its argued that the govt wanted a plea agreement so it would not be challenged in court.

    And FISA was created for "electronic surveillance in most foreign intelligence cases."

    The beginning of the article states: My point is that I am not sure how many Presidents have allowed warrantless wiretaps...but AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK, $Pres$. $Bush$ $is$ $the$ $first$ $since$ $FISA$ $was$ $created$.
    The next line in the article states

    Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick said in 1994 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
    That same authority, she added, pertains to electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.


    and here is info from the arter administartion
    “Thank you Jimmy Carter”--Carter Agrees With Bush Spying
    The New York Times ^ | November 8, 1980 | Robert Pear


    Posted on 12/23/2005 11:23:24 AM PST by SBD1


    U.S.OFFICIALS DEFINE POLICY ON SEARCHES; Lawyers Assert President Still Has 'Inherent Authority' to Order Entries Without Warrants 'Concurrent Jurisdiction' 1978 Executive Order Cited No 'Foreign Connections' Found By ROBERT PEAR Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 9, 1980. pg. 35, 1 pgs

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 8--Justice Department lawyers say that the President still has the "inherent authority" to order searches without warrants to collect foreign intelligence within the United States, despite the criminal conviction this week of two former officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who said they had approved such searches in 1972 and 1973.

    An executive order issued by President Carter in January 1978 established the standard that governs the use of searches for intelligence purposes today. Such searches, it said, ‘’shall not be undertaken against a United States person without a judicial warrant, unless the President has authorized the type of activity involved and the Attorney General has both approved the particular activity and determined that there is probable cause to believe that the United States person is an agent of a foreign power.'’

    I am sure anyone can google and find instances for Reagen and Bush I, I do not have time this morning. All I am saying is that this is not new, is it right, maybe maybe not, but it is not new.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #302  
    Update:


    Source: WaPo

    NSA Web Site Places 'Cookies' on Computers

    By ANICK JESDANUN
    The Associated Press
    Thursday, December 29, 2005; 7:24 AM

    NEW YORK -- The National Security Agency's Internet site has been placing files on visitors' computers that can track their Web surfing activity despite strict federal rules banning most of them.

    These files, known as "cookies," disappeared after a privacy activist complained and The Associated Press made inquiries this week, and agency officials acknowledged Wednesday they had made a mistake. Nonetheless, the issue raises questions about privacy at a spy agency already on the defensive amid reports of a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States.

    "Considering the surveillance power the NSA has, cookies are not exactly a major concern," said Ari Schwartz, associate director at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy advocacy group in Washington, D.C. "But it does show a general lack of understanding about privacy rules when they are not even following the government's very basic rules for Web privacy."

    Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary, permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies already on.

    -snip-
  3. #303  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Update:
    NSA Web Site Places 'Cookies' on Computers
    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...
  4.    #304  
    big deal, so does every website. Just went to their website and they no longer are doing it. But, someone should sue them and make this into congressional hearings.

    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Update:
  5. #305  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    big deal, so does every website.
    I just checked my temp internet files... TreoCentral sets a persistent cookie as well. Should I be worried?
    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...
  6. #306  
    It looks as if the story in question does not understand persistent and yemp cookies nor the gov't privacy recommendations regarding them.

    The gov't does not disallow the use of persistant cookies but does recommend encrypting any personal information persisted in that cookie. Lazy websites do stupid things like spell out user=***** and password=****** in persistent cookies. I used to do gnutella searches for cookies.txt files and look for these then access people's email accounts and email them from their own account that they were hanging their C: drive out for all to see and how to correct it. Good times.

    That said, let the NSA domestic spying investigation BEGIN! Oh, and the Abramoff investigation! Oh, and the continued Libby/Plame investigation!

    Good times are coming!
  7. #307  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    That said, let the NSA domestic spying investigation BEGIN! Oh, and the Abramoff investigation! Oh, and the continued Libby/Plame investigation!

    Good times are coming!
    You left out the investigation of who leaked the NSA story (*ahem* Rockefeller *ahem*) to the NYT.

    Oh - and the Democrats probably will need a majority in Congress to do any investigating of anything. Given the polls released in the past couple of days, that prospect seems to be diminishing.

    Meanwhile, the grown-ups will continue to protect the country - perhaps overzealously at times.
    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...
  8. #308  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    It looks as if the story in question does not understand persistent and yemp cookies nor the gov't privacy recommendations regarding them.

    The gov't does not disallow the use of persistant cookies but does recommend encrypting any personal information persisted in that cookie. Lazy websites do stupid things like spell out user=***** and password=****** in persistent cookies. I used to do gnutella searches for cookies.txt files and look for these then access people's email accounts and email them from their own account that they were hanging their C: drive out for all to see and how to correct it. Good times.
    I bet that was eye opener for many!

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    That said, let the NSA domestic spying investigation BEGIN! Oh, and the Abramoff investigation! Oh, and the continued Libby/Plame investigation!

    Good times are coming!
    I agree, as long as all who are guilty of the same offenses are held to the same level of accountability. In other words not a Nancy or Reed approach of "never mind that some of the Dems did the exact same thing, you only need to look at all the evil the Reps have done and our same offenses don't look as bad". So investigate all you want, as long as the points listed HERE are included in the same investigations.

    Here is the lastest update of the Abramoff deal from the Is there a problem in the GOP that shows that 1/3 of the accused are Dems, with the second highest money grabber as a Dem:

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Again, there is no doubt that Reps were involved, but again the Dems had their hand in the cookie jar as well:


    Democrats Also Got Tribal Donations
    Abramoff Issue's Fallout May Extend Beyond the GOP
    Here is a Washington Post graphic detailing how the money was split among Reps, Independents, PACs, and Dems:


    Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121200286.html
  9. #309  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    You left out the investigation of who leaked the NSA story (*ahem* Rockefeller *ahem*) to the NYT.
    You should learn the difference between whistle-blowing and leaking.



    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Meanwhile, the grown-ups will continue to protect the country - perhaps overzealously at times.
    Oh thank you!! I'm glad someone is doing that, besides that guy on 24 (what would we do without him?), while the rest of us children run around and babble about privacy concerns.
  10. #310  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I agree, as long as all who are guilty of the same offenses are held to the same level of accountability. In other words not a Nancy or Reed approach of "never mind that some of the Dems did the exact same thing, you only need to look at all the evil the Reps have done and our same offenses don't look as bad". So investigate all you want, as long as the points listed HERE are included in the same investigations.

    Here is the lastest update of the Abramoff deal from the Is there a problem in the GOP that shows that 1/3 of the accused are Dems, with the second highest money grabber as a Dem:
    Agreed 100%! Clear the halls of the amoral scoundrels!!
  11. #311  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Agreed 100%! Clear the halls of the amoral scoundrels!!
    Boy, talk about a turn over....could you imagine 80% of Congress and the Senate being replaced!!!!
  12. #312  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Boy, talk about a turn over....could you imagine 80% of Congress and the Senate being replaced!!!!
    That would keep the gov't pork-free and productive, at least until the next election.
  13. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #313  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Boy, talk about a turn over....could you imagine 80% of Congress and the Senate being replaced!!!!
    Wow, you are optimistic! You think you can find 20% of congress and senate that have not scammed, cheated, lied, stole, mislead or failed to do the job they were elected to do. That does not even scratch the surface of the governors, mayors, etc.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  14. #314  
    I chose 80% because you know that ones on the committees doing the investigations are not going to convict themselves. So now you are left with only 20% of the corrupt with 80% new blood scared they will get kicked out and then they can kick out the remaining 20% corrupt ones that stayed.
  15. #315  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You should learn the difference between whistle-blowing and leaking.
    I don't think I'm the one in need of that lesson.
    Oh thank you!! I'm glad someone is doing that, besides that guy on 24 (what would we do without him?), while the rest of us children run around and babble about privacy concerns.
    You're welcome.
    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...
  16. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #316  
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department has launched an investigation to determine who disclosed a secret NSA eavesdropping operation approved by President George W. Bush after the September 11 attacks, officials said on Friday.

    "We are opening an investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified materials related to the NSA," one official said.

    http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...ING.xml&rpc=22
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  17. #317  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department has launched an investigation to determine who disclosed a secret NSA eavesdropping operation approved by President George W. Bush after the September 11 attacks, officials said on Friday.

    "We are opening an investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified materials related to the NSA," one official said.

    http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...ING.xml&rpc=22
    Just an interesting observation...

    I read the CNN story on this and noticed that it was more about the program than about the leak. I decided to categorize each paragraph in the article to see if there was a bias. There definitely was one but it wasn't on the Pro or Con side. Only two paragraphs dealt with the actually leak inquiry. One described the program. The remaining paragraphs were surprisingly balanced between defenses and criticisms of the program. Sure, CNN is trying to be balanced here but they're also trying to direct the focus of this story.

    My analysis on http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/...ak/index.html:

    Leak
    Leak
    Program Description
    Defense
    Defense
    Defense
    Defense
    Criticism
    Criticism
    Criticism
    Criticism
    Defense
    Defense
    Criticism
    Criticism
    Recognizing that I volunteered...
  18. #318  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    The next line in the article states

    Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick said in 1994 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
    That same authority, she added, pertains to electronic surveillance such as wiretaps.
    I am by no means saying that I am right...but I would suspect the Presidents AG to support his position :-)


    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    and here is info from the arter administartion
    “Thank you Jimmy Carter”--Carter Agrees With Bush Spying
    The New York Times ^ | November 8, 1980 | Robert Pear


    Posted on 12/23/2005 11:23:24 AM PST by SBD1


    U.S.OFFICIALS DEFINE POLICY ON SEARCHES; Lawyers Assert President Still Has 'Inherent Authority' to Order Entries Without Warrants 'Concurrent Jurisdiction' 1978 Executive Order Cited No 'Foreign Connections' Found By ROBERT PEAR Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 9, 1980. pg. 35, 1 pgs

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 8--Justice Department lawyers say that the President still has the "inherent authority" to order searches without warrants to collect foreign intelligence within the United States, despite the criminal conviction this week of two former officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who said they had approved such searches in 1972 and 1973.

    An executive order issued by President Carter in January 1978 established the standard that governs the use of searches for intelligence purposes today. Such searches, it said, ‘’shall not be undertaken against a United States person without a judicial warrant, unless the President has authorized the type of activity involved and the Attorney General has both approved the particular activity and determined that there is probable cause to believe that the United States person is an agent of a foreign power.'’

    I am sure anyone can google and find instances for Reagen and Bush I, I do not have time this morning. All I am saying is that this is not new, is it right, maybe maybe not, but it is not new.
    Fair enough...I was just focusing on electronic surveillances and not physical searches.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #319  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I am by no means saying that I am right...but I would suspect the Presidents AG to support his position :-)


    Fair enough...I was just focusing on electronic surveillances and not physical searches.
    I am also assuming that the AG will support president Bush.

    Not sure there should be a distinction between physical search and electronic surveillance in regards to warrents, do you?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  20. #320  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    I am also assuming that the AG will support president Bush.
    Of course...that was my point (i.e. the AG for any President would support his policies with rational legal arguments). :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Not sure there should be a distinction between physical search and electronic surveillance in regards to warrents, do you?
    Well since you are asking me, the first thing that comes to mind is that physical searches are generally smaller and more refined in scope (i.e. a suspects house). Electronic searches can be very massive in scope (I think I read that the NSA is pulling 1000's of records looking for patterns). *Arguably (obviously not everyone believes this) many more people are having their privacy rights violated without due process with electronic warrantless searches.

    (And just so I am fair, I do understand how much more efficient this type of search is.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Posting Permissions