Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 546
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    They already do this! This why I don't understand.
    I think this can only happen in the case of "imminent emergency". For example, if the police enter a home for a domestic disturbance and find one party dead. They can search the home for a suspect and evidence before obtaining a search warrant - the warrant is issued later as an administrative function.

    This is obviously not the same thing as trying to identify nebulous cells of terrorists before any crime has actually been committed.
    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...
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    I don't get that either. What's the judge going to do, say "no"?
    If they say no then all collected intel is destroyed,
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    I did but it doesn't anything to persuade me. I does not cite that their is a law or absence of a law regarding those sorts of phone calls. As I said, if AlaskanDad's holds true then........ But after this is resorted I would like this changed so it is routed through FISA.
    I think you're saying that what Bush is doing is OK under current law, but you'd like to see the law changed to require FISA review. Fair enough, but FISA review can take weeks. As I just posted, I don't think there's any way to retroactively issue this kind of warrant.

    The 9/11 Commission clearly stated that the FISA bureaucracy was partly responsible for the delays and inability to identify the 9/11 perpetrators. I don't have a probem with more review of these cases, but it has to be timely enough not to jeapordize investigations.
    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. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #64  
    Phurth

    Maybe this will clear it up for you. They can tap a line. Then within' 72 hours you must appear before FISA. These are the guidlines in place now.
  5. #65  
    I certainly don't any issues with that. It give immediate need the opportunity to act. Plus it will hold those accountable and on record (secret record, but on record non the less).
  6. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I think you're saying that what Bush is doing is OK under current law, but you'd like to see the law changed to require FISA review. Fair enough, but FISA review can take weeks. As I just posted, I don't think there's any way to retroactively issue this kind of warrant.
    From my understanding(DOJ docs) FISA hardly ever turns down a request, plus when they consider a case the wire tap is allowed. I would just like to see the law that authorizes Bush.
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    I think this can only happen in the case of "imminent emergency". For example, if the police enter a home for a domestic disturbance and find one party dead. They can search the home for a suspect and evidence before obtaining a search warrant - the warrant is issued later as an administrative function.

    This is obviously not the same thing as trying to identify nebulous cells of terrorists before any crime has actually been committed.
    I actually just finished a legal brief on a similar issue about 10 minutes ago. The police need probable cause or exigent circumstances. But the police don't get a warrant after the fact in my state, because no warrant is required if the case falls under one of the two exceptions.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  8. #68  
    heberman - Thanks for the insight. Do you know how this is handled in Federal law?
    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...
  9. #69  
    Here's an excellent explanation of the legal issues involved. The more the Dems sqeal about this the worse they'll look.

    I hope Justice is already investigating the source of the criminal leak to the 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...
  10. #70  
    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...
  11. #71  
    Another one- this time more about the reasoning rather than legality.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200512191334.asp
    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...
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Not sure, only caught the last half of the interview, but I just found it interesting that the likes of him had full knowledge of this happening and he does not hold himself accountable in the least. Just after the interview, it was reported that these wiretaps without a warrent were legal and approved by high ranking law enforcement agencies.

    It seems that this was not a big secret for those in the know, on several sides of the fence, but a big secret that was not available to the public...hence the terrorists they were trying flush out.


    OFF TOPIC: During this interview, after the 3rd time of saying all the corrupt Reps, he was asked about money he received from Jack in the amount of $66,000. He said that many Reps and Dems have paid back all the money they got in this scandal claiming they didn't know it was from him. Reid said he was not going to return any of it. He never met the man. Never dealt with him or any of the organizations. He refused to acknowledge that he received the $66,000 that was paid to him and was not going to return anything.

    Basically everything he was questioned about had a theme to it.....look at so-and-so they are bad because of that, but I didn't do anything so I am not accountable for anything.

    Believe me, I am just sharing exactly how it went.
    Here is an article covering only the Abramoff portion of the interview I mentioned above:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10507328/
  13. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #73  
    Hmm. What do we have here?

    Source: NY Times

    F.B.I. Watched Activist Groups, New Files Show

    By ERIC LICHTBLAU
    Published: December 20, 2005

    WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 - Counterterrorism agents at the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted numerous surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations that involved, at least indirectly, groups active in causes as diverse as the environment, animal cruelty and poverty relief, newly disclosed agency records show.

    F.B.I. officials said Monday that their investigators had no interest in monitoring political or social activities and that any investigations that touched on advocacy groups were driven by evidence of criminal or violent activity at public protests and in other settings.

    After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, John Ashcroft, who was then attorney general, loosened restrictions on the F.B.I.'s investigative powers, giving the bureau greater ability to visit and monitor Web sites, mosques and other public entities in developing terrorism leads. The bureau has used that authority to investigate not only groups with suspected ties to foreign terrorists, but also protest groups suspected of having links to violent or disruptive activities.

    But the documents, coming after the Bush administration's confirmation that President Bush had authorized some spying without warrants in fighting terrorism, prompted charges from civil rights advocates that the government had improperly blurred the line between terrorism and acts of civil disobedience and lawful protest.
    -snip-
  14. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #74  
    More Info

    Source: Yahoo!

    WASHINGTON - Some Democrats say they never approved a domestic wiretapping program, undermining suggestions by President Bush and his senior advisers that the plan was fully vetted in a series of congressional briefings.

    "I feel unable to fully evaluate, much less endorse, these activities," West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the Senate Intelligence Committee's top Democrat, said in a handwritten letter to Vice President **** Cheney in July 2003. "As you know, I am neither a technician nor an attorney."

    Rockefeller is among a small group of congressional leaders who have received briefings on the administration's four-year-old program to eavesdrop without warrants on international calls and e-mails of Americans and others inside the United States with suspected ties to al-Qaida.

    The government still would seek court approval to snoop on purely domestic communications, such as calls between New York and Los Angeles.
    -snip-
    Part of the actual letter from Jay Rockerfeller:

  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    More Info
    The Congress' role was not one of approval- merely informational. If they had doubts at the time why did they say nothing?
    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. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Hmm. What do we have here?
    A national security policy run by grown-ups (for a change)? Interesting that the lead to the stpry doesn't mention the names of the groups. Do you think maybe the NYT might be trying to mislead its readers into believing evil George is snooping on the Audibon Society?
    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. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    The Congress' role was not one of approval- merely informational. If they had doubts at the time why did they say nothing?
    I think it is summed up in that letter I posted. It states that Rockefeller had some serious misgivings, because it was so secret he could not even talk to his staff about! I know his handwriting is like chicken scratch but give it a read.
  18. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Hmm. What do we have here?
    Outstanding! Our law enforcement officials are monitoring groups of people who are driven by evidence of criminal or violent activity at public protests.

    Does this bother anyone? If so why, they are monitoring individuals and/or groups with evidence of criminal activity. That is why they receive a tax payer payed salary.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  19. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    A national security policy run by grown-ups (for a change)? Interesting that the lead to the stpry doesn't mention the names of the groups. Do you think maybe the NYT might be trying to mislead its readers into believing evil George is snooping on the Audibon Society?
    Hence, why I had no comment.
  20. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    I think it is summed up in that letter I posted. It states that Rockefeller had some serious misgivings, because it was so secret he could not even talk to his staff about! I know his handwriting is like chicken scratch but give it a read.
    It is a letter from a single person, (to the Vice President) however I am sure the "I voted for it before I voted against it" group will chime in any minute now and say, "Oh we were going to send a letter, but ran out of stamps" or something along those lines.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions