Obama extends patriot act

T.W.A.T???:bravo: Thank you, Ice!

...Why have I never thought of or heard of that abbreviation for The War Against Terror?

Personally, I can never get enough of T.W.A.T...

The War Against Terror...

We'll lick 'em all!

:xctd:

(....in other news, I really need to spend more quality time with my wife, or at least beg and plead for some quality time, a good honest effort. Yanno, begging and pleading...Seduction through being annoying and pathetic...whatever works... )

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The people whose information was stolen never authorized anything. It was given by companies that by law had the responsibility to protect it.
It's like looking at your rented storage space without your consent, except there is data there instead of stuff.

What is your point? We know they didn't get in trouble. That's what's so fucking hysterical about the story.
Telcom broke the law. Govt changed the law so telcom wouldn't get into trouble. Citizens had their info stolen and have no legal recourse.
Little arthur thinks it's ok.

Sorry little arthur, that is just not good enough. This kind of decision opens the door to all kinds of crimes done in good faith. Soon enough they'll be shooting people in good faith.

LOL WHAT? THEY DIDN'T KNOW IT? AWWW THAT'S OK THEN. WHO COULD EXPECT THAT COMPANIES HANDLING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION TO KEEP IT CONFIDENTIAL?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It never went to trial because the system is corrupt. Govt and corps rely on each other and protect each other. The people can fuck off.

They also know that by not cooperating with the govt they jeopardize their political interests. They lose the power to influence garbage legislation like this and they lose govt contracts. The only reason they would ever jeopardize political interest was in the case that their actions would bring up a lawsuit in which they would lose money. That possibility no longer exists.

Fair to who?
Now if your data is taken there is nothing you can do. The only way to stay private is to not use any service. Back to stone age.

Is that what you call it? I call it a dishonest loophole.

BAAAAAH! BAAAAH!

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Little arthur, we, you included, don't know shit. you know you don't know shit. You have no idea of what is going on.
The NSA can listen to phone conversations, that is a fact. They have whole buildings whose only purpose is to listen and transcript conversations.

I can remember at least one case in which this power to listen to phone calls WITHOUT A WARRANT was abused.You may remember this:

Read the whole article here please:
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-10-09/...aulk-nsa-linguists-military-officers?_s=PM:US

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

lol, is she jewish?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Guys GUYS! Look at this, in case anyone missed

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Nothing was stolen.
There is no law that prohibits the log data from being released.

No, they broke no criminal law (SCOTUS says this info is not protected).
But you can still be sued in CIVIL court for anything, and that's what the Congress prevented.

Nope
There was no crime.

Nope, there is no expectation of privacy for this info which is why no warrants are needed for pen registers which collect the exact same info.

Yup
Fucking the phone company isn't in the people's best interest, which is why the Congress prohibited it.

Sure they do, but the LOG DATA, which is what we are discussing is NOT phone conversations. Don't try that lie again.

Except the NSA can listen in on ANY phone call where one party is overseas without a warrant. Now if it turns out that the call is not related to terrorism they are supposed to scrub their recording, but the NSA wasn't breaking any laws just by listening to them.

Of course people are involved and so abuses will occur.
So what?
When abuses are found out they punish the people involved. The NSA doesn't want people on its staff wasting their time listening to conversations that aren't related to their mission either

Arthur

 

Yes, you can. You can even, if you can find an honest and willing prosecutor, subpoena testimony and records and so forth to collect evidence of deliberation and intent - which would be criminal, not only cause for disallowing the evidence in court.

You can also go after the landlord - good faith is no defense, unless Congress steps in with special laws to cover his ass.

You do not sign away Constitutional protections in your rental lease. Your landlord does not have permission to search your belongings or residence, or allow anyone else to do so, without a warrant. Your landlord may not even enter your residence for legitimate purposes except under specified circumstances detailed in standing law or your exact lease. The police do not have such privileges without a warrant or immediate "probable cause" - such as hot pursuit etc.

We are not limiting our discussion to your uninformed speculations about what they obtained from their tapping, recording, and perusal of phone records.

You don't know what they obtained from their extensive and technically sophisticated investigations. There is no public, corroborated record. The only evidence we have is the clandestine nature of the operations, and the many somewhat successful attempts by the Executive Branch involved to evade or override the existing Constitutional curbs - including flat out breaking the FISA laws.

No, I don't - any more than I would have to prove that threats were made by kidnapers, people carrying weapons at the ready, etc. Threat is immediate in the situation.

That's why people admire the companies that refused, for showing strength and courage.

Your carefully maintained ignorance is not a source of information here. We know the government did more than file requests for company records without probable cause even, let alone warrants - already a violation of the Bill of Rights. How much more, and what exactly, we don't know.

 

Hmm...her mom converted...technically.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Tell her it's good for America.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Nope:

.

You might not be, but that's all I've been commenting on based on Varda's link to the issue of the NSA Call Database. Which as Wiki points out:

No it's not. If they were coerced into turning over the data the Govt protection from civil suits wouldn't have been required.

Nope.
Asking for data is NOT a violation of the Bill of rights any more than an officer asking if they can search your car or enter your house is not a violation if you then let them.

Arthur

 

So as I pointed out, it depends on the existence of reasonable belief - and officers who have no such reasonable belief can be prosecuted.

If someone steals my identity, fools the police into thinking he's me and can allow a search of my premises, the police are innocent.

We are not talking about innocence, in this multi-year carefully concealed and never yet fully described searching of American citizens' private communications.

Any police officer who pretends that permission from the landlord or the phone company or any other such entity is enough for search and seizure of my property without cause, warrant, or consent from me, will be hearing from my lawyer. They know better, and I know they know better.

Even if the protection was for them, it still saved them the court hassles - which were shaping up to be numerous and serious.

But we don't really think the protection was only for them, do we? Are we that childlike and ignorant of the world?

I'm going to give any police officer who pulls me over and is holding my license, and asks me, permission to search your house, copy your computer files, and install cameras in your bedroom light fixtures.

Because it's not violation of your rights if they ask, right?

 

But again you miss the point, it was NOT communications that were searched, and as the SCOTUS has already said, you have no right to presume that data about the numbers you call and are held by the phone company is private.

Well good luck with that.
LOL

What a pompous ASS you are.

Nope, because that's not something you have access or right of entry to.

Arthur

 

You don't know what was searched. Your speculations in the matter are uninformed and irrelevant.

According to you, above, that doesn't matter - the cop asked for and received permission.

 

No it's not.
The NSA Call database, which was the issue, does not contain any actual calls or transcripts of calls.
Don't believe me, then feel free to update the Wiki article so everyone can share in your insight into the matter.
Of course you won't because you are all hat and no cattle.

Not from just anybody.

As the SCOTUS said: apparent authority is sufficient, and without the key to my house or the password to my computer you don't have that.

Arthur

 

WARNING: long post. Worth reading though, there is comedy, drama, crime, oh so exciting.

Lets address this whole sack of shit of a post by taking a step back and looking at the facts.

Our current discussion is about he famous class action suit brought up by the EFF against AT&T, aka Hepting vs. AT&T of 2006. (At least that is what I am talking about).
Now let's do some reading about that case.

Considering that the govt administration publicly confirmed some claims and denied others, that there is someone from the inside testifying, and that the media investigated the case, it is a plausible allegation.

So AT&T was probably shitting itself at this point. So they go talk to their govt buddies, and it goes sort of like this:

AT&T: hey man, I got your back when you needed. Now these guys are looking to fry me and you gotta help me out. Remember that one time when I gave you hundreds of thousands for your campaign, I'm always looking out for you, we're partners, do something man.

Govt: Don't worry buddy, we have your back. I have a trick in my sleeve: STATE SECRETS! It's pretty awesome, it's basically a magic wand that makes suits disappear. check this out...

back to our narration:

AT&T: AAAHHHG shit man, I need to go change my pants again. Fuck fuck fuck, it didn't work, man you gotta do something!

Govt: Jezz, chill man, I have power... we just have to appeal this thing. Stay cool ok?

AT&T: Man, that's not going to work, you need to do something drastic, they're going to come form my money!

Govt: Ok alright! Let me see what I can do...

So as you can see, SCOTUS never ruled anything, because the people never got a change to be heard.

THE END

You can clap now Arthur. The most cynical, abusive, and criminal use of power and influence of the decade, at the cost of your rights. Brought to you by the PATRIOT ACT and the Bush admin.

We know you're into that.

 

Which to you means the phone company can give the police permission to search and seize my private electronic communications without warrant or cause, monitor them for years, and do whatever they want to with whatever info they obtain.

And the police are reasonable in believing that is OK. Says you.

Which brings up the odd circumstance that the police involved denied their actions, hid their actions, and when caught dissembled and lied about their actions, and to this day have gone to great lengths (acts of Congress, even) to avoid describing or accounting for their actions - in even general terms.

So have the phone companies involved - except the ones who denied the cops access without warrant. Those happy few seem to have nothing to hide.

Not the behavior we expect from clear consciences, eh?

 

:yay:

I am into that.

Why?

Because unlike you I don't fear the NSA.

Oh, and by the way Obama voted YEA on the bill, Hillary voted NEA.

From your original link:

Got no problem with that, and so far no one has shown that domestic calls were intercepted.

As you know, I'm glad the phone companies got immunity from friggin CIVIL law suits. As was Congress, which represents the MAJORITY of us.

They didn't do anything wrong. The data is the same data that the SCOTUS has said does not require a warrant (pen register data), but the civil suits could have cost them a small fortune in legal fees even though they probably would have prevailed.

Of course, winning those suits would be a HUGE pay day for them.
What hasn't been shown is ANY damage to anyone.

Once again, :yay:

Arthur

 

Not your actual domestic communications.

Your pen register data, which is the same as the NSA Call Log database (what number you call, how long you call etc) though is fair game without a warrant.

Has been for some time.


U.S. Supreme Court
Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979)

The telephone company, at police request, installed at its central offices a pen register to record the numbers dialed from the telephone at petitioner's home. Prior to his robbery trial, petitioner moved to suppress "all fruits derived from" the pen register. The Maryland trial court denied this motion, holding that the warrantless installation of the pen register did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Petitioner was convicted, and the Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed.

Held: The installation and use of the pen register was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required

Arthur

 

It IS good for America.
America needs more middle aged married queers having sex.
At least 2 more.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So you actually believe that they broke the FISA law for no reason? They went to all that trouble of hiding and lying and indemnifying retroactively, for no reason at all?

They broke the law, betrayed their customers and their country. Congress had to pass a new law and make it retroactive, to cover their collective campaign contributing ass.

You keep on pretending you know what they seized and recorded, what they did. Do you really believe that? And you have no evidence at all, with plenty to the contrary. Why the goofy insistence on the reality of something you obviously just imagined for yourself?

That's what court is for. That's why W&Co moved so quickly to keep that stuff out of the courtroom.

Yes, my actual domestic communications. Read your own quote, bottom of the one post up, the one you celebrate. The garbage that makes you happy when you eat it.

The psychology of such childlike faith in what appears to be parental substitute - a government that soothes and comforts and only wiretaps the bad guys for good reasons, a fatherly and friendly big brother government we can trust implicitly - is the only remaining arena of discussion here, as far as I can tell.

 

Under the light of that last post I can't continue to discuss with you, little arthur.
If you had made any slightly good point we could go on, but at this point it feels like I'm just feeding the troll.
Run along now, shoo.