Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-15-2013, 05:26 AM  
mikey23545 mikey23545 is online now
MVP
 
mikey23545's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $114247
Al Gore: NSA Surveillance Program Violates Constitution

Al Gore: NSA Surveillance Violates The Constitution


Former Vice President Al Gore broke with many of his fellow Democrats Friday and said that the NSA surveillance programs violate the constitution.

"This in my view violates the constitution. The fourth amendment and the first amendment and the fourth amendment language is crystal clear," he told The Guardian, which revealed the agency's phone surveillance and reported on its Internet data-mining. "It is not acceptable to have a secret interpretation of a law that goes far beyond any reasonable reading of either the law or the constitution and then classify as top secret what the actual law is."

"I quite understand the viewpoint that many have expressed that they are fine with it and they just want to be safe but that is not really the American way," he added.

Gore called "blanket" surveillance "obscenely outrageous" in a tweet on June 5. Nevertheless, he has mostly criticized Obama over climate change, an issue where the 2000 presidential nominee won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in 2007.

The revelations have scrambled traditional Democratic and Republican labels. A bill to require the Attorney General to declassify the court opinions used to justify the programs was introduced by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah). Sen Rand Paul (R-Ky.) announced Thursday that he planned to take legal action against the programs, after initially introducing his own legislation to prevent the government from collecting data on Americans.

On the other hand, both Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) have said that Edward Snowden, who admitted to leaking documents showing the existence of the programs to The Guardian, committed treason. Congressional leaders in both houses have called for him to be prosecuted, with Boehner going so far as to call Snowden a "traitor."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...p_ref=politics
Posts: 11,530
mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 04:32 PM   #16
mikey23545 mikey23545 is online now
MVP
 
mikey23545's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $114247
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedstooge View Post
King O'Bama will do what he wants to when he wants to and why he wants to and you'll like it
You're just channeling RINO-Pat.
Posts: 11,530
mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 04:36 PM   #17
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikey23545 View Post
Police rely on a variety of tools to investigate crimes, including the ability to tap into a suspect's telephone conversations. While such wiretaps can produce very good evidence against potential criminals, it is also a major invasion of privacy and police must follow strict procedures when performing a wiretap.

The Wiretap Order

The police must first obtain a wiretap order before eavesdropping on your phone conversations. This is similar to a warrant. The police must prove to a judge that they have probable cause to believe that tapping your phone lines will help them to solve a serious crime, such as drug trafficking, money laundering, or terrorism. However, because wiretapping is so intrusive, the police are held to a higher standard when seeking wiretap orders than when they are seeking warrants.

One communication that is generally exempt from the wiretap order requirement is phone conversations from prison. Prisoners have a greatly reduced expectation of privacy and cannot expect that their phone conversations will remain private. For this reason, some criminal attorneys choose to meet their clients in person face to face, to try and ensure that their communication is private.

Restrictions on Wiretapping

Wiretapping orders are often restricted in order to minimize any invasion of privacy. In particular, wiretapping orders usually expire after a certain period of time, so the police cannot keep listening forever. Police are also required to limit wiretapping only to phone conversations that are likely to yield evidence against the suspect.
?
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,225
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 04:39 PM   #18
mikey23545 mikey23545 is online now
MVP
 
mikey23545's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $114247
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
?
Just keep pretending there's a difference so you can sleep at night, RP...
Posts: 11,530
mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.mikey23545 has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 04:53 PM   #19
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikey23545 View Post
Just keep pretending there's a difference so you can sleep at night, RP...
I have no idea what point you were trying to make with that post. Would you explain it to me?
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,225
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 05:12 PM   #20
CoMoChief CoMoChief is offline
The Revolution Has Begun
 
CoMoChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KCMO
Casino cash: $139358
Yes Al it does....and so is paying you money from the taxes we would pay for the air we breath.

He's no better than any Clinton, Bush, or Obama.
__________________
2014 Adopt-A-Chief: RT Donald Stephenson #79
Posts: 29,930
CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.CoMoChief is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 05:42 PM   #21
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $157258
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
The 4th amendment doesn't say anything about emails or phone calls. In the late 18th century, if you gave a verbal message to a messenger to deliver to someone and that messenger decided to tell the government about it, no one would have thought the government was violating the sender's 4th amendment rights.
First class mail cannot be opened by postal inspectors without a warrant. Why? Because without a warrant, the postal service is violating my rights as described by the 4th Amendment. It doesn't matter if some government agency wants the information contained in the mail's contents. It doesn't matter if the postal service wants to share the contents. Without a warrant issued for probable cause, the contents are protected.

When I send an email through my ISP (the modern-day equivalent of the postal service), the government should not be allowed to ask them to open my e-mail and share its contents. Neither should my ISP be allowed to share the contents of my email even if they want to.

If government wants to collect a database of the records of where my mail goes, and if my ISP has the absolute right to tell them to **** off, I can't think of a good reason at the moment that they shouldn't be allowed to to compile such a database. (The government claims that they won't view the contents of the emails themselves, but I have a hard time believing that's true. If it is true, I have a hard time believing that it will remain true. )

Here's the thing, as I see it: My ISP is not a messenger. I haven't "told" them something that they should then race across the world to "tell" to my intended correspondent. They should have no knowledge of the contents of my email under normal conditions, they should not be able to share the contents of my email under normal conditions, they should not be asked by the government to share my email under normal conditions, and the government sure as hell shouldn't be allowed to compel them to share my email under normal conditions.

The 18th century messenger you mentioned would be lucky to get off with just a good tarring and feathering. Personally, I'd consider shooting the son of a bitch.
Posts: 20,022
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 05:53 PM   #22
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $157258
In addition (if I may push the argument onto softer ground), if we haven't reached this point already, we're fast approaching the time when the convergence of technology should similarly protect my email and phone records under the 1st amendment right of freedoms of assembly and the press. Like many, many of my fellow citizens, I publish to a small subscriber list with my phone and through email. In 2013, I am the press. I assemble with like-minded individuals electronically. In 2013, cyberspace is the town square.
Posts: 20,022
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 06:54 PM   #23
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463229
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco View Post
First class mail cannot be opened by postal inspectors without a warrant. Why? Because without a warrant, the postal service is violating my rights as described by the 4th Amendment. It doesn't matter if some government agency wants the information contained in the mail's contents. It doesn't matter if the postal service wants to share the contents. Without a warrant issued for probable cause, the contents are protected.

When I send an email through my ISP (the modern-day equivalent of the postal service), the government should not be allowed to ask them to open my e-mail and share its contents. Neither should my ISP be allowed to share the contents of my email even if they want to.

If government wants to collect a database of the records of where my mail goes, and if my ISP has the absolute right to tell them to **** off, I can't think of a good reason at the moment that they shouldn't be allowed to to compile such a database. (The government claims that they won't view the contents of the emails themselves, but I have a hard time believing that's true. If it is true, I have a hard time believing that it will remain true. )

Here's the thing, as I see it: My ISP is not a messenger. I haven't "told" them something that they should then race across the world to "tell" to my intended correspondent. They should have no knowledge of the contents of my email under normal conditions, they should not be able to share the contents of my email under normal conditions, they should not be asked by the government to share my email under normal conditions, and the government sure as hell shouldn't be allowed to compel them to share my email under normal conditions.

The 18th century messenger you mentioned would be lucky to get off with just a good tarring and feathering. Personally, I'd consider shooting the son of a bitch.
So there are at least two issues here. Can the government look at the metadata? And can they look at the contents?

I don't think there's any basis for a constitutional argument over the metadata. That's not even content you create. That's business data generated by the ISP/phone company. The ISP may have a privacy interest rooted in the constitution, but I don't see how the customer does.

WRT the content, I think your analogy is flawed. The ISP is not the modern day post office because it's not a branch of the government. When you send a message through an ISP/phone company, unless it's encrypted, you're voluntarily sharing that information with a third party. Google notoriously scans traffic that flows through gmail, whether your email account is gmail or not. I don't think the constitution imposes a duty on that third party to protect your privacy.

I'm not saying that there's no reason to protect the privacy of your emails and phone calls from federal government snooping, but I think that whatever constraints we put on them will have to come from statute because I don't think the 4th amendment should cover this.

I think your 1st amendment argument is interesting. I'm not sure how it applies at first blush, but it's interesting.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,225
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:06 PM   #24
Ace Gunner Ace Gunner is offline
First Overall
 
Ace Gunner's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: kcmo
Casino cash: $11021583
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
So there are at least two issues here. Can the government look at the metadata? And can they look at the contents?

I don't think there's any basis for a constitutional argument over the metadata. That's not even content you create. That's business data generated by the ISP/phone company. The ISP may have a privacy interest rooted in the constitution, but I don't see how the customer does.

WRT the content, I think your analogy is flawed. The ISP is not the modern day post office because it's not a branch of the government. When you send a message through an ISP/phone company, unless it's encrypted, you're voluntarily sharing that information with a third party. Google notoriously scans traffic that flows through gmail, whether your email account is gmail or not. I don't think the constitution imposes a duty on that third party to protect your privacy.

I'm not saying that there's no reason to protect the privacy of your emails and phone calls from federal government snooping, but I think that whatever constraints we put on them will have to come from statute because I don't think the 4th amendment should cover this.

I think your 1st amendment argument is interesting. I'm not sure how it applies at first blush, but it's interesting.
the post office was formed to give you service that guarantees your privacy.

you are so hung up on the legal mechanics of this and most things anti USC that you fail to acknowledge the courts are more than a robot thumbing through text, they know in a case like this the motive is in fact to invade individual privacy.
__________________
two five
Posts: 10,384
Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:14 PM   #25
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzz_TinBalls View Post
the post office was formed to give you service that guarantees your privacy.
OK, that's consistent with my argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzz_TinBalls View Post
you are so hung up on the legal mechanics of this and most things anti USC that you fail to acknowledge the courts are more than a robot thumbing through text, they know in a case like this the motive is in fact to invade individual privacy.
We all know that the motive is to invade individual privacy. And group privacy. And national privacy. That's what intelligence is about. But it's not necessarily violating any American's rights. That's a completely different issue.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,225
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:21 PM   #26
Ace Gunner Ace Gunner is offline
First Overall
 
Ace Gunner's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: kcmo
Casino cash: $11021583
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
We all know that the motive is to invade individual privacy. And group privacy. And national privacy. That's what intelligence is about. But it's not necessarily violating any American's rights. That's a completely different issue.
why do you think gathering intel on americans is important. do you think the american people are the enemy?
__________________
two five
Posts: 10,384
Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.Ace Gunner is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:23 PM   #27
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $157258
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
...WRT the content, I think your analogy is flawed. The ISP is not the modern day post office because it's not a branch of the government...
You're right. FedEx could probably open my mail if they cared to. I'm going to need a better argument.
Posts: 20,022
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:27 PM   #28
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $157258
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I'm not sure how it applies at first blush, but it's interesting.
I would think that a publisher could not be compelled to share his subscriber list with the government without the government serving a warrant. If the publisher's truck driver shared the list without permission, it would be an act of theft.

I am the publisher, my correspondents are my subscribers, my ISP is the truck driver and the government is the government.

However, I probably signed the right to my subscriber list over to my truck driver when he made me sign that ridiculous agreement that I didn't read.

Still working.
Posts: 20,022
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:29 PM   #29
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463229
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco View Post
You're right. FedEx could probably open my mail if they cared to. I'm going to need a better argument.
I don't think FedEx is free to open your mail, but they wouldn't be violating your constitutional rights if they did.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,225
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2013, 07:37 PM   #30
ClevelandBronco ClevelandBronco is offline
Banned
 
ClevelandBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Casino cash: $157258
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
I don't think FedEx is free to open your mail, but they wouldn't be violating your constitutional rights if they did.
I wouldn't be surprised if they are allowed to open my package, but they'd soon lose business if they made it a regular practice.

I agree that FedEx alone can't violate my 4th Amendment rights, but if they are being compelled by government to do something that the government itself is prohibited from doing, and if they are further compelled to share their findings with the government, I would consider that to be the same as the government doing it.
Posts: 20,022
ClevelandBronco has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.