I realize how much you value your privacy Laz, but the NSA's gathering of those phone #'s, etc. DID NOT VIOLATE the 4th Amendment. As I have shown you, several courts have upheld these types of searches & there are laws on the books, plus the Patriot Act that also support what has occurred. And NOTHING supersedes the Constitution which grants those inherent powers to the Executive Branch.
There was no REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY regarding the info obtained by the NSA. I fail to see how this makes Bush a dictator for responsibility performing the #1 priority for the President of the US - National Security.
You can opine about it all you wish but it won't make your assertions any more valid.
Far smarter people than me have thoroughly reviewed this material. They have linked me to credible, independently verifiable evidence to support their work as I have to you.
"(A)ll the other courts to have decided the issue held
that the President did have inherent authority to conduct
warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence
information . . . . We take for granted that the
President does have that authority and, assuming that is
so, FISA could not encroach on the President's
constitutional power."
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22139776
Information Please
Only a paranoid solipsist could feel threatened by the calling analysis program.
As a constitutional matter, no one's privacy is violated
by [the NSA's] automated analysis of business records.
Senator Dianne Feinstein needs to brush up on her legal
doctrine when she decries the program as a "major
constitutional confrontation on Fourth Amendment
guarantees of unreasonable search and seizure." There is
no Fourth Amendment protection for information that you
have conveyed to a third party.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22451220
"If I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress?"
President Bush today speaking about the warrantless wiretaps.
It's Legal
John Schmidt, associate attorney general of the United
States in the Clinton administration, superbly explains
why the NSA intercept program is legal under all
authorities and precedents:
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21995718
FISA judges say Bush within law
Message 22306779
The DoJ Defends The Administration On Intercepts
Message 22083051
"SHARING TITLE III ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE MATERIAL WITH THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY."
Message 22134049
On the Legality of the NSA Electronic Intercept Program
Message 21999532
More on the legality of the NSA program
Message 22001814
Is It Legal?
Message 22451778
Gonzales Crushes Arguments Against NSA's International Surveillance
Message 22096108
Bush Defends NSA Program
Message 22023660
FISA vs. the Constitution
Congress can't usurp the president's power to spy on America's enemies.
Message 22009244
FISA Fallacies
Bush’s unconstitutional critics.
Message 22024263
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THE FISA COURT, AND NSA SURVEILLANCE
Message 22306470
FDR's domestic surveillance
Message 22432425
Spies and Lying Editorialists
Message 22119122
All the news that's fit to ignore
Message 22004639
IS THE PRESIDENT “ABOVE THE LAW”? I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON WHO THE PRESIDENT IS
Message 22134031
Congress Told Of Expanded NSA Efforts In 2001
Message 22026249
Disorder in the Court
Message 22017350
Ben Franklin understood the need for secrecy in matters of national security.
Message 22070284
Hayden Delivers Impassioned Defense of NSA
Message 22092568
General Hayden’s reading of the Fourth Amendment is correct, and his critics are mistaken.
Message 22437229
The Wisdom in Wiretaps
Bush critics seek war-powers loopholes to benefit terrorists.
Message 22043521
The Terrorist Surveillance Program, Explained
Message 22294367
It's Not "Domestic Spying"; It's Foreign Intelligence Collection
Message 22139776
A Colloquy With the Times
Message 21995726
Let's Send These Guys to Jail
Message 22001800
The Soviets Had the KGB -- Al Qaeda Has the NYT
Message 22023048
Timesspeak: Specialists at work
Now why would [the New York Times] overlook such a
critical piece of information even when reporting on the
opening of a criminal investigation of the leaks?
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22024019
Did the New York Times break the law with its wire-tapping story?
Message 22094637
The Times and the law
Since the New York Times published the Risen/Lichtblau
NSA story on December 16, we have cited the federal law
that makes the disclosures on which the story is based a
crime. The federal law is 18 U.S.C. § 798, a law that
precisely prohibits leaks of the type of classified
information disclosed in the story.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22034887
Amnesiac America
Message 22139776
How do You Connect the Dots if You don't Collect the Dots?
Message 22451326
The Big Brother on Capitol Hill
Is the NSA the government’s only data miner?
Message 22445565
