Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (8740)	1/11/2006 4:09:18 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541444

I think Dale agreed (at least if I understood him right) that some data mining lies outside the scope of this. But when it comes to listening to conversations, conversations on phone lines which we could expect to be private, then you need a warrant- where US citizens are concerned. What's to discuss? This is an area of law- and the law is pretty clear. There are areas where you need warrants, and areas where you don't, and areas where it is gray. Tapping phone lines is not a gray area. What gray areas were you interested in? The law on wiretaps for citizens- just FYI: lawcollective.org

To: Lane3 who wrote (8740)	1/11/2006 4:12:33 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541444

You need to explain what constitutes intel for you, how it is collected, the permissible ways to collect it, impermissible ways to collect it, its importance in the war on terrorism and whether that role will change if the war can ever end. And please don't use the ticking time bomb analogy. It's not what 99.99% of intel collection is all about. Perhaps if you can get beyond "consider the intel, you stubborn *&^&" construction, we can get somewhere. I'll look forward to reading your thoughts over coffee tomorrow morning. ;<)