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 : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (6151)	5/16/2006 2:15:14 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 14758

Hear, hear!!!

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (6151)	5/16/2006 3:00:09 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 14758

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