Don't see what the big hub-bub is, anyway. The jihadis know all about this anyway after the Left raised a stick about this under Bush. They know we are watching their phone numbers.
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Didn't stop the Boston bombings, did it? The Russians practically handed them to us.
Shoe bomber? No... the Ft. Hood jihadi? Nope, and they KNEW about his radical ties. Times Square bomber? Nope. Local cops.
The 'couple dozen' plots that were said to be stopped by this illegal program have been proven to be the work of almost everything BUT Prism.
You are correct, Bob...he (VP Cheney) did say that. My concern then as now is whether someone can go too far as seems to be coming out now.
1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"...recent IRS revelations should cause circumspection"
The Internal Revenge Service.
So what? Gathering information on Americans who have not committed a crime is illegal under the Constitution, no matter who it started under or who defends it.
0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Dick Cheney staunchly defended the NSA surveillance programs started under his tenure as Vice President, telling Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday that the programs could have stopped 9/11 had they been in effect, and that Edward Snowden was a traitor for revealing the information and fleeing to China.
Welcome to 1984 in 2013...facebook, phone call, comment or email much? You may want to review this excerpt from 1984 if you ever want to run for political office or take a stand against the government.
" Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you."
One might wish to believe that civil servants are apolitical ... recent IRS revelations should cause circumspection. One might be wise to stop backing this administration and demand a change.
2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler's disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.
The disclosure appears to confirm some of the allegations made by Edward Snowden, a former NSA infrastructure analyst who leaked classified documents to the Guardian. Snowden said in a video interview that, while not all NSA analysts had this ability, he could from Hawaii "wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president."
There are serious "constitutional problems" with this approach, said Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who has litigated warrantless wiretapping cases. "It epitomizes the problem of secret laws."
1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"That's www . npr "
National Progressive Radio
I was just getting ready to post that article, Kozy.
"...the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls. "
Welcome to Amerika.
Here's the link:
I wondered when this was going to come out...
1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst deciding that."
If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.
Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA's formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls.
This is a link. When you copy this into your browser, it takes you to a page. Mind the space.
That's ok, Phoenix. Understood.
Apologies for misspeaking on my earlier post, Fisa wasn't set up under the Patriot Act, a provision was set up under the Patriot Act that requires the Nsa to go through Fisa.
2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
That's www . npr
1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Gladly, since you obviously haven't heard of Fisa, The Secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Following is a link to the original Guardian article and two more links just for fun. m.guardiannews. com /.../nsa-phone-recor... ****npr. org/.../nsa-collecting-v... talkingpointsmemo. com/.../revealed-nsa-...
"First of all notSocialist, like it or not President Obama went through the proper channels and received a subpoena from the special court set up under the Patriot Act. "
Obama got a subpeona to gather information on ALL Americans? Please post a link to your proof.
0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
"Now, isn't it time you quit stalling and answer my question? "
AFter you have your two spare accounts deleted, I'll consider it.
"nd no, you don't really support this country."
You don't know jack.
0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
And that's the fat cats on BOTH sides of the aisle.
Snowden didn't betray America. He betrayed the fat cats in Washington who are betraying Americans.
Now, truly...I don't believe that anyone who is posting here is anti-American or would, on purpose, hurt our Republic.
I do believe the current administration is having far too many issues with trust. I believe that is why so many are anti the taking of our information. Check the voting records on the Patriot act and you find almost everyone from liberal to conservative wanted this law. Can it be abused? Can it be used against us? Should "we the people" let our guards down no matter what political party holds the WH?
Now again, I believe it is wrong to give way secrets and it looks like this young man has...I just want to see what the facts are. Is that too much to want?
No, rentss, Phoenix, and Bob...Unlike others I know, I have voted for the person rather than only a republican. have certain values that can sway my vote but I spend a great deal of time making certain I vote for the candidate who seems best for the country. I enjoy debate and don't unfriend or un-follow a person because they are politically bent different than me. I also do not call names as that ruins any real debate.
You see, I'm not perfect and on some things you may be right (although rarely). And' if I agree with you I let it be known.
What I don't like is lying and false statements and there are far too many being bantered around. Please don't post something just because it was on MSNBC or Breitbart or Fox because they can be wrong. Check at least three sources from all directions ad then post...makes for a great debate my friends.
Oh no, Notsocialist, I see things quite clearly. And no, you don't really support this country. You support conservatives, but when you see someone who you think will prove embarrassing for a Democratic president, you'll immediately side even with a traitor. All you care about is the GOP.
It's the same with Kozy, he's just more educated and less extremist.
4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
161 North Lincoln , Salem, OH 44460 |