Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Government > NSA Echelon > Re: Evidence Su...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 4 of 9 Topic 95 of 133
Post > Topic >>

Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying

by "James E. Morrow" <jamesemorrow@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 9, 2006 at 03:59 AM

Leythos wrote:

> In article <445fca6b$0$13570$5402220f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ethic@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
>> Ghafoor and Belew initially assumed that the do***ent was obtained
>> through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) -- which
allows
>> for warrantless wiretaps as long as a warrant is obtained within 72
>> hours. But they grew suspicious when the FBI requested the return of
that
>> do***ent. The lawyers immediately complied, but the FBI failed to
contact
>> both Al-Buthi and Seda, both now living overseas, to get their copies
>> back.
> 
> So, two terrorism sup****ters, caught in the act, by wiretaps, fleeing
> from the USA, want some form of payback?
> 
> Warrantless wiretapping was going on long before Bush and will be done
> long after Bush, it's a way of protecting the sheep - and it seems to
> have worked from the account above.
> 

Good point, Leythos. In addition we must come back to the basic problem of
these particular wiretaps. What is the expectation of privacy for one
making an international phone call? When crossing borders nations have
always had the right to control activities they deemed illegal. If one
were
a terrorist posing a threat to the United States or any other nation would
they ever have an expectation of privacy in making an international
telephone call? I think not. Were the call domestic the law would be
clearly otherwise. But if a border is crossed the Executive (President
Bush) has the power and the duty to intercept communications relating to
illegal activities with or without a warrent. This does not violate the
Fourth Amendment. Ask yourself the question, when was the last time an
Officer of the Customs needed a warrent? 

The opponents of the President on the far left such as Senator Russ
Feingold
of Wisconsin have said that this is illegal but no court has so ruled or
in
my opinion is likely to do so. The left wing nut fringe can yell in the
streets, scream and threaten to hold it's breath. Such efforts will not
change the facts of the matter or the law. 

-- 
James E. Morrow         

jamesemorrow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 




 9 Posts in Topic:
Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"Ethic" <Eth  2006-05-09 00:43:03 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"Jim Higgins" &  2006-05-08 19:13:47 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
Leythos <void@[EMAIL P  2006-05-08 23:35:58 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"James E. Morrow&quo  2006-05-09 03:59:17 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"GEO" Me@[EMAIL  2006-05-08 23:15:24 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
Leythos <void@[EMAIL P  2006-05-09 10:28:10 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"GEO" Me@[EMAIL  2006-05-09 20:35:39 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
Leythos <void@[EMAIL P  2006-05-10 03:16:12 
Re: Evidence Surfaces of Bush/Hayden's Illegal Spying
"Jim Higgins" &  2006-05-09 07:28:37 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Sat Nov 22 7:22:37 CST 2008.