I don't know that it is a scandal. Wasn't everything they did lawful and with the approval of the leadership of the Intelligence Committees in both houses? Is it disturbing and potentially dangerous to our privacy, of course it is. I assumed they were doing stuff like this and more after 9-11 so it doesn't surprise me.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Whatever happened to "probable cause" ?
- Thread starter kandlekid
- Start date
I don't know that it is a scandal. Wasn't everything they did lawful and with the approval of the leadership of the Intelligence Committees in both houses? Is it disturbing and potentially dangerous to our privacy, of course it is. I assumed they were doing stuff like this and more after 9-11 so it doesn't surprise me.
Then you are even more ignorant than most of us thought.Quote from bigarrow:
I don't know that it is a scandal. Wasn't everything they did lawful and with the approval of the leadership of the Intelligence Committees in both houses? Is it disturbing and potentially dangerous to our privacy, of course it is. I assumed they were doing stuff like this and more after 9-11 so it doesn't surprise me.
We were told that communications between the states and foreign countries would be monitored. That if any type of surveillance in the US would, if not getting a warrant beforehand, would have to get one after the fact to justify it. Communications between Americans in the U.S. was to be subject to previous privacy laws. The Act also allowed agencies to share information between themselves which they couldn't do before.
No where were we told ALL of our communications would be copied and stored for eternity for possible investigation. No where were we told a secret court would give this type of permission to invade our privacy and credit card charges/data without cause. Much of this is unconstitutional even if they found a way to do it through the Patriot Act. The constitution supersedes the Act.
There is just a fine line between what is happening now and the society in the book "1984."
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3820901#post3820901
Quote from BSAM:
Google these words, brother Big: fourth amendment
Just because the current crop of thugs in D.C. say something is legal; that doesn't make it legal.
If congress passes a law and it is not struck down by the courts then it is legal. From what I read the illegal argument isn't going to work.
Quote from bigarrow:
If congress passes a law and it is not struck down by the courts then it is legal. From what I read the illegal argument isn't going to work.
Well, going by your line of conclusions, if the NSA activities are in conflict with the fourth amendment and the fourth amendment is still in the constitution, then what they have been doing is still illegal, no?
You've got that backwards.Quote from bigarrow:
If congress passes a law and it is not struck down by the courts then it is legal. From what I read the illegal argument isn't going to work.
Until a law is challenged and upheld by the Supreme Court it may be unlawful. Even then it could be overturned by a later Supreme Court.
Many unconstitutional laws stay on the books and are enforced because they have never been challenged. It costs a lot of money to repeatedly challenge a law and get it before the Supreme Court.
Quote from BSAM:
Well, going by your line of conclusions, if the NSA activities are in conflict with the fourth amendment and the fourth amendment is still in the constitution, then what they have been doing is still illegal, no?
Yeah but that's not the way it works. None of us are in charge of deciding what is or isn't constitutional. I doubt this even goes to court. On a different note try arguing with the IRS about a bank account seizure being unconstitutional, which IMO should be.
That's not true. If Congress should pass a law that a large number of people think is unconstitutional that law would be ignored by many from the beginning and rightfully so. The burden in most jurisdictions would shift to Congress to show it is within the Constitution.Quote from bigarrow:
Yeah but that's not the way it works. None of us are in charge of deciding what is or isn't constitutional. I doubt this even goes to court. On a different note try arguing with the IRS about a bank account seizure being unconstitutional, which IMO should be.
The proposed gun laws that Ovomit tried to pass are a perfect example. Many law enforcement agencies said they would not enforce those laws since they would probably be unconstitutional. The same might happen with certain provisions in ObamaCare such as the birth control mandate.
Quote from bigarrow:
I don't know that it is a scandal. Wasn't everything they did lawful and with the approval of the leadership of the Intelligence Committees in both houses? Is it disturbing and potentially dangerous to our privacy, of course it is. I assumed they were doing stuff like this and more after 9-11 so it doesn't surprise me.
Potentially dangerous to our privacy.
Buddy, there is NO privacy. The NSA listens to the content of every fucking phone call. All internet, email, web traffic is tracked, traced and logged.
The entire grid is a gigantic spying machine, mostly to poach corporate secrets (insider trading/R&D theft) and political blackmail.
Political fucking blackmail. That's how dictators operate. Ya, no big deal.
Quote from achilles28:
Potentially dangerous to our privacy.
Buddy, there is NO privacy. The NSA listens to the content of every fucking phone call. All internet, email, web traffic is tracked, traced and logged.
The entire grid is a gigantic spying machine, mostly to poach corporate secrets (insider trading/R&D theft) and political blackmail.
Political fucking blackmail. That's how dictators operate. Ya, no big deal.
Who's the dictator ?