NSA whistleblower: warrantless wiretaps targeted journalists
Register, UK - Jan 24, 2009
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/25 ... velations/
Russell Tice has dropped another bombshell. More than two years after he leaked the existence of the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program to the New York Times in late 2006, Tice says warrantless wiretaps specifically targeted journalists and news organizations - all day, every day.
The original outrage over the warrantless wiretapping arose out of what appeared to be (though it was never confirmed) a massive data mining effort on the part of the NSA that routinely - and without apparent concern for the search and seizure requirements of the Fourth Amendment - redirected untold numbers of communications onto NSA super computers for analysis. The latest allegations, flushed out over the course of two interviews with MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann, reveal the outline of other shadowy efforts by the NSA whose existence had previously been the subject of speculation.
All communications go through the nsa and all information is data-mined for keywords. Every phone call and every email. Not necessarily a human listening to all conversations though the spooks did like to listen to phone sex I read somewhere.
I do believe it is a constitutional right not a privilege to be able to travel where and how you want.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution as written by our nation’s Founding Fathers states that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.â€
Gungrabbing bill hr 45 sucks!
That statement (at least with regards to Canada) is not the whole truth. Yes, the rate of violent crimes in Canada increased following introduction of firearms legislation. But it actually increased at a <i>slower</i> rate of increase than in the US over the same time period. If you really want to imply cause-and-effect, it would seem that legislation did have the intended effect of preventing some violent crimes, doesn't it? (I, frankly, don't imply causation... there are too many confounding influences).Moxxorman wrote:Violent crime has increased in Australia, Canada, and Great Britain following adoption of legislation restricting firearms.
I think there are pros and cons in the systems both here in the US and in Canada. I think it would be a huge mistake to introduce Canada's legislation to the US or vice versa. A big reason gun control works there, in as much as it does, has to do with differences in our cultural identity and history, with regards to route to independence, roles in international wars, urban violence, settling of the west and north, etc. Personally, I don't see the point in owning anything beyond a rifle or shotgun for hunting... but that's just my upbringing showing through.
I think just because the constitution and the bill of rights guarantees the right to bear arms it doesn't preclude certain restrictions. There's also the right to privacy but we erode that right to protect the general population. I don't always like it but it is sometimes necessary. If there are disqualifiers for misdemeanor offenses and psychiatric issues then there will be the opportunity to have a hearing and challenge the fairness of having that right taken away. It's the same when the govt. takes your property or job. It can be done but there are safeguards.
Jesus only knows that she tries too hard. She's only trying to keep the sky from falling.
-Everlast
-Everlast
L K Day wrote:The right to bear arms is a constitutionally guaranteed right.
So, with this bill, is the right to bear arms being infringed upon or is it the people complaining about infringing on the rights of a well-regulated militia (i.e. National Guard in modern times)?The Founding Fathers wrote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Fuzzy language born in the vacuum of 200 yrs ago is just like statistics. Statistics are like people, you torture them enough and they'll tell you exactly what you want to hear.
Not that I am anything but a fan of the constitution.
-
michaelarmand
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:08 pm
I just can't resist.....Crankmas wrote:Too bad they don't end abortion if there so interested in stopping people from killing people oh wait that's a hot button sooo non PC thought-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2CaBR3z85c