NSA Wiretapping and Snowden on the run

[thernbroom]

Well damn snowden is going to Ecuador and they are talking about the government diverting the plane

 

[AV Dicey]

The 4th amendment is the supreme law.

He broke a law to expose unconstitutional government behavior.

Those people who violate the constitution take oaths as well to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

But let's not let facts get in the way.

Other than the 'secretive' FISA Courts, Obama styled all over the 4th amendment, and having the programs renewed every 90 days means every one is culpable.
Administration is merely executing what those fellas that create and interpret laws have brought forth...Montesquieu must be smiling in whatever circle of hell he was deposited, I know Obama is

 

[Blackking]

fuk this traitor

Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant.
-Ann Coulter
or

I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against.
-Malcolm X

yeaa just finished my move to midwest couple of days ago , lol brook gave me the when i sent him that PM

where in the midwest? Probably Chicago...

 

[The Real]

fuk this traitor

You mad?

 

[theworldismine13]

You mad?

Yeah

 

[The Real]

Yeah

Not in the freedom mood?

 

[theworldismine13]

Not in the freedom mood?

What has snowden done for freedom? How do freedom fighters end up in Hong Kong and Russia? Snowden is a spy

 

[newarkhiphop]

Ecuadorian president twitter account just tweeted that snowden has put in a asylum request with them :che:

 

[theworldismine13]

Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant.
-Ann Coulter
or

I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against.
-Malcolm X

Are those supposed to be contrasting statements? Cuz they aren't

 

[newarkhiphop]

Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant.
-Ann Coulter
or

I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it's for or against.
-Malcolm X



where in the midwest? Probably Chicago...

Spoiler

nebraska

 

[Type Username Here]

He's a judge now?
Tell me what was illegal and unconstitutional about it, Justice XXX

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]

How does collecting millions upon millions of people's personal information through phone metadata or using PRISM to snoop into people's emails/social media fit any of the following criteria:

1) Is reasonable
2) Is done by warrant
3) Probable Cause
4) Describes the place, person or things to be seized

I'll wait.

The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls, a participant in the briefing said.

NSA spying flap extends to contents of U.S. phone calls | Politics and Law - CNET News

 

[Liquid]

Spoiler

nebraska

yooo...I don't question where people go, but why out there? If you don't mind

That's a HUGE change from Newark lol

edit: Steady growth from the 90's till now in Omaha

 

[Type Username Here]

Other than the 'secretive' FISA Courts, Obama styled all over the 4th amendment, and having the programs renewed every 90 days means every one is culpable.
Administration is merely executing what those fellas that create and interpret laws have brought forth...Montesquieu must be smiling in whatever circle of hell he was deposited, I know Obama is

It's okay. Obama will get away with it. Just like Bush and Cheney did.

At the end of the day, he's in charge of the executive branch, which the NSA, CIA, DOD and DOJ answer directly to.


Just like Nixon shoulders a lot of LBJ's Vietnam war, Obama will be tied directly to War Crimes, Drones, Indefinite detention, Spying on Americans, Bailouts for the wealthy, and so on.

 

[thernbroom]

Mobile apps ? RT get the app people live streaming news , best coverage of the snowden story

 

[No1]

How does collecting millions upon millions of people's personal information through phone metadata or using PRISM to snoop into people's emails/social media fit any of the following criteria:

1) Is reasonable
2) Is done by warrant
3) Probable Cause
4) Describes the place, person or things to be seized

I'll wait.

This in and of itself is not a full argument. I don't know how many times I can say this, and you'll probably give me some "rah rah rah" Obama apologist spiel for just telling the truth but just referring to the Constitution when we're having a legal discussion is never enough. It's barely a starting point. You know better than that. You know that you have to look at reigning judicial opinions and case law. Which is why, I said this guy going on trial would probably force us to look further at the justifications and legal arguments made by the FISA courts and government attorneys. As we are now, we can barely mount a legal challenge. @ltheghost or any of the students in the legal discussion thread will tell you the same. Policy is only one part, and often an unconvincing part of legal arguments. To quote Marshall,

We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding.

A constitution, to contain an accurate detail of all the subdivisions of which its great powers will admit, and of all the means by which they may be carried into execution, would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. ... Its nature, therefore, requires, that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves.

@superunknown23 is right, we need more. We need to see the basis of the government's definition of "reasonable" and if it's anything we will ever support (which I doubt).