Bush Admin: Caught For More Unconstitutional and ILLEGAL spying!

A victory for all freedom loving citizens! What have I been telling you guys for months now???? Exactly this!

A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.

The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_go_pr_wh/warrantless_surveillance

 

lmao....I saw that, and I was thinking of posting that here just for you....I knew you'd like it.

 

I know I'm gonna call every terrorist I know, since my right to call them is now back! SWEET!

A few days after the NSA program proved instrumental in stopping the UK attacks; one has to question the sanity of this (carter appointed judge - showing how important the presidency is). Carter, as usual, infecting policy almost 30 years after being tossed out of office. Carter; helping the wrong side since 1976.

 

dont they have 72 hours AFTER the wiretap to ask for a warrant? Sounds like they were just lazy to file the paperwork, there is a special court to take care of the wiretap warrants. There does need to be checks and balances in this system.

Do you think they know what I am talking about when I call my friend and complain that the "laundry" I picked up from him has to many seeds in it?

 

About time. I mean, yeah, it won't actually stop them from spying on their own citizens, but at least they won't keep trying to justify it as being legal.

-Michael

 

The blame on this realy falls on senate/house republicans. They had YEARS to come up with legistlation to make it okay (and since Democrats "said" they had no problem with it), it should have been easy to pass. I'd say laziness, or more likely, no stomach for a fight, is to blame for it.

Heh a relative of mine would be gone a long time ago if that were the case . My understanding has always been that they don't actually listen to calls, they listen for patterns of calls, specifically to known terrorist numbers or to their agents and such.

ACLU is good at shopping for judges and they found a good one this time. One who was bound to rubber stamp their opinion. ACLU excels in this. Also, since these are "secret", none of the plaintiffs even know if they were being monitored or not, so the opinion is based on theoretically tapping of people, even though they may or may not have been. I always thought you had to be an actual party to something (not a theoretical party) to bring a case. Guess not.

 

Where in the Constitution does it state the an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat decides what is in the Constitution?

Why does the ACLU you get special jurisdiction of a federal judge when the rest of us have to use representative government and elections for our complaints?

 

Glad to know you don't stand by our constitution or charish our freedoms big boy. Why don't you just go ahead and start waving a fascist flag around with gtech who I'm sure is also crushed the government has been caught once again.

 

When all else fails; roll out the fascist label. Such a good little puppy.

 

Personally, I don't understand where the concern is. Generally, I think they need a better program that initated firstly, then reviews to prevent misuse. Obviously since it's out in the open, I'd expect (but I'll not hold my breath) some sort of iniation in making legislation that will mend this rift.

I don't know if people remember that the 9/11 hijackers used their phones right before take-off. Curious if the 'unconsitutional' system would have helped?

*shrug*

 

Exactly.

If they're only using it for "known terrorists" numbers like lorien would have us all believe, they should have no problems getting warrants.

Instead the Bush admin would rather bypass the constitution and all of ours rights for "convenience" using nothing more than fear mongering.

 

It's tortured logic, yo. If you do not know who the terrorists are; and you cannot profile based upon commonalities, you cannot find out if they call known terror cells or agents, and you cannot check out international banking transfers how can you ever find them?

 

I think that word is a bit overused. If you actually lived in a country that was fascist you'd realize how much freedom have here. I try not to use socialism, fascism, communism, etc, unless I truely think they apply.

 

They can track terrorists by getting warrants.

Warrantless wire tapping was always illegal, and now it's official. Just like bush's little war criminals trials that were found unconstitutional (what 2 months ago?)...

How many times are we going to have to go through this before the president figures out he's not a dictator and the constitution isn't gone yet?

 

Look at what's been done since George Bush took office and tell me it doesn't bother you. Tell me you actually believe our freedom isn't being encroached upon?

When we can't even trust the election results or have to wonder if our homes have been searched secretly... we're not living in a free country any more.

 

So, they are supposed to get warrants by getting evidence they are not allowed to collect? Again. Tortured logic. If they are lazy, and there is 72 hours after the fact; then laziness is not an excuse. But when dealing with these people; they aren't going to wear a sign.

 

Generally speaking, warrants are prodominately given...with very few exceptions. I still think the method must be intiated immediately, then reviewed...I do believe that would require legislation, though.

 

I'm pretty sure it's not based on "known terrorists", it's based on suspected ones. So, using that logic, if they don't define the parameters on what constitutes "suspected", then they are asking for basically a carte blanche on eavesdropping. I mean, so if I contact a suspected terrorist, fine, start wiretapping me. Makes me a suspect. Then, you call me, well, you're a suspect too. And ok, you're mom calls you... gotta put her on the list. And so on.

Also, if they don't define the limits on their profiling then it allows such ridiculous assumptions as an FBI agent thought you "looked" suspicious as being enough. Sure, you can argue that they would never go that far, but they will will if we allow them to.

Don't get me wrong... I'm not your standard liberal. If a need arises to assassinate a potential enemy, frag the bastard. Just don't claim you had the right to, and for god's sake don't get caught. Do it quietly and quickly. Much much preferable if it's going to prevent a war.

Same with the eavesdropping... if you have to then do it. But if we make it legal to do so, then we are opening the door to legalize further intrusions into out rights... it's just a road we don't want to go down, period.

-Michael

 

Sure lorien. Just like they never solve a murder case or robbery without illegally spying on every single "suspect" right.

 

You fearmongerer ; p

It doesn't bother me...when it is remotely like Lincoln's days, then I'll worry. With America, as long as we have state powers, the federal government will have some level of weakness. I do have concerns, but not of your kind.

Valid concern, but what puzzles me is that if America was so concerned about their elections, why don't they control their ballot method(s)...it's a decesion made by counties, I believe... that's not hard to push that through, as we have a secure method where I live....

Although we don't check indentification!?

Do you have any valid reason to believe this is happening on a wide scale?

I'd say the most disturbing thing is when a man of arab descent was put in jail with no sentence for a coarse of 2 years, then released after his lawyer got him out...the whole time there was no charges. That's disturbing, but I'm scared someones going to search my house. I have nothing to hide.

Bush's term will end soon, and if Americans actually concerns themselves over their elections then they should bother their local representitives...have you done that?