Posted on 07/10/2008 7:36:59 PM PDT by tobyhill
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush signed a law on Thursday overhauling the rules for eavesdropping on terrorism suspects but immediately met a civil liberties challenge calling it a threat to Americans' privacy.
"This law will protect the liberties of our citizens while maintaining the vital flow of intelligence," Bush said at a White House ceremony to mark a rare legislative victory for the president during his last year in office.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in Manhattan federal court as Bush signed the measure and called for the law to be voided as a violation of constitutional speech and privacy protections.
"Spying on Americans without warrants or judicial approval is an abuse of government power, and that's exactly what this law allows," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said in announcing the suit.
The action was filed on behalf of human-rights groups, journalists, labor organizations and others who say they fear the law will allow the U.S. government to monitor their activities, including compiling of critical reports on the United States
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
A British ditty from the beginning of the last century:
"You do not have
To bribe or twist
The arm
Of the British journalist.
Considering what he would do
Unasked
There is no reason to."
This, of course, applies equally to the American BlameStreamMedia.
Long long overdue. Too bad the UN can't tag along.
Summertime at the Ranch there are an abundance of flies. I’ve often wondered what good the damned things are. Other than feed for some birds and lizards they seem to exist simply to torture the animals and us. I’ve wondered if we could turn them into alternative fuels at times.
I’ve considered the ACLU in the same light as flies. Wondering what good the damned things are.
there’s a legitimate concern about government use of the public media to ferrett out terrorists.
but i don’t understand why the libs wanted to set up the telephone co’s for lawsuits. that ain’t gonna fly.
I expect someone like the ACLU to sue but for journalist to be suing only tells about their wanting to be the story instead of reporting the story. There’s nothing in the laws that grant them access to terrorist.
The Fourth Amendment: "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."
agree.
many people i talk to have no idea how the nsa or a like govt org goes about getting this.
some older people actually think there’s someone listening in.
no! no! no! i tell them—303,000,000 americans and 303,000,000 people would be required to listen in!
then i tell them about arab language specialists and mathematicians developing algorithms to grab the stuff out of the air—radio signals of cellphones.
not to mention the old level 5 phone co switching stations.
so on.
Since the communication derives from outside the US I guess the feds will only listen to half the conversation.
I think we can depend on our government officials and employees of the communication companies not to engage in any inappropriate snooping, even if they can do it without warrants.
I have never understood why the administration couldn’t go after terrorists in accordance with the limitations placed on it by FISA. Why does our government want to be able to operate in total secrecy, spy on whoever it wishes with no record? Doesn’t sound good to me. To protect our freedom, we must protect ourselves against our own government as well.
Yes, the ACLU does a lot of crazy things. But if this is right:
“The law lets government “conduct intrusive surveillance without ever telling a court who it intends to surveil, what phone lines and e-mail addresses it intends to monitor, where its surveillance targets are located, or why it’s conducting the surveillance,”
then I have to say I am in agreement with them. A secret government invites abuse of our rights. Remember, it may well be Marxist, terrorist-loving libs we’re giving this power to.
“It would appear that the ACLU is an extension of AQ in the USA. Time for them to go.”
Does anyone have an idea on how the ACLU could be legally eliminated? I’d love to hear a viable option detailed.
“I think we can depend on our government officials and employees of the communication companies not to engage in any inappropriate snooping, even if they can do it without warrants.”
Of course we can depend on our elected officials not to do anything unethical. Who could believe otherwise?
Exactly! Privacy laws as against the government are superfluous, if not merely unenforceable. And warrants are only needed if the government takes the evidence to a court. As long as the evidence never goes to court, there can't be a fourth amendment violation. The government can snoop as much as it wants, as long as it never charges the bad guys in court. Courts are bad anyway. They let the bad guys off. Down with courts, up with surveillance.
A choice has to be made ~ you're with us or against us.
If their talking to americans, then you’d only need 151 million. LOL!
***A secret government invites abuse of our rights.***
and loose lips sink ships. If you’re not talking to terrorist then you have nothing to worry about unless you’re naturally paranoid then you probably worry all the time anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.