So we should allow spying on innocent Americans to prevent a possible attack in the UK? That is what they are saying, isn’t it?
What’s not being said here is that someone, somewhere, told the NSA where to look. There’s no way they knew what this ‘code’ meant absent someone telling them about it.
In short, they made the case to surveil this email account, but they still have not made a case for spying on EVERY email account.
(And everyone be polite and wave at our guests from the Federal Government who are monitoring FR today!)
Retroactive justification for stealing the 4th Amendment from us.
Profiling is a good tool. Use it.
And the subtle message is that spying on our email is okay.
They keep trotting out this one plot arguably foiled by DESTROYING THE BILL OF RIGHTS FOR 300,000,000 AMERCANS.
A$$****s.
Where is the SECOND conviction?
Next time they may raid a wedding in Peshawar...
The interesting takeaway I have from this is that these guys obviously never assumed that their email exchanges were safe... everything was in code.
HUMA! Where have I heard that name before?
This is more shiny objects and squirrel pointing.
No sale.
The NSA was listening to OBL’s HQ phone calls for three years before 9/11. They tracked two hijackers to the U.S.
The Boston bombers were warned about twice and had FBI surveillance.
Why do have to believe they need a police state to do a good job?
Have they disrupted any plots at all that did not include a government informant or an outside tip ?
Why is this story relevant to Prism? NSA was given a tip by the Brits, they ( FBI) obtained a warrant on “probable cause” and caught another terrorist. No ones objecting to that, except the terrorists. Fourth Amendment was honored. Has no relevance to Prism unless the Brits are doing the same and got the address originally thru a Prism type program they are operating.
What’s funny is we have foreign newspapers blowing the lid off of Obama’s monitoring with nary a peep from the domestics.
Then we have the domestic papers riding to Obama’s rescue, defending his practices.