Codename: Prism

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[zipman]

I think you need to become more informed as to the scope of the present eavesdropping program, you're stuck on stupid.

LOL, and you're still defending Bush and your precious republicans

 

[Busybody]

LOL, and you're still defending Bush and your precious republicans

they say JEWS are smart

you prove them

WRONG

DISMEMBER YOURSELF

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

You can bold anything you want, the real point is the one I raised. I don't care if it went on for ten years, the extent of the overreach didn't become apparent to the public until now, gleefully expanded upon and carried out on Obama's watch....you fucking asshole.

You're a fucking liar.

Once again, you bring great shame to yourself, your family (including your three sons Lee, Harvey and Oswald), and the United States Marine Corps.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Since Samantha Powers has advocated a U.S. military invasion of Israel, I suspect Zip's extremities will be needed for his coming moon barking ovation.

Wow, Vettebigot, I honestly thought you'd be lining up to suck her dick, since she described Hilary Clinton as a monster.

Also, you're a motherfucking liar about her claim to want to "invade Israel", she said she wanted to use forces to keep Israel from bombing the shit out of Palestine, which is not a bad idea.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Squibbs]

Codename: whiny old poopy pants.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yes, we are intelligent enough to know exactly what she is advocating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oFdt6fjdHQw#t=4s

Didn't watch the video, did you. You just read the video title.

Tell us exactly where in that video she advocated invading Israel.

You can't.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I was thinking, after reading Jim Sensenbrenner's assertion that the net cast was in excess of the authority he authored in section 215, and your post that the Constitution affords no expectation of privacy for business, being enough at odds that a violation of 215 might be permitted by the Constitution. The pertinent language of 215 today in the reauthorized version of the PA being:

"must be 'relevant' to an authorized preliminary or full investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a U.S. person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities."

Given that the government can assert it is "protecting against international terrorism" as a sole and sufficient rationale for a FISA warrant under the current Patriot Act language, I cannot envision a way for it to be "in violation" of section 215. It is an either/or principle at work here. Either the materials production is "relevant to an authorized or full investigation to obtain foreign intelligence...etc., OR to protect against international terrorism, etc." Doesn't have to be both.

I believe Sensenbrenner is underestimating the authority he in fact authored. The application may be broader than he anticipated, but I don't believe he can legitimately argue the government's practice violates the letter of the law. I don't believe the language of sections 214 and 215 have changed since the acts passage and the act has been renewed prior to its sunset several times.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Given that the government can assert it is "protecting against international terrorism" as a sole and sufficient rationale for a FISA warrant under the current Patriot Act language, I cannot envision a way for it to be "in violation" of section 215. It is an either/or principle at work here. Either the materials production is "relevant to an authorized or full investigation to obtain foreign intelligence...etc., OR to protect against international terrorism, etc." Doesn't have to be both.

I believe Sensenbrenner is underestimating the authority he in fact authored. The application may be broader than he anticipated, but I don't believe he can legitimately argue the government's practice violates the letter of the law. I don't believe the language of sections 214 and 215 have changed since the acts passage and the act has been renewed prior to its sunset several times.

Wait wait wait. Hogan, just for the record are you saying that Sensenbrenner had to pass his bill to find out what was in it?

 

[unregistered]

 

[phrodeau]

Yes, we are intelligent enough to know exactly what she is advocating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oFdt6fjdHQw#t=4s

But not quite intelligent enough to figure out exactly what she said.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/04/24/still-not-true-conservatives-revive-falsehood-t/184127

 

[RobDownSouth]

But not quite intelligent enough to figure out exactly what she said.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/04/24/still-not-true-conservatives-revive-falsehood-t/184127

He doesn't know what she said, nor does he care. He read the headline and regurgitated it here. It's becoming the norm around here for Lit's Marines Without Honor (see also: AJ, miles, Chinabandit)

 

[phrodeau]

He doesn't know what she said, nor does he care. He read the headline and regurgitated it here. It's becoming the norm around here for Lit's Marines Without Honor (see also: AJ, miles, Chinabandit)

I assumed that vetteman was an America First kind of guy. I guess he's really an Israel First guy, like miles and busybody.