|
Edward Snowden (pg. 11)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
I think you will find what you consider a warrant a rather broad order of operational parameters which undermines the purpose of what a warrant serves. That isn't really a warrant is it. And if it is , then that should raise a red flag no ?
The problem seems to be this need to be right without just taking a step back and thinking about wether this should be legal even if it is. I don't even see the need to justify its current legality. It is wrong rather scary and kinda ed that actual citizens are totally fine with unchecked domestic surveillance
I mean what if they see your wife and think they actually killed the wrong guy and that moustached ape looking fatty the drone is picking up is giving a 90% match to osama. They check your internet use and notice all the trance mixes and determine no ing way this guy is american. Drone is sent, hellfire takes out the ape while you are also blown to bits which is fine because anyone within 1 mile radius of an enemy combatant is also an enemy. We aren't there yet but i'm pretty sure your ape wife being bagged and tagged would piss you off. Not to mention the storm PETA would start creating a smokescream to the real issue. Fat girls being able to procreate. |
It is checked.
You're an idiot.
Continue spewing onto your keyboard, please. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
*As someone from the NSA reading L4Cs posts exclaims "what the is this guy on about? He's a music school dropout, what the does he know about anything?*
*Injects worm into his computer and is shocked and appalled at the amount of hardcore gay porn on his HDD* |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| a warrant should be specific. How is FISA's guidelines specific ? They are virtually given carte blanche. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
*As someone from the NSA reading L4Cs posts exclaims "what the is this guy on about? He's a music school dropout, what the does he know about anything?*
*Injects worm into his computer and is shocked and appalled at the amount of hardcore gay porn on his HDD* |
those videos of your wife getting trained by a basketball team is hardcore but definately not gay. Not pretty but not gay. On the porn spectrum, i would say it would be closer to man on ape sex. But definitely not even close to gay. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| Still not funny |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
a warrant should be specific. How is FISA's guidelines specific ? They are virtually given carte blanche. |
Have you read anything about what's going on?
Because every word you type screams no. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| Of course. Haven't you read how FISA gives out warrants for no reason? It's not like it stipulates the reason, type of data, and specific details of what the data can be used for or anything. |
|
|
| Spacey Orange |
| contorted as his arguments may be, at least L4C's heart is in the right place. i wish i could say the same of others. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
Of course. Haven't you read how FISA gives out warrants for no reason? It's not like it stipulates the reason, type of data, and specific details of what the data can be used for or anything. |
Fisa court-approved policies allow the NSA to:
• Keep data that could potentially contain details of US persons for up to five years;
• Retain and make use of "inadvertently acquired" domestic communications if they contain usable intelligence, information on criminal activity, threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted, or are believed to contain any information relevant to cybersecurity;
• Preserve "foreign intelligence information" contained within attorney-client communications;
• Access the content of communications gathered from "U.S. based machine[s]" or phone numbers in order to establish if targets are located in the US, for the purposes of ceasing further surveillance.
sort of goes against the idea that they are carefully issuing warrants with a narrow and specific scope. You would have to be ing retarded to think that collecting data on everyone could be covered under the amount of warrants they claim to have issued. The fact that they are gives you somewhat an idea what they mean by warrant and it is rather vague. usually most would consider any term like inadvertent as a basis of operation regarding something this sensitive rather problematic. It amazes me that you laud the fact that others don't know what the government are doing yet are so ing gullible that you defend it because the people doing it tell you everything is fine and legal. |
|
|
| enydo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spacey Orange
contorted as his arguments may be, at least L4C's heart is in the right place. i wish i could say the same of others. |
GOD YES |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spacey Orange
contorted as his arguments may be, at least L4C's heart is in the right place. i wish i could say the same of others. |
Defending the factual aspects of this case is not the same thing as endorsing its practice. I obviously can't speak for anyone else, but I would vie for a complete dissolution of the NSA, ATF, DEA, and severe snips to the CIA's ability to wage an international war with no military oversight or writ of Congress. But that doesn't mean any/everything they do is legally in the wrong; the discourse needs to focus on the provisions of legality in the first place, rather than the spirit of how you think things ought to work.
What the NSA did was well within their charge and well within the law. The problem is not the NSA, it's the laws. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| Down with laws! Ron Paul 2016!!! |
|
|
|
|
