This is a decent, short summary of the situation.

Here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDlYcn5HEs8)

I'm not moved, nor convinced.

That's a nice phone he has right there.

After I get my tax rebate courtesy of Bush and him, I'll use it to buy a better phone than him.

It's the perfect plan.

A gross over simplification.

I'm not moved, nor convinced.

ROFLMFAO!!!

:lolhit:

I didn't expect you to be.

ROFLMFAO!!!

:lolhit:

I didn't expect you to be.You ROF and LYAO pretty easily, don't you.

I'm not moved, nor convinced.

How do you feel about the government being able to read your e-mails, or listen to your phone calls?

How do you feel about the government being able to read your e-mails, or listen to your phone calls?
they could before. you never heard of ECHELON (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON)?

You ROF and LYAO pretty easily, don't you.

You crack me up Brooks.

they could before. you never heard of ECHELON (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON)?

I work with someone who used to work on Echelon for the NSA at Menwith-Hill and he informs me that it was never used for American domestic communications. (at least during the Clinton presidency when he worked there)

I work with someone who used to work on Echelon for the NSA at Menwith-Hill and he informs me that it was never used for American domestic communications. (at least during the Clinton presidency when he worked there)
was it the English friend that can't spell, or one of the auto workers that denied the existence of the job bank?

even if i did believe you, him not knowing doesn't mean it didn't happen.

they could before. you never heard of ECHELON (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON)?

Yes, I have heard of Echelon. Was it legal?

How do you feel about the government being able to read your e-mails, or listen to your phone calls?

How one feels about it doesn't matter. According to the law they get a warrant they can do it.

Haha, Menwith Hill...... I just tried to get stationed there! I got Germany instead, lol.

Yes, I have heard of Echelon. Was it legal?

Yes, because it was not used domestically.

How one feels about it doesn't matter. According to the law they get a warrant they can do it.

And according to President Bush, he doesn't need a warrent.

And according to President Bush, he doesn't need a warrent.

FISA doesn't say that at all.

FISA doesn't say that at all.

Bush does not obey FISA. Hense the illegality of his program and the sudden "urgent" need to revise it and give retroactive immunity to Bush and the corporations that helped him break the law.
:rolleyes:

Bush does not obey FISA. Hense the illegality of his program and the sudden "urgent" need to revise it and give retroactive immunity to Bush and the corporations that helped him break the law.
:rolleyes:

There are those who have that opinion. And at this point that's all it is, an opinion. No one has attempted to litigate the issue. Now why would that be?

Bush does not obey FISA. Hense the illegality of his program and the sudden "urgent" need to revise it and give retroactive immunity to Bush and the corporations that helped him break the law.
:rolleyes:
what criminal penalties are there for what you claim?

There are those who have that opinion. And at this point that's all it is, an opinion. No one has attempted to litigate the issue. Now why would that be?Because ... it isn't??

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/index.html

There are those who have that opinion. And at this point that's all it is, an opinion. No one has attempted to litigate the issue. Now why would that be?

Because ... it isn't??

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/index.html

I was going to say, because the justice dept is corrupted and politicized, but you are absolutely right Sedan.

Because ... it isn't??

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/index.html

That's right it isn't. The case was dismissed. The Bush administration appealed the ruling, and a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case last July

I guess now we'll hear that the 6th Circuit Court is politicized too.

That's right it isn't. The case was dismissed.Your contention was that no litigation had been attempted.

Clearly, you were mistaken.

That's right it isn't. The case was dismissed.


No, it was not dismissed. It was overturned on appeal by a court dominated by conservative Judges, the majority of whom were appointed by Bush or Reagan.


In the first federal challenge ever argued against the president's NSA spying program, the ACLU defeated the Bush administration in 2006, when a district court declared the program unconstitutional. In July 2007, the 6th Circuit overturned that decision. The appeals court refused to rule on the legality of the program, thereby denying Americans the chance to contest the warrantless surveillance of their telephone calls and e-mails. The ACLU recently appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Judges on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals

Danny J. Boggs, Chief Judge,
appointed 3/25/86 by President Ronald Reagan

Boyce F. Martin, Jr.,
appointed 9/26/79 by President Jimmy Carter

Alice M. Batchelder,
appointed 12/2/91 by President George Bush

Martha Craig Daughtrey,
appointed 11/22/93 by President William Clinton

Karen Nelson Moore,
appointed 3/24/95 by President William Clinton

R. Guy Cole, Jr.,
appointed 12/26/95 by President William Clinton

Eric L. Clay,
appointed 8/1/97 by President William Clinton

Ronald Lee Gilman,
appointed 11/7/97 by President William Clinton

Julia S. Gibbons,
appointed 7/31/02 by President George W. Bush

John M. Rogers,
appointed 11/26/02 by President George W. Bush

Jeffrey A. Sutton,
appointed 5/5/03 by President George W. Bush

Deborah Cook,
appointed 5/7/03 by President George W. Bush

Richard Griffin,
appointed 6/10/05 by President George W. Bush

David W. McKeague,
appointed 6/10/05 by President George W. Bush

Your contention was that no litigation had been attempted.

Clearly, you were mistaken.

indeed i was. So we have an attempt and the result was the case was dismissed.

indeed i was. So we have an attempt and the result was the case was dismissed.

Not so.
See post #25. The case is still in appeal.