View in: Desktop
Copyright @2024 TigerDroppings.com. All rights reserved.
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Posted by
Message
Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related to
Posted by Cali 4 LSU on 3/7/17 at 2:25 am60
The actual current events other than it shows how Obama Admin (or any president for that matter) could very, very easily spy on anyone without any requests for anything or any repercussions.
LINK
Most notable quote (& there were many):
All it takes is a few unethical politicians... say one that would lie to congress, use the IRS to target conservatives, or use tax payer monies to fund left wing activist groups. Do you know anyone like that?
LINK
Most notable quote (& there were many):
quote:
Binney considers himself a conservative, and, as an opponent of big government, he worries that the N.S.A.’s data-mining program is so extensive that it could help “create an Orwellian state.” Whereas wiretap surveillance requires trained human operators, data mining is automated, meaning that the entire country can be watched. Conceivably, U.S. officials could “monitor the Tea Party, or reporters, whatever group or organization you want to target,” he says. “It’s exactly what the Founding Fathers never wanted.”
On October 31, 2001, soon after Binney concluded that the N.S.A. was headed in an unethical direction, he retired. He had served for thirty-six years. His wife worked there, too. Wiebe, the analyst, and Ed Loomis, a computer scientist at SARC, also left. Binney said of his decision, “I couldn’t be an accessory to subverting the Constitution.”
All it takes is a few unethical politicians... say one that would lie to congress, use the IRS to target conservatives, or use tax payer monies to fund left wing activist groups. Do you know anyone like that?
re: Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related toPosted by The Baker on 3/7/17 at 2:27 am to Cali 4 LSU
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10 at 7:48 pm
re: Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related toPosted by Cali 4 LSU on 3/7/17 at 2:29 am to The Baker
That was one long arse article!
re: Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related toPosted by SquirrelyBama on 3/7/17 at 6:31 am to Cali 4 LSU
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/5 at 7:55 am
re: Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related toPosted by WhiskeyPapa on 3/7/17 at 7:07 am to Cali 4 LSU
Without a doubt my favorite court case is Mapp v. Ohio from 1961.
The cops go to this lady's house looking for gambling related paraphernalia. She turns them away as they have no warrant. They return 3 hours later with a "warrant" which she snatches away and puts in her dress. They subdue her and take the piece of paper. No true warrant was ever produced which is bad enough.
In searching the house, they did find gambling slips and what not and also a small stash of pornography which she said belonged to a previous tenant.
wiki:
"Mapp was arrested, charged, and cleared on a misdemeanor charge of possessing numbers paraphernalia; but several months later, after she refused to testify against Shon Birns, Edward Keeling and their associates at their trial that October for the attempted shakedown of Don King,[5] she was prosecuted for possession of the books, found guilty at a 1958 trial of "knowingly having had in her possession and under her control certain lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs in violation of 2905.34 of Ohio's Revised Code", and sentenced to one to seven years in prison.
Mapp then appealed her case to the Supreme Court, on the grounds that the police had no probable cause to suspect her of having the books. She stated that the 4th Amendment should be incorporated to the state and local level. She argued that the police couldn't use the books as evidence in trial because they were found without a warrant and therefore illegally recovered. Mapp is not the first to call upon this law.
Decision[edit]
The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 in favor of Mapp. The Court overturned the conviction, and five justices found that the States were bound to exclude evidence seized in violation of the 4th Amendment.[6] This ruling officially applied the exclusionary rule to the States."
LINK
Here is the point: The Bill of Rights is just a joke now, and back in the day, many of the states only ratified the Constitution contingent on the protection of individual rights.
"Antipathy toward a strong central government was only one concern among those opposed to the Constitution; of equal concern to many was the fear that the Constitution did not protect individual rights and freedoms sufficiently. Virginian George Mason, author of Virginia's 1776 Declaration of Rights, was one of three delegates to the Constitutional Convention who refused to sign the final document because it did not enumerate individual rights. Together with Patrick Henry, he campaigned vigorously against ratification of the Constitution by Virginia. Indeed, five states, including Massachusetts, ratified the Constitution on the condition that such amendments be added immediately.
When the first Congress convened in New York City in September 1789, the calls for amendments protecting individual rights were virtually unanimous. Congress quickly adopted 12 such amendments; by December 1791, enough states had ratified 10 amendments to make them part of the Constitution. Collectively, they are known as the Bill of Rights. Among their provisions: freedom of speech, press, religion, and the right to assemble peacefully, protest and demand changes (First Amendment); protection against unreasonable searches, seizures of property and arrest (Fourth Amendment); due process of law in all criminal cases (Fifth Amendment); right to a fair and speedy trial (Sixth Amendment); protection against cruel and unusual punishment (Eighth Amendment); and provision that the people retain additional rights not listed in the Constitution (Ninth Amendment)."
LINK
Obviously the 4th amendment protections don't allow of allowing the government to cyber monitor people.
The government provided to us by the Founding Fathers is no more. It just makes you sick.
The cops go to this lady's house looking for gambling related paraphernalia. She turns them away as they have no warrant. They return 3 hours later with a "warrant" which she snatches away and puts in her dress. They subdue her and take the piece of paper. No true warrant was ever produced which is bad enough.
In searching the house, they did find gambling slips and what not and also a small stash of pornography which she said belonged to a previous tenant.
wiki:
"Mapp was arrested, charged, and cleared on a misdemeanor charge of possessing numbers paraphernalia; but several months later, after she refused to testify against Shon Birns, Edward Keeling and their associates at their trial that October for the attempted shakedown of Don King,[5] she was prosecuted for possession of the books, found guilty at a 1958 trial of "knowingly having had in her possession and under her control certain lewd and lascivious books, pictures, and photographs in violation of 2905.34 of Ohio's Revised Code", and sentenced to one to seven years in prison.
Mapp then appealed her case to the Supreme Court, on the grounds that the police had no probable cause to suspect her of having the books. She stated that the 4th Amendment should be incorporated to the state and local level. She argued that the police couldn't use the books as evidence in trial because they were found without a warrant and therefore illegally recovered. Mapp is not the first to call upon this law.
Decision[edit]
The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 in favor of Mapp. The Court overturned the conviction, and five justices found that the States were bound to exclude evidence seized in violation of the 4th Amendment.[6] This ruling officially applied the exclusionary rule to the States."
LINK
Here is the point: The Bill of Rights is just a joke now, and back in the day, many of the states only ratified the Constitution contingent on the protection of individual rights.
"Antipathy toward a strong central government was only one concern among those opposed to the Constitution; of equal concern to many was the fear that the Constitution did not protect individual rights and freedoms sufficiently. Virginian George Mason, author of Virginia's 1776 Declaration of Rights, was one of three delegates to the Constitutional Convention who refused to sign the final document because it did not enumerate individual rights. Together with Patrick Henry, he campaigned vigorously against ratification of the Constitution by Virginia. Indeed, five states, including Massachusetts, ratified the Constitution on the condition that such amendments be added immediately.
When the first Congress convened in New York City in September 1789, the calls for amendments protecting individual rights were virtually unanimous. Congress quickly adopted 12 such amendments; by December 1791, enough states had ratified 10 amendments to make them part of the Constitution. Collectively, they are known as the Bill of Rights. Among their provisions: freedom of speech, press, religion, and the right to assemble peacefully, protest and demand changes (First Amendment); protection against unreasonable searches, seizures of property and arrest (Fourth Amendment); due process of law in all criminal cases (Fifth Amendment); right to a fair and speedy trial (Sixth Amendment); protection against cruel and unusual punishment (Eighth Amendment); and provision that the people retain additional rights not listed in the Constitution (Ninth Amendment)."
LINK
Obviously the 4th amendment protections don't allow of allowing the government to cyber monitor people.
The government provided to us by the Founding Fathers is no more. It just makes you sick.
This post was edited on 3/7 at 7:17 am
re: Scary story on the NSA & the power they have: 2011 so not related toPosted by Cali 4 LSU on 3/7/17 at 9:00 am to WhiskeyPapa
And now Jason Chaffetz just said on Fox news that there are many ways to conduct surveillance on any American (Trump) WITHOUT a FISA order so the congressional investigation can look at other things such as stingrays & such. He also said it isn't as simple as requesting a copy of a FISA order (which could be non-existent regardless of the fact that surveillance actually occurring).
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News