PDA

View Full Version : Warrantless wiretap update!



LWW
12-17-2010, 04:22 AM
Oddly ... the far left has been remarkably silent on this.

In typical fashion, they go into fits of canniption if the government actually uses technology to defend the mainland US from those who wish to destroy the republic ... while having no issue at with the state using that same technology to keep the proles in their place while increasing the omnipotence of the state.

Once again, the regime has shown a total disdain for the individual. Fortuneately we still have some judges who follow the COTUS instead of the regime's agenda.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>A federal appeals court on Wednesday rejected the Obama administration’s contention that the government is never required to get a court warrant to obtain cell-site information that mobile-phone carriers retain on their customers.</span>

The decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is one in a string of court decisions boosting Americans’ privacy (.pdf) in the digital age — rulings the government fought against. <span style='font-size: 11pt'>The most significant and recent decision came Tuesday, when a different federal appeals court said for the first time the government must obtain a court warrant for an internet service provider to grant the authorities access to a suspect’s e-mail.</span>

The case that concluded Wednesday concerns historical cell-site location information, which carriers usually retain for about 18 months. The data identifies the cell tower the customer was connected to at the beginning of a call and at the end of the call — and is often used in criminal prosecutions and investigations.

“Prosecutors across the country use the statute in criminal investigations to obtain a wide range of evidence,” (.pdf) the administration told the Philadelphia-based 3rd Circuit.

The Stored Communications Act, the appeals court ruled in September, granted judges the discretion to require a warrant under the Fourth Amendment for the government to obtain the cell-site information. It was the first appellate court to reach that conclusion, despite a handful of lower-court decisions freeing the government from that requirement.

The Obama administration urged the appellate court to reconsider its position, an offer the court declined Wednesday without commenting on the merits.

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>The administration has also asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to reverse its August ruling requiring court warrants to affix GPS devices to vehicles to track their every move.</span> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The administration said Americans should expect no privacy “in the totality of his or her movements in public places.”</span>

The appellate court’s answer is pending.</div></div>

BARACK MAY BE WATCHING YOU (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/cell-site-warrants)

LWW

Qtec
12-17-2010, 05:40 AM
link (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=329936#Post329936)

Q

LWW
12-17-2010, 06:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> link (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=329936#Post329936)

Q </div></div>

So ... are you arguing Bush and Obama were both wrong?

LWW

Qtec
12-17-2010, 06:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> link (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=329936#Post329936)

Q </div></div>

So ... are you arguing Bush and Obama were both wrong?

LWW </div></div>


Yes.

Q

LWW
12-17-2010, 06:54 AM
Well, at least we have progress and consistency.

LWW

eg8r
12-17-2010, 09:14 AM
Sure hasn't been much change since Obama took over the office.

eg8r

LWW
12-18-2010, 05:36 AM
Actually there's been a lot ... the majority of the left's heads would have exploded had this happened under Bush.

LWW

Qtec
12-18-2010, 05:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure hasn't been much change since Obama took over the office.

eg8r </div></div>

On that front no but you all agreed with it when Bush was doing it.

Q

LWW
12-18-2010, 05:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure hasn't been much change since Obama took over the office.

eg8r </div></div>

On that front no but you all agreed with it when Bush was doing it.

Q </div></div>

That is not the truth ... and you know it.

LWW

Qtec
12-18-2010, 06:03 AM
I can't remember the GOP calling Bush to order. Or Fox or any RW pundit for that matter.

Have you forgotten 'Freedom Fries' and a boycott on French restaurants?

Q

LWW
12-18-2010, 06:13 AM
Show me where the Bush regime was using such technology to track citizen's every movement in public?

Speaking for myself ... I support(ed) buth the Obama and Bush regimes in using technology to track calls to and from known terrorist numbers.

That is completely different from putting a tracking device on an uncharged citizen's vehicle to track their every movement.

LWW

eg8r
12-18-2010, 03:05 PM
Hope and change, hope and change. That was the sermon...

eg8r