14 Responses to Analysis of recent contradictory decisions by federal judges regarding NSA’s program

  1. colin black says:

    When I read of decisions made in your Alternate Universe by Judges with surnames reminisant of charecters from The Sopranos.

    An the ludicrousness is assure when they start talking about … megaphonic …phone data…Which I suppose is govermentease for conversations they tap record an store…

    Come on MEGAPHONIC an then they start on with SEED numbers wich seeds grow into HOPS .

    An then they brew or get hip and a bop an we get a bit of hip hop showing.

    ..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO6frvdTRWk

  2. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    This does not have anything to do with the title being discussed, but this video is an interested find. A few months ago, a blogger had concerns about information concerning Trayvon Martin (RIP) and Rodney King (RIP.) It is important that individuals listen to the original story given and how it changes by the time, it ends. Two Los Angeles sheriffs (knew about this happening back then) forwarded this link concerning many bodies unaccounted for after the riots; it was never reported except through a few newspapers and civil right activists. In addition, it addresses some of the articles written concerning organ stealing. I will try to post the reputable articles when the Professor creates another open discussion concerning the Kendrick Johnson (RIP) case. It will be a more appropriate time, back to work…

    May everyone have a Happy and Prosperous New Years! Stay safe… Sorry to post differently from the discussion Professor; it is difficult finding time to participate in most of these informative discussions…

  3. aussie says:

    The point all three judges (including the original one) missed in Smith vs Maryland is that Smith was ALREADY SUSPECTED OF A CRIME when his phone activity was recorded. They could have easily obtained a warrant even to TAP the phone ie listen in on the conversations.

    The original decision is wrong where it says “Petitioner concedes that if he had placed his calls through an operator, he could claim no legitimate expectation of privacy”. The 4th amendment issue is privacy vis a vis the GOVERNMENT, not other ordinary people who NEED to know something in order to be able to provide you with a service you want.

    In operator days, a person VERY MUCH had expectations to privacy, eg not having the local operator gossip to everyone in town how a man keeps making calls to someone else’s wife.

    Companies have very strict rules for employees about not disclosing customer information. There are various privacy laws to make sure of this.

    If the Government wants a temporary breach of those laws in a particular instance, it is open to them to GET A WARRANT, but for that they have to have GOOD REASON, ie a per-existing suspicion of wrongful behaviour.

    • The point all three judges (including the original one) missed in Smith vs Maryland is that Smith was ALREADY SUSPECTED OF A CRIME when his phone activity was recorded. They could have easily obtained a warrant even to TAP the phone ie listen in on the conversations.

      Good point.

  4. Malisha says:

    Reminds me of Obama’s famous quote:
    “If you can’t trust your federal government, who CAN you trust?”
    My answer: the Tooth Fairy.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Exactly at least the Tooth Fairy will leave a dollar bill….

      • Malisha says:

        Reminds me of one of my favorite jokes.

        A postman has a residential route where every year, most of his residents leave Christmas tips. One particular house NEVER does, but that’s life. One year, on December 23, a nice looking woman steps out the door when he’s delivering the mail and says:

        “Are you our postman?”
        Yes, he answers.
        “Would you like to come in for a cup of coffee and a donut?”
        SURE!
        (Goes in and she gives him coffee and a donut, then says)

        I’ll be right back (she leaves the room and soon returns in a gorgeous low-cut negligee and proceeds to seduce him).

        When they’re done in the bedroom she asks if he’d like another cup of coffee so he says yes, and she gives him another cup, and then hands him a dollar bill.

        “What’s that?” he asks, startled.
        “My husband told me to give this to you,” she answers.

        He’s astonished. “Wha– huh? — waddayou mean? I could never take money from you!”

        “Oh you have to,” she says. “My husband insists. I told him the neighbors give you Christmas tips and asked him what should I do. He said, ‘fuck him; give him a dollar.’!” 😆

      • bettykath says:

        At least the tooth fair recognizes inflation. The minimum wage doesn’t. Which brings me to another pet peeve. Why is the minimum wage not tied to cost of living the way Congressional paychecks and SS are? Bet the corporations had something to do with that.

  5. bettykath says:

    Another concern is the infiltration of activist organizations that work to right the wrongs committed by corporations and government. How much easier it is to destroy movements like Occupy when they can infiltrate the communications to find the key organizers and those they primarily work with. Trust the government? Hell, no!!

  6. bettykath says:

    One concern is the tracking of journalists’ calls. It has a tremendously chilling affect on whistleblowers who want to spread sunshine on wrong-doings w/in the government. The clampdown on whistleblowers has escalated. So it’s a first amendment concern as well as in freedom of the press.

  7. bronxlady1 says:

    This is nothing more than pure laziness. Some government people are given some giganimous amounts of money (our money, btw), to do something, anything about the terrorists, and this is the best that those lazy sob’s can do. Play Peeping Tom. Sit at their desks all day listening to people’s phone calls, or looking into people’s emails, while scratching their asses. Lazy, quick, easy solution to a complex problem. But meanwhile the very true issue of torturing our Constitution, and Bill of Rights is diminished. Just like that stupid Stop & Frisk garbage, where kids couldn’t go to the corner store without being thrown up against the concrete wall, while their rights were being violated because it was the best that those lazy smart guys could come up with to “keep us safe”.

  8. Malisha says:

    My opinion: Not good that the US Supreme Court will get this one (two). The Supremes do not care to protect our constitutional rights; they mean to do more political damage to the already-limping democracy.

  9. Reblogged this on AntiTerrorAthiest and commented:
    It is called Treason. Remove the Foreign influence from our political and Judicial processes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: