Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: BBC: NSA surveillance lawful, judge rules.

  1. #1
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107

    BBC: NSA surveillance lawful, judge rules.

    Posted in the Social Lounge because not-gun related, also, didn't see any threads about it.
    --------

    A US federal judge has ruled that mass government surveillance of the phone network is legal, a week after another court said the opposite

    New York District Judge William Pauley described the snooping as a "counter-punch" against al-Qaeda.

    He said the National Security Agency (NSA) programme might even have prevented the 9/11 attacks.

    Last week a Washington DC federal judge ruled the surveillance was "likely unconstitutional" and "Orwellian".

    But in Friday's decision, Judge Pauley, of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, said "the balance of equities and the public interest tilt firmly in favour of the Government's position".
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/25529677

    I think that's a Fair-use Quote, but don't quote me on that :P
    ---

    Isn't it amazing that a Foreign news service does a better job of reporting on U.S. news than U.S. media outlets? I first saw it on RT, then cross-checked BBC, then turned on CNN and MSNBC and they didn't have anything on it at all.

    Well it's official guys, the 4th Amendment is meaningless. And the 5th has already been stripped down to uselessness because of the Boston Bomber thing. Seems like the Gov't is working in reverse order to tear up our Rights. Don't worry though, the last right to be taken away will be free speech, press, and religion, so the anti-gunners, and anti-liberty, and anti-patriot patriots will all have their day in the sun! Should I start sewing pink triangles to my stripped pajamas, or wait until an Americanized Swastika is flying over D.C.?
    Last edited by DrakeZ07; 12-28-2013 at 01:44 PM. Reason: Spelling, grammar.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    See? Expect courts to protect our rights? In Fantasy-Land.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    I believe there was also another ruling in a different circuit that that's said it was no good.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I believe there was also another ruling in a different circuit that that's said it was no good.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    His FUQ mentions that. This will have to be resolved the the SC. Unless Obama gets to alter the balance of the court, the NY judge will be slapped down and the DC judge will be validated.

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Most these cases should even reach SCOTUS, it's bunk that judges, and prosecutors and politicians keep pushing until the state gets what it wants.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    His FUQ mentions that. This will have to be resolved the the SC. Unless Obama gets to alter the balance of the court, the NY judge will be slapped down and the DC judge will be validated.
    You have great faith. I predict the National Security State will prevail regardless. After all, "ninehlevin"
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Well, if one court says yes and another says no .. then the NSA should not suck up the data from the one that says no, right?

    But I think that this is an impossible task .... so they'll keep on sucking

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    You have great faith. I predict the National Security State will prevail regardless. After all, "ninehlevin"
    How 'bout puttin' a beer on it?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  9. #9
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    Posted in the Social Lounge because not-gun related, also, didn't see any threads about it.
    --------


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/25529677

    I think that's a Fair-use Quote, but don't quote me on that :P
    ---

    Isn't it amazing that a Foreign news service does a better job of reporting on U.S. news than U.S. media outlets? I first saw it on RT, then cross-checked BBC, then turned on CNN and MSNBC and they didn't have anything on it at all.

    Well it's official guys, the 4th Amendment is meaningless. And the 5th has already been stripped down to uselessness because of the Boston Bomber thing. Seems like the Gov't is working in reverse order to tear up our Rights. Don't worry though, the last right to be taken away will be free speech, press, and religion, so the anti-gunners, and anti-liberty, and anti-patriot patriots will all have their day in the sun! Should I start sewing pink triangles to my stripped pajamas, or wait until an Americanized Swastika is flying over D.C.?
    Didn't read the full article, just the quote... But it's absolutely despicable. "Balance of equities and public interest?" And even has the gall to say that it might have prevented the success of the attacks on 9/11!?! There were a lot of choices that could have been made by many different people that might have prevented the success of the attacks on 9/11. Being an act that might have prevented the attacks on 9/11 does not automatically justify that act. Rights are inalienable, sir. You don't get to suspend them regardless of how "interested" the public is. You don't get to suspend them by simply playing a utilitarian card.
    Advocate freedom please

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •