New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

[Donegeal]

I'm not sure, and I have no stats, but I believe more than 50% of the population lives in cities less than 100,000 people. Probably more like 60 to 65%.

And the reason they'd get ignored is because the best way to reach them would be through going there on the campaign trail. Why would a candidate stop in rural/mid America to visit and listen to a town of 60,000 when a town of 350,000 is just 100 miles away?

[Kuciwalker]

And the reason they'd get ignored is because the best way to reach them would be through going there on the campaign trail. Why would a candidate stop in rural/mid America to visit and listen to a town of 60,000 when a town of 350,000 is just 100 miles away?

Have you ever heard of the long tail? Any candidate that completely ignored them would be very vulnerable.

[Donegeal]

No. I don't think I have (or maybe I have, just not in that term).

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Actually for revealing a classified intelligence gathering operation.

Its legality is immaterial. Its classified status is.

Not quite that clean, since classifying illegal activities doesn't create a privilege to commit them.

[Kuciwalker]

In theory

[chequita guevara]

Re: Re: Re: Re: New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
The purpose of FISA

Actually, the purpose of FISA was and is to keep the U.S. from spying on Americans without a warrant, period. It was intended to shut the loop-hole you say exists, which was being greatly abused before the law was passed.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Donegeal
Because its the only way they'd receive attention. In a strictly popular election, sure, my vote would count just as much as everyone elses, but since I live in a less populated area, no one would listen to me.

So you should have more of a voice than other people because you chose to live in the boonies? That ain't right. You should have the exact same voice as everyone else. So the president doesn't come to visit on a campaign stop, boo-****ing-hoo. Right now, you have more of a say in who gets to be Prez than I do.

[Kuciwalker]

Right now, you have more of a say in who gets to be Prez than I do.

Actually that's a good thing

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Actually, the purpose of FISA was and is to keep the U.S. from spying on Americans without a warrant, period.

Sorry to have to hit you upside the head with the Baseball Bat of Reality^TM, but if that's the intent, period, no less, then why is the statute largely silent as to the nationality of surveillance targets? The only criteria for applying FISA is that the primary purpose of the overall investigation is gathering of foreign intelligence information.

Citizenship of the targets is irrelevant* - if you're a Saudi national on an expired visa, or a red white and blue born in the USA Amurkin, the only issue is whether the covered activity (secret search, electronic surveillance, etc.) will take place within the United States and its territories, and whether the primary purpose is gathering of FII within the statutory definition of counterintelligence at 50 U.S.C §401 (a) (3).
The FISA warrant does not need to meet the probable cause standards of a Fourth Amendment warrant with respect to criminal activity, or particularity requirements of the scope of the warrant. It's not at all the same as a judicial warrant.

* The exception is that no court order is needed for up to one year for surveillance conducted within the US when there is no "substantial likelihood" that the communications of a "US person" will be intercepted. This applies to corporations, government agencies and resident aliens, not just citizens.

Otherwise, the FISA warrant process applies, unless...

It was intended to shut the loop-hole you say exists, which was being greatly abused before the law was passed.

It limits warrantless search and surveillance conducted within the boundaries of the United States and its territories. Surveillance which does not occur within the United States or its territories is specifically exempted unless it happens to be on a wired common carrier system.

50 U.S.C. §1801 (f) (4)
the installation or use of an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device in the United States for monitoring to acquire information, other than from a wire or radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes.

Wire communication is defined narrowly, such that satellite up/downlinks for international calls, microwave and other wireless communications, etc. are not included within the definition. Install your box outside the US, grab any signal not on a wire or transmitted by radio (only if there's an expectation of privacy, which means the signal has to be scrambled), and you're not covered by FISA. Period.

[RGBVideo]

If they wish to continue once a threat has gone

It'll never be gone.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Not quite that clean, since classifying illegal activities doesn't create a privilege to commit them.

But then it was improperly classified as that clearly is defined as illegal even in executive order that creates the ability for the governement to classify docs, intelligence, etc.

Morevoer I was correcting the mistatement that revealing a legal (but presumably not well known) program constituted criminality/treason. In reality the issue at hand is revealing classified info. I realize the statement "Its illegality is immaterial" is confusing as I presume legality as a prerequisite for classification.

The real question is in grey area situations such as this (where the courts have not specifically ruled on a given programs legality) do classified restrictions still hold sway. Obviously the governments hands have been tied via the Pentagon Papers case regarding injuctive solutions to prevent publishing. Criminal prosecution (unlikely anyway as that has route has extreme political fall out and forever poisons the press against the party in power) is untenable without understanding that the program was properly classified in the first place.

[Donegeal]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
So you should have more of a voice than other people because you chose to live in the boonies?

So I should be ignored because I live in the boonies? (and remember that probably well over 50% of the population lives in these "boonies")

(And I really don't think I live in the boonies. Madison is 30 miles to the north (about 200,000 to 300,000) and Rockford about the same distance and size only to my south)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: New York Times: Traitors to the Republic

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

Wire communication is defined narrowly, such that satellite up/downlinks for international calls, microwave and other wireless communications, etc. are not included within the definition. Install your box outside the US, grab any signal not on a wire or transmitted by radio (only if there's an expectation of privacy, which means the signal has to be scrambled), and you're not covered by FISA. Period.

Yep this one was discussed ad nauseum at the time as well. "Course operational detail has not been givenup yet (and should not be IMO as the program is classified) to the public at large on how the surveilances take place so people such as Che and Ramo have been frothing at the mouth.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Donegeal


So I should be ignored because I live in the boonies? (and remember that probably well over 50% of the population lives in these "boonies")

(And I really don't think I live in the boonies. Madison is 30 miles to the north (about 200,000 to 300,000) and Rockford about the same distance and size only to my south)

Why should you have more of a say than any given one person living in a big city?

-Arrian

[Donegeal]

I've said this before...

Because its the only way that I'd (or rural and mid-america) would be listened too.