Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bush broke the law. President Obama followed it. [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)49. Again,
What is your definition of "wiretapping"??
Perhaps that is where we disagree? Is this not what they are presently doing??
<snip>
Telephone tapping (also wire tapping or wiretapping in American English) is the monitoring of telephone and Internet conversations by a third party, often by covert means. The wire tap received its name because, historically, the monitoring connection was an actual electrical tap on the telephone line. Legal wiretapping by a government agency is also called lawful interception. Passive wiretapping monitors or records the traffic, while active wiretapping alters or otherwise affects it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping
Perhaps that is where we disagree? Is this not what they are presently doing??
<snip>
Telephone tapping (also wire tapping or wiretapping in American English) is the monitoring of telephone and Internet conversations by a third party, often by covert means. The wire tap received its name because, historically, the monitoring connection was an actual electrical tap on the telephone line. Legal wiretapping by a government agency is also called lawful interception. Passive wiretapping monitors or records the traffic, while active wiretapping alters or otherwise affects it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_tapping
..I'm not sure I understand your point. OK, you posted a definition of wiretapping, but that doesn't address the point being discussed. Initially, I asked you to explain how getting a warrant legalizes illegal wiretapping without a warrant and ignores the FISA court?
Again, Bush was actually wiretapping Americans, illegally tapping into conversations.
While many details about the program remain secret, officials familiar with it say the N.S.A. eavesdrops without warrants on up to 500 people in the United States at any given time. The list changes as some names are added and others dropped, so the number monitored in this country may have reached into the thousands since the program began, several officials said. Overseas, about 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time, according to those officials.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959557
No, what Bush did is still illegal, and no that is not "what they are presently doing." You are conflating two different programs.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"the poster only attacks the soft targets and not those who are well informed."
ProSense
Jun 2013
#31
"Now, to play your silly little linky game- albeit without the bizarre self-referential dogshit."
ProSense
Jun 2013
#30
That doesn't say anything about making illegal warrantless wiretapping legal. n/t
ProSense
Jun 2013
#46
"People also need to stop pretending that the U.S. doesn't have a history of surveillance."
sibelian
Jun 2013
#7
The folks sceaming the loudest don't seem to be interested in improving anything.
JoePhilly
Jun 2013
#21
According to the Constitution, international treaties have the force of U.S. law.
hobbit709
Jun 2013
#48