So which Amendment is it that permits subordination of the Constitution to "safety from terrorism?"

[ConservativeDemocrat]

125. I'm sorry you feel so embarrassed...

...if you would stop saying things embarrassing to yourself, maybe it would stop.

#1 Courts have an entirely different standard when dealing with what third parties know about you compared to your personal effect. In general, third parties can be compelled to reveal what they know. I don't expect you to understand this, seeing as you are unclear on the concept of jurisprudence, but maybe you should read up about it so you can be less embarrassed.

#2 I hold you to your own words, Bvar. You are more "afraid" of data being misused by the big bad "gov'mint" (which has no economic interest in doing so), than you are major corporations which do. Tell me, are you in favor of Privatizing Social Security as well? Get govmint out of your Medicare?

#3 The only FAIL here is that of Sergio Hernandez, who clearly mischaracterized the FISA subpoena as a warrant. I'll let you off the hook for this one because this was the reporter's mistake, but if you look at the actual FISA Court Order being referenced, it is clearly a subpoena.

Here's a basic explanation of the difference:

A subpoena is an order directed to an individual commanding him/her to produce documents in a pending lawsuit or to appear in court on a certain day. A subpoena does not allow the investigator to immediately search and seize any of the records enlisted to be produced.

The records produced by Verizon were never taken from Verizon, and then further checks were made before individual searches for people's records were made. You may disagree with the 51% rule, but it still was an impediment. (Although even then, courts always allow people to read copies of records provided by a subpoena - at least in lawsuits. The "search" referenced above generally refers to a disruptive physical search.)

-C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community