From: Lloyd Parker on 6 Oct 2006 09:35 In article <kurtullman-4CDB3C.12183406102006(a)customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >In article <eg5rop$70s$4(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, > lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: > >> >> > Didn't. If the American is CALLING France, warrants are still needed, >> >even under the Bush statement. When calls originate OUTSIDE the country >> >and just come, then Bush says they don't need warrants. This is backed >> >up by current law, more or less. >> >> Which law is that? >> > > Case law. See below. This has been in place at least since my >training in the mid-70s. > >> >If there is a legal tap on Goomba 1, >> >then if Goomba 2 calls G1, anything G2 says is usable against G2, >> >because the tap was legal. >> > In this case, when calls originate outside the US, there are no >> >requirements for warrant. Thus, if Terrorist 1 calls Terrorist 2 in >> >Pakistan it is legal. If T1 calls T3 in Newark it is also legal. >> > If one phone is legally tapped any calls to or from that phone are >> >fair game. >> >> The issue is "domestic wiretapping" though. > Which was illustrated by Goomba one and two. As in Mafia type >one and two. One side is legal, then what is heard either way is okay. > Actually we are talking international wiretapping. Domestic by >most definitions remains inside the US. In this case the tapped phone is >outside the US. The US phone isn't tapped. But when someone from the >tapped phone calls or is called then the conversation is probably legal. There isn't "tapping" anyway. The NSA monitors phone calls. ALL phone calls. Computers flag those with certain words or phrases, or certain voices, or certain locales, etc. But we have no way of knowing which things cause calls to get flagged, nor do we have any assurance nobody is looking at the others. That's why a judge declared the whole program unconstitutional a couple of weeks ago (just stayed by an appeals court pending appeal).
From: John Fields on 6 Oct 2006 14:03 On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:17:32 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> My reference to not speaking English as a first language was a >> euphemism for being conquered, which was related to an earlier post >> by Graham stating that had the US not become involved in WW2, >> England and Germany might have teamed up to fight Russia after >> Germany double-crossed Russia. In my opinion that would have been >> suicide for England, as depleted as it would have been, when Russia >> came rolling in to get Germany. > >It wouldn't just have been Britain and Germany you clot ! --- Then you should have been more precise with your description. Lord knows you expect everyone else to be! -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: Michael A. Terrell on 6 Oct 2006 14:10 T Wake wrote: > > This is a logical fallacy. Everything you have said can be true and still it > would not disprove anything YD has written. > > Insulting someone does not change the validity of their comments, nor does > eliciting sympathy for yourself. If I needed sympathy, I wouldn't visit the vast troll playground known as Usenet. ;-) -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 6 Oct 2006 14:14 John Fields wrote: > > Hell, we can make a joke out of anything, even a sad little donkey > like you. Its no fun though, since he's better at making a joke out of himself than we are when doing it for him. :( -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 6 Oct 2006 14:15
lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > > "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:4525D7F9.458A1C6C(a)earthlink.net... > > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > >> > >> "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message > >> news:t1dbi2pob3u7ic3dp19guns746jria0n2e(a)4ax.com... > >> > On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:29:00 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" > >> > <nobody(a)nowhere.com> Gave us: > >> > > >> >> importing oil to feed its ridiculous fleet of > >> >>inefficient cars > >> > > >> > I doubt that you even have any clue as to the model and make > >> > distribution of cars in the US population. > >> > >> Over half are SUVs and pickup trucks, that all get less than about 17 > >> mpg. > >> I think that's all he really needs to know to make statements like he did > >> about "ridiculous fleet of inefficient cars". > > > > Not around here. More small cars than anything else. Sure a lot of > > people drive pickup trucks, but they have business names painted on > > them. I drive a mini pickup with a four cylinder to do my volunteer > > work, and because its all I have at the moment. > > Not nationally representative, but interesting. > > > It all changes when the Northerners come to winter here. Lots of > > Caddies, Lincolns, and SUVs driving down the center of two lanes at 20 > > miles an hour under the speed limit. > > Yeah, I hate Ohio drivers, too. > > Eric Lucas Why do you think I left Ohio almost 20 years ago? -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |