No, only if you take an extremely broad reading of the laws does it become legal. It is far from "the most casual reading". Furthermore, if you accept that argument, where does the power to void laws stop? If FISA doesn't apply, what about federal murder statutes? Does the AUMF authorize the President to order someone's death?
Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that... (B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party...
So, "United States Person" means a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.. an unincorporated association a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a corporation which is incorporated in the United States, but does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power.
President George Walker Bush: "What I'm talking about is the intercept of certain communications emanating between somebody inside the United States and outside the United States; and one of the numbers would be reasonably suspected to be an al Qaeda link or affiliate."
The only way it becomes legal is if you accept the ridiculous legal arguments made by the administration, or if the program only ever covered tourists and illegal aliens. Although school/work visas are not explicitly mentioned, they would almost always be covered by the association and corporation clauses of the United States Person definition.
Law scholars I've seen interviewed on this situation do not agree
That's because they're blinded by partisanship. It is extremely clear that FISA does not authorize these actions without a court order and it is extremely clear that the AUMFs do not authorize these actions. It's hilarious how "originalists" or "literalists" can suddenly find things that aren't at all writen in the law.
You likely do not have top secret clearance to know exactly what has been going on with this program. Therefore, you're relying on unofficial reports from unnamed sources that were reported in newspapers.
Incorrect. Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, have all made public statements, some of them to the Congress. You can look only at what they've disclosed (like the federal judge who recently ruled on the state secrets claim did), and it's obviously illegal.
100% correct. Bush takes the heat because he's the Executive, but the real fault lies in the GOP Congress that has completely abdicated its oversight responsibilities. Unfortunately, the Framers made Congress its own policeman, with the exception of elections.
Kerry didn't mention Abu Ghraib because he didn't want to be seen as anti-military, imo. He already had enough problems with his testimony in the 70s.. highlighting Abu Ghraib would have practically written a campaign ad.. "John Kerry, 1973".. "John Kerry, today" etc.
Not that I think it was the right move.
Sorry, but your girl is right. Just going inside the store isn't the same as spending money there. If this was the "other day", odds are that it was hot out. Might as well leech off their a/c.
You know.. thinking back, I don't think there was a writer either. It was actually a reader to pull the pre-written number off the card and associate it with my account, as you describe.
That is not 100% true. New Jersey has regulations covering "universal waste" (batteries, fluorescent lights, CRTs and other electronics). However, the reg only applies to businesses that already generate a certain amount of hazardous waste. It does not apply to consumers.
When I got my ATM card, they had blanks and a writer. No mail necessary.
Furthermore, what about the info on your student ID? At my alma mater, the info is used to swipe into dining halls, computer labs, libraries, and can serve as a debit card.
Not so sure that I agree. Being paralyzed by small decisions can really add stress where it's unwarranted, which can have severe negative effects. Who wants to get all worked up about what to eat at a restaurant?
Hillary's position has been misrepresented. She supports a flag burning ban in cases of intimidation, similar to cross burning bans. She voted against the flag burning amendment.
First off, a car that doesn't use gas wouldn't shutdown the oil industry. There are still thousands of essential uses for petroleum and derivatives.
There are millions of gasoline cars that would not just go away overnight. Look how long it took to get rid of leaded gas. The phase-out started in 1973 and went to 1996 for cars and 2008 for other uses. What companies like Exxon would do is cut off the investments to maintain the infrastructure, letting it rot as the demand subsides (it doesn't work out perfect, of course). There would probably still be some demand for airplanes, landscaping equipment, etc.
Here we go again..
I repeatedly try to get people to realize what most Federal legislation does, especially regulatory legislation: it removes rights from the individual
We've battled on environmental regulations in the past, and again, I challenge you: Name one significant pollution reduction that was not a result of regulation. Furthermore, what rights are removed when it is forbidden to dump oil in a river, or spew soot into the air uncontrolled? The right to fuck up the planet for the rest of us?
Play on a better site. The good ones will send you a check directly. No middleman on the winnings. Some will even cover the deposit transaction fees for certain middlemen.
You continue to parade around a strawman. Find me a doctor who will provide a late-term abortion due to "stress" and I'll find you a state medical board to take away their license.
Think of Ayn Rand's novels, The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged. If those were edited for content by many of today's far-Left nitwits, they would not convey the same message.
Slashdot Mirror
No, only if you take an extremely broad reading of the laws does it become legal. It is far from "the most casual reading". Furthermore, if you accept that argument, where does the power to void laws stop? If FISA doesn't apply, what about federal murder statutes? Does the AUMF authorize the President to order someone's death?
First, state the law.
... (B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party ...
Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that
Thats USC 50.36 (sec) 1802.
So, "United States Person" means a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.. an unincorporated association a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a corporation which is incorporated in the United States, but does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power.
Thats USC 50.36 (sec) 1801.
Second, provide the facts From wiki:
President George Walker Bush: "What I'm talking about is the intercept of certain communications emanating between somebody inside the United States and outside the United States; and one of the numbers would be reasonably suspected to be an al Qaeda link or affiliate."
The only way it becomes legal is if you accept the ridiculous legal arguments made by the administration, or if the program only ever covered tourists and illegal aliens. Although school/work visas are not explicitly mentioned, they would almost always be covered by the association and corporation clauses of the United States Person definition.
Law scholars I've seen interviewed on this situation do not agree
That's because they're blinded by partisanship. It is extremely clear that FISA does not authorize these actions without a court order and it is extremely clear that the AUMFs do not authorize these actions. It's hilarious how "originalists" or "literalists" can suddenly find things that aren't at all writen in the law.
You likely do not have top secret clearance to know exactly what has been going on with this program. Therefore, you're relying on unofficial reports from unnamed sources that were reported in newspapers.
Incorrect. Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, have all made public statements, some of them to the Congress. You can look only at what they've disclosed (like the federal judge who recently ruled on the state secrets claim did), and it's obviously illegal.
100% correct. Bush takes the heat because he's the Executive, but the real fault lies in the GOP Congress that has completely abdicated its oversight responsibilities. Unfortunately, the Framers made Congress its own policeman, with the exception of elections.
Incorrect. The War Powers Act makes it extremely clear that a statutory authorization of force is NOT a declaration of war.
Kerry didn't mention Abu Ghraib because he didn't want to be seen as anti-military, imo. He already had enough problems with his testimony in the 70s.. highlighting Abu Ghraib would have practically written a campaign ad.. "John Kerry, 1973".. "John Kerry, today" etc. Not that I think it was the right move.
Sorry, but your girl is right. Just going inside the store isn't the same as spending money there. If this was the "other day", odds are that it was hot out. Might as well leech off their a/c.
You know.. thinking back, I don't think there was a writer either. It was actually a reader to pull the pre-written number off the card and associate it with my account, as you describe.
That is not 100% true. New Jersey has regulations covering "universal waste" (batteries, fluorescent lights, CRTs and other electronics). However, the reg only applies to businesses that already generate a certain amount of hazardous waste. It does not apply to consumers.
You today:
MySpace is a cancer on the internet (IMHO)
You 8 years ago:
GeoCities is a cancer on the internet (IMHO)
We're all still here. Any questions?
Yes, idiot, there is a standard data structure. However, there's nothing in the ATM that can tell if the ACTUAL DATA is valid.
When I got my ATM card, they had blanks and a writer. No mail necessary.
Furthermore, what about the info on your student ID? At my alma mater, the info is used to swipe into dining halls, computer labs, libraries, and can serve as a debit card.
Not so sure that I agree. Being paralyzed by small decisions can really add stress where it's unwarranted, which can have severe negative effects. Who wants to get all worked up about what to eat at a restaurant?
You had a shitty deal on your previous DSL account. You can get consumer level for $20-30. All of the sudden $70 looks like a lot more.
Hillary's position has been misrepresented. She supports a flag burning ban in cases of intimidation, similar to cross burning bans. She voted against the flag burning amendment.
Reality check: The vast majority of hiring is done this way. Public and private.
Why do you think private companies are any better? They never screw things up? Ha! At least the government is somewhat accountable.
You're a fucking idiot. Go read some history and you'll learn that the Germans didn't go from a republic to a genocidal dictatorship overnight.
First off, a car that doesn't use gas wouldn't shutdown the oil industry. There are still thousands of essential uses for petroleum and derivatives.
There are millions of gasoline cars that would not just go away overnight. Look how long it took to get rid of leaded gas. The phase-out started in 1973 and went to 1996 for cars and 2008 for other uses. What companies like Exxon would do is cut off the investments to maintain the infrastructure, letting it rot as the demand subsides (it doesn't work out perfect, of course). There would probably still be some demand for airplanes, landscaping equipment, etc.
Here we go again.. I repeatedly try to get people to realize what most Federal legislation does, especially regulatory legislation: it removes rights from the individual
We've battled on environmental regulations in the past, and again, I challenge you: Name one significant pollution reduction that was not a result of regulation. Furthermore, what rights are removed when it is forbidden to dump oil in a river, or spew soot into the air uncontrolled? The right to fuck up the planet for the rest of us?
Play on a better site. The good ones will send you a check directly. No middleman on the winnings. Some will even cover the deposit transaction fees for certain middlemen.
I must say it's quite hilarious that you spent all that time replying to my one liner.
You continue to parade around a strawman. Find me a doctor who will provide a late-term abortion due to "stress" and I'll find you a state medical board to take away their license.
Bambi where his parents show up again at the end of a movie?
Guess you missed this one. That's right, Bambi's dad isn't a deadbeat!
Think of Ayn Rand's novels, The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged. If those were edited for content by many of today's far-Left nitwits, they would not convey the same message.
Yeah, they might actually make sense.