The critical elements for your post are "motivation" and "intent." Motivation + curiosity + information + preparation = what? If it bomb making, probably nothing good.
Kinda reminds me of the 'if you are not guilty then you have nothing to hide' logic.
Could you expand on that? I don't really see any connection there. I also almost never recall the government using that actual argument, especially around the current controversy. What I do seem them saying is that they are looking for specific types of activity. That is a different argument.
You think it's "rather funny" that they might think you have an interest in beating polygraph examinations if you bought a book on beating polygraph examinations?
Canada is harbouring dissident Romulan scientists brought here by James T. Kirk (Canadian William Shatner).
Which is why the Borg tried to invade the Earth in the past, before the Federation obtained cloaking shield technology with hundreds of years of refinement.
I do have the habit, considered unfortunate by some, of bringing facts into the discussion that others would prefer to forget, or otherwise find "inconvenient." I hope that was what you remembered.
I suspect it's going to be the amount of people turned away from voting because of all these daft ID voter rules..... I really think it'll be the mass disenfranchisement of a huge % of the US citizens at the next big election.
It doesn't look like there is a problem with that.
If you wanted to convince me that you were informed on this matter at some level you could simply post the name of the court you were referring to if it wasn't the US FISA court. No google links, just a name. You have repeatedly evaded doing that in post after post. What can we conclude from that?
I think I understand you just fine. If you had an answer you would post it instead of a google search link.
I am well acquainted with people posting American concerns, including claims about constitutional rights under the American Constitution and their alleged violation, in stories on British affairs. (And that also goes for issues of common interest.) My favorites are when Americans post quotations from American Revolutionary War heroes, such as the one about renewing the "Tree of Liberty" with the blood of patriots, and suggesting that as a remedy to a British audience. That is a bit tone deaf. It would be like posting great quotes from Benedict Arnold to Americans as suggestions for policy.
I will allow it is possible that I have you pegged wrong on this, but I am unconvinced.
What about you? Can you point out any of the United State's secret courts? Can you name judges, or supply the addresses at which these judges hold court? Can you name the officers of the courts?
The FISA court is staffed by regular judges from other courts that rotate through it.
Every few months, the FISA judges set aside their regular, public cases, travel to Washington, and take the bench inside a secure, windowless courtroom at 333 Constitution Avenue. Prosecutors and federal agents appear to answer questions about warrants before individual judges, rather than a panel.
Generally, the judges rotate on a week-long schedule. Three judges live in the Washington area and are available for emergencies. FISA judges do not receive extra pay.
That is all well and good, but I have little doubt about the target of the post I replied to. I have grown entirely accustomed to Americans posting rants about American constitutional rights, complaints about American institutions, and redress by American means in forums on British matters. I understand this is a matter of shared concern, but still...
So then, please enlighten us about exactly which British court you were referring to? Please? Or was it yet another FISA/NSA rant in a story on the UK as is common on Slashdot.
As to your second point I find it an interesting diversion. Congress has oversight over the NSA and can create disestablish courts, remove judges, and change the laws that govern both the courts and the NSA. So, you've got it essentially wrong again.
Really? So which secret courts in the UK was s.petry referring to? Surely you can point to them? Or could you acknowledge the simple fact that s.petry was going on about the FISA court, yet again?
If you look very carefully I answered a post by s.petry complaining yet again about "secret courts" which is a reference to the American FISA.
GCHQ may very well care about some things that Congress says as it authorizes payments to the NSA to forward to GCHQ as part of partnership agreements.
Slashdot Mirror
The critical elements for your post are "motivation" and "intent." Motivation + curiosity + information + preparation = what? If it bomb making, probably nothing good.
Kinda reminds me of the 'if you are not guilty then you have nothing to hide' logic.
Could you expand on that? I don't really see any connection there. I also almost never recall the government using that actual argument, especially around the current controversy. What I do seem them saying is that they are looking for specific types of activity. That is a different argument.
You think it's "rather funny" that they might think you have an interest in beating polygraph examinations if you bought a book on beating polygraph examinations?
You're talking a list of no more than a couple of megabytes of data, right? They might be able to.
Canada is harbouring dissident Romulan scientists brought here by James T. Kirk (Canadian William Shatner).
Which is why the Borg tried to invade the Earth in the past, before the Federation obtained cloaking shield technology with hundreds of years of refinement.
And then... the dreaded Zamboni Apocalypse....
World War Freeze-Z
I do have the habit, considered unfortunate by some, of bringing facts into the discussion that others would prefer to forget, or otherwise find "inconvenient." I hope that was what you remembered.
I suspect it's going to be the amount of people turned away from voting because of all these daft ID voter rules. .... I really think it'll be the mass disenfranchisement of a huge % of the US citizens at the next big election.
It doesn't look like there is a problem with that.
Texas voter ID law didn't suppress vote
...it'll take that sharp focused event that'll be the camel back breaker ...
Maybe we've found one.
Calif. Insurance Commissioner: More Than 1M Californians Having Insurance Cancelled Due To ACA
Forbes: White House Predicted in 2010 That 93 Million Would Lose Their Health Plans Under ObamaCare
Troubled HealthCare.gov unlikely to work fully by end of November
Hopefully they won't be moving to a "everybody is a winner" scheme.
They don't in the US, which is where Vermont is. They are likely to have better lawyers though.
If you wanted to convince me that you were informed on this matter at some level you could simply post the name of the court you were referring to if it wasn't the US FISA court. No google links, just a name. You have repeatedly evaded doing that in post after post. What can we conclude from that?
I asked you a direct question, and you evade. I will complement you on that fine army of strawmen you're assembling.
I think I understand you just fine. If you had an answer you would post it instead of a google search link.
I am well acquainted with people posting American concerns, including claims about constitutional rights under the American Constitution and their alleged violation, in stories on British affairs. (And that also goes for issues of common interest.) My favorites are when Americans post quotations from American Revolutionary War heroes, such as the one about renewing the "Tree of Liberty" with the blood of patriots, and suggesting that as a remedy to a British audience. That is a bit tone deaf. It would be like posting great quotes from Benedict Arnold to Americans as suggestions for policy.
I will allow it is possible that I have you pegged wrong on this, but I am unconvinced.
In other words, you weren't referring to a British court.
What about you? Can you point out any of the United State's secret courts? Can you name judges, or supply the addresses at which these judges hold court? Can you name the officers of the courts?
The FISA court is staffed by regular judges from other courts that rotate through it.
Here are 9 of the 11 judges.
Every few months, the FISA judges set aside their regular, public cases, travel to Washington, and take the bench inside a secure, windowless courtroom at 333 Constitution Avenue. Prosecutors and federal agents appear to answer questions about warrants before individual judges, rather than a panel.
Generally, the judges rotate on a week-long schedule. Three judges live in the Washington area and are available for emergencies. FISA judges do not receive extra pay.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
I am for better oversight by both Parliament and Congress over their respective charges, where needed.
I hope you aren't taking time away from something useful to post that nonsense.
That is all well and good, but I have little doubt about the target of the post I replied to. I have grown entirely accustomed to Americans posting rants about American constitutional rights, complaints about American institutions, and redress by American means in forums on British matters. I understand this is a matter of shared concern, but still ...
So then, please enlighten us about exactly which British court you were referring to? Please? Or was it yet another FISA/NSA rant in a story on the UK as is common on Slashdot.
As to your second point I find it an interesting diversion. Congress has oversight over the NSA and can create disestablish courts, remove judges, and change the laws that govern both the courts and the NSA. So, you've got it essentially wrong again.
Really? So which secret courts in the UK was s.petry referring to? Surely you can point to them? Or could you acknowledge the simple fact that s.petry was going on about the FISA court, yet again?
Europe.... I think I've heard of it.
It is petry complaining about the FISA court, yet again.
The complaints about "secret courts"? Does FISA ring a bell?
If you look very carefully I answered a post by s.petry complaining yet again about "secret courts" which is a reference to the American FISA.
GCHQ may very well care about some things that Congress says as it authorizes payments to the NSA to forward to GCHQ as part of partnership agreements.
Shill? Bugger off.
They say that in space nobody can hear you scream, but I'll bet they can hear you curse. #$%@#$%!!! MALWARE!!!!
If you look very carefully I answered a post about a US thing. Why don't you protest that post? Or do you lack the wit to answer it?