NSA "Scandal"

security for liberty, good tradeoff?

During testimony earlier this week, FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce claimed that NSA surveillance programs were responsible for thwarting a bomb plot targeting the New York Stock Exchange. When asked whether this was a serious plot, Joyce said, “I think the jury considered it as serious since they were all convicted.”

It turns out there was no jury trial and the suspects cut deals for lesser charges. The FBI has confirmed that Joyce misspoke, but they are standing behind the assertion that the plot was a serious one.

Shepard Smith railed against the revelations on today’s Studio B. “The centerpiece of his statement was the jury convicted them, we saved the Stock Exchange … None of it was true! And he misspoke on the centerpiece of the argument?! The one example of the 50 that they’re holding up for the nation as ‘this is why we collect this data’?!”

Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed, “I hope that the American public learns a lesson from this […] We got a vastly different view from the truth than we should have gotten.”
Click to expand...

Read more: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/06/2...rveillance-thwarted-nyse-terror#ixzz2WnjlImxL
 
Regarding Jury Nulification....

From the Florida Standard Jury Instruction...

"1. You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. If you fail to follow the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice. There is no reason for failing to follow the law in this case. All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter.
2. This case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses [and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence] and these instructions.
3. This case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone, or are angry at anyone."

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter3/p1c3s3.10.rtf

These were written by the Fla Supreme Ct, in part to explain that Jury Nulification is an injustice and not Constitutional.
 
Jarod said:
Regarding Jury Nulification....

From the Florida Standard Jury Instruction...

"1. You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. If you fail to follow the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice. There is no reason for failing to follow the law in this case. All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter.
2. This case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses [and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence] and these instructions.
3. This case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone, or are angry at anyone."

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter3/p1c3s3.10.rtf

These were written by the Fla Supreme Ct, in part to explain that Jury Nulification is an injustice and not Constitutional.
Click to expand...
blah blah blah blah....this is nothing but the courts trying to take over OUR justice system. the courts do not have any constitutional power or authority to deny any of our rights, such as jury nullification. nothing but black robed tyrants and they are wrong.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
does not cover emails after they have been delivered to the recipient......if the email is opened by the recipient and left on the internet it is an electronic record and is covered by the laws dealing with the storage of electronic records.....
Click to expand...

If an NSA, FBI, CIA, DIA, etc analyst has access to query raw SIGINT databases, they can enter and get results for anything they want. Phone number, email, user ID, cell phone handset ID, and so on, it's all the same. The restrictions against this are policy-based, not technically-based, and can change at any time. Additionally, audits are cursory, incomplete, and easily fooled by fake justifications. For at least GCHQ, the number of audited queries is only 5% of those performed.
 
And yet all the right wing-nut dupes on this thread SUPPORTED Cheney & Libby getting away with TREASON for outing a CIA covert opt leader.

Go figure.
 
I request asylum in the Republic of Ecuador because of the risk of being persecuted by the government of the United States and its agents in relation to my decision to make public serious violations on the part of the government of the United States of its Constitution, specifically of its Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and of various treaties of the United Nations that are binding on my country.


As a result of my political opinions, and my desire to exercise my freedom of speech, through which I've shown that the government of the United States is intercepting the majority of communications in the world, the government of the United States has publicly announced a criminal investigation against me.


Also, prominent members of Congress and others in the media have accused me of being a traitor and have called for me to be jailed or executed as a result of having communicated this information to the public.Some of the charges that have been presented against me by the Justice Department of the United States are connected to the 1917 Espionage Act, one of which includes life in prison among the possible sentences.


Ecuador granted asylum to the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, in relation to this investigation. My case is also very similar to that of the American soldier Bradley Manning, who made public government information through WikiLeaks revealing war crimes, was arrested by the United States government and has been treated inhumanely during his time in prison. He was put in solitary confinement before his trial and the U.N. anti-torture representative judged that Mr. Manning was submitted to cruel and inhumane acts by the United States government.


The trial against Bradley Manning is ongoing now, and secret documents have been presented to the court and secret witnesses have testified. I believe that, given these circumstances, it is unlikely that I would receive a fair trial or proper treatment prior to that trial, and face the possibility of life in prison or even death.
 
Jarod said:
Im not, Im trying to have an open discussion, something that often proves hard to get Conservatives to engage in when they are using hype and misdirection to fuel a political agenda.
Click to expand...

No, you're not trying to have an open discussion. You're trying to lick the President's balls, per usual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top