Clash of Opinions: Judge rules NSA spying legal, not 'Orwellian'

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Fox News: 'Counter-punch': Federal judge rules NSA data collection legal​

A federal judge in New York has ruled the National Security Agency's massive data collection program is legal, one week after another federal judge ruled the opposite.

The conflicting rulings increase the likelihood that the challenges could someday end up before the Supreme Court.

The ruling on Friday came from District Judge William H. Pauley III, in the case of the ACLU vs. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence. The judge agreed with the federal government's request to dismiss the case.

"No doubt, the bulky telephony metadata collection program vacuums up information about virtually every telephone call to, from, or within the United States," the judge wrote.

But he added: "As the September 11th attacks demonstrate, the cost of missing such a thread can be horrific. Technology allowed Al Qaeda to operate decentralized and plot international terrorist attacks remotely. The bulky telephone metadata collection program represents the Government's counter-punch: connecting fragmented and fleeting communications to re-construct and eliminate al-Qaeda's terror network."

I've got mixed reactions to this. President Bush used the data sparingly, acting only on additionally confirmed information, and he ordered NSA to store the records swept up off-site, so they had to get a court order to go back to the data at a later time. Great Pretender rescinded that order, and NSA keeps all the information on-site, where it is free to look at it at any time, even if it isn't looking for something specific.

I agree with Judge Pauley that the collection of foreign intelligence by this method is essential. But when the NSA can keep the data on-site, peruse it at any time, and make connections to anyone about anything, they've crossed the line. We need to go back to the way GWB was doing things.

In fact, we need to impeach the Ignoble Traitor in the White House.

 

[poncho]

That's some nice spin TND but the fact is the neocons wanted very much to set up a "Total Information Awareness" system. Congress stepped in and "allegedly" put a stop to funding it.

The neocons not to be thwarted by any act of congress simply changed the name of their massive high tech illegal total surveillance grid and funded it's creation by other means. SEE THIS and THIS

Obama just took what the neocons built and kept it all sort of secret until Edward Snowden blew the whistle on it.

Why do we need a person in a black robe to "interpret" the plain English of the fourth amendment anyway?

Here's is the text itself.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It's self explanatory there's no need for a federal interpreter the tell us what it plainly says. All these black robed interpreters do is twist the meaning of words around to justify the obviously unconstitutional acts of a government that is constantly seeking ways to grant itself more power.