| rdfs:comment
| - Warrantless Wiretapping is the act of covertly overseeing communication without legal formalities in place. Such wiretapping is obviously the preferred method for any government to maintain order, as there is no pesky paper trail which might be used against the government later in a legal action. In summary, the use of the term "warrantless wiretapping" is a red flag, indicating strongly that the person using the phrase is an enemy of the state and is undoubtedly hiding something of vast importance.
- The Bush Administration claims the authority to bypass the FISA court, which was set up for the sole purpose of monitoring secret intelligence use of wiretaps. The claim is that there may be no time to get a warrant before starting a wiretap. Since the FISA law explicitly provides an exception for emergencies, only requiring a court filing within three days, this argument is meaningless. This article is a . You can help My English Wiki by expanding it.
|
| abstract
| - The Bush Administration claims the authority to bypass the FISA court, which was set up for the sole purpose of monitoring secret intelligence use of wiretaps. The claim is that there may be no time to get a warrant before starting a wiretap. Since the FISA law explicitly provides an exception for emergencies, only requiring a court filing within three days, this argument is meaningless. Dean Johnson, a legal analyst for ABC news, offered the opinion January 6, 2007 that the strongest legal impeachment case against Mr. Bush is with respect to the National Security Agency's wire-taps of millions of American telephone calls without warrants. "Section 1809 of the FISA Act provides that any public official who engages in a wiretap, without authorization, is guilty of a felony," Mr. Johnson said. "I think it's beyond a reasonable dispute that President Bush violated that statute." This article is a . You can help My English Wiki by expanding it.
- Warrantless Wiretapping is the act of covertly overseeing communication without legal formalities in place. Such wiretapping is obviously the preferred method for any government to maintain order, as there is no pesky paper trail which might be used against the government later in a legal action. Any government which has the appropriate control over its citizenry should never be called upon to justify its actions. The mere mention of the supposed desirability of a warrant is a very reliable sign that someone (perhaps several "someones" or even entire cities or states) needs to be disappeared. In fact, pathetic requests for such written justifications are telltale indicators that the citizenry is going rogue, and preventive measures cannot be too sudden or too severe in such a case. Any information gained in wiretapping should be considered to be of a higher caliber of reliability than information which is gained through torture or old-fashioned "plea agreements" with criminals. It is undeniably more reliable (being actual rather than virtual) than mere suspicions or suppositions, although that does not negate the value of the latter in obtaining the pure and true justice which is the object of the government at all times. In summary, the use of the term "warrantless wiretapping" is a red flag, indicating strongly that the person using the phrase is an enemy of the state and is undoubtedly hiding something of vast importance.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)