Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy The Courts Crime

Federal Prosecutors, In a Policy Shift, Cite Warrantless Wiretaps As Evidence 321

Posted by Soulskill
from the surprising-no-one dept.
schwit1 sends this quote from the NY Times "The Justice Department for the first time has notified a criminal defendant that evidence being used against him came from a warrantless wiretap, a move that is expected to set up a Supreme Court test of whether such eavesdropping is constitutional. The government's notice allows the defendant's lawyer to ask a court to suppress the evidence by arguing that it derived from unconstitutional surveillance, setting in motion judicial review of the eavesdropping. ... The practice contradicted what [Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr.] had told the Supreme Court last year in a case challenging the law, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. Legalizing a form of the Bush administration’s program of warrantless surveillance, the law authorized the government to wiretap Americans’ e-mails and phone calls without an individual court order and on domestic soil so long as the surveillance is “targeted” at a foreigner abroad. A group of plaintiffs led by Amnesty International had challenged the law as unconstitutional. But Mr. Verrilli last year urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the case because those plaintiffs could not prove that they had been wiretapped. In making that argument, he said a defendant who faced evidence derived from the law would have proper legal standing and would be notified, so dismissing the lawsuit by Amnesty International would not close the door to judicial review of the 2008 law. The court accepted that logic, voting 5-to-4 to dismiss the case."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Federal Prosecutors, In a Policy Shift, Cite Warrantless Wiretaps As Evidence

Comments Filter:
  • by amightywind (691887) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:06PM (#45248219) Journal
    There have been a lot of firsts for Eric Holder's corrupt and diseased justice department.
    • by smitty_one_each (243267) * on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:09PM (#45248497) Homepage Journal
      He's a representative sample of what the U.S. government has become, and that's by no means limited to either component party of the Ruling Class.
      • And the home, of the alleged.

        • Because #Progress
        • by Taco Cowboy (5327) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:00PM (#45248743) Journal

          ... there is NOTHING FREE !!!

          I am speaking on experience.

          I am an American, a naturalized American citizen.

          I came from China.

          I, and many others, risking our lives and swam to Hong Kong back in the 1970's. They were shooting at us, back then.

          We risked our lives not because we were poor (and we were) but because there was NO FREEDOM for the people.

          Everything that we did - who your friends were, where you been to, what you did, why you did what you did, everything - was under the watchful eyes of the BIG BROTHER.

          I went to the United States precisely because, back then, the United States of America was the only country that could guarantee my freedom, because, back then, the government of the United States of America still had respect for The Constitution.

          I became an American citizen precisely because I found the freedom that I had longed for.

          That was back then.

          Not now.

          Nowadays, the so-called "freedom" has all but evaporated.

          When the prosecutors (or rather, persecutors ) can charge people with warrantless wiretaps , what is the difference between the United States of America and the former East Germany under Stasi or China under CCP ?

          Back when I became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America, my new government was still operating under the Constitution of the United States.

          No more.

          Under the Obama administration, I am sorry to say, the Constitution of the United States has become as valuable as soiled disposable diaper.

          As an American, I am sad.

          As one who was from an oppressed state, risking live in order to gain freedom, I am HORRIFIED.

          I am watching THE COUNTRY THAT I ADOPTED turning into just like the one I ran away from.

          • by Dutchmaan (442553)

            "Under the Obama administration, I am sorry to say, the Constitution of the United States has become as valuable as soiled disposable diaper."

            ...I thought you said you were here since the 1970's

            • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

              by rtb61 (674572)

              It's called "The straw that broke the camels back", the camel always remembers that last straw and who put it their and tends to forget all the others that piled on there.

              Basically Uncle Tom Obama the choom gang coward looks far far worse because he promised time and time again to be far far better than his predecessors and instead, well, history has proven that while he is a skilled teleprompter reader his actions prove him to be a far right sycophant.

              As for the individual, mouthing off is mouthing of

              • by causality (777677)

                Basically Uncle Tom Obama the choom gang coward looks far far worse because he promised time and time again to be far far better than his predecessors and instead, well, history has proven that while he is a skilled teleprompter reader his actions prove him to be a far right sycophant.

                The hell of a thing is, even if he truly intended to be better (which I doubt, for he was groomed from his obscure start), it would not matter. He's a mere puppet or a cog in a vast machine far beyond his control despite his high office.

              • by stenvar (2789879) on Sunday October 27, 2013 @07:45AM (#45250405)

                Basically Uncle Tom Obama the choom gang coward looks far far worse because he promised time and time again to be far far better than his predecessors and instead, well, history has proven that while he is a skilled teleprompter reader his actions prove him to be a far right sycophant.

                Yes, Obama's failure is particularly profound because he did the opposite of what he promised. But your diagnosis is wrong.

                I used to be a registered Democrat and I voted for Obama. But it is clear to me now that there is little difference between Democrats, Republicans, progressives, and conservatives: they all are beholden to their own special interests, and they are all using laws and regulations to enrich their buddies, whether they be unions or corporations. And the NSA, police, military, and government employees are every politician's buddy and get what they want. So stop paying lip service to the propaganda that "the left" somehow has your interests at heart.

                What we need is more politicians that fight for individual liberties and reduce the size of the US federal government.

            • by stenvar (2789879)

              Until 2001, things weren't so bad. After 9/11, Bush and Congress went crazy. Obama was elected in 2008 to reverse this trend. He had made great promises to restore the rule of law, privacy, due process, and constitutionality (and also to reduce crony capitalism and craft a sane drug policy). As a constitutional scholar and liberal, he had all the credentials. That's why people voted for him; that's why I voted for him. Instead of doing what he promised, Obama has actually made things far worse, and because

          • by causality (777677) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:32PM (#45248881)
            You are one of the minority who can remember what Jim Marrs calls "The old republic". That was before the banker takeover of the nation was approaching its final stages, before the technology for total surveillance was widespread and readily available, before there were so many American citizens who would cooperate with and work for the police-state apparatus in the name of security because they are governed by fear or greed or lust for power instead of reason and what was once called decency.

            The real problem is, we now have an entire generation that has never known the difference. We have too many people who are products of their environment, knowing only what they were taught, who lack the initiative to really look into the history and understand the changes that have occurred. To them, all of this is necessary and normal. It's a problem of inertia.
          • I am pretty sure our leaders have been ignoring the constitution for over 100 years. Just because you did not notice that it was corrupted and ignored when you came here in the 1970s does not change that.

            Warrant-less wiretaps is certainly a very old thing.

            I don't think that Obama has been any better or worse than previous presidents at following the constitution.

            • by pitchpipe (708843) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @11:17PM (#45249031)
              You know, I really hate posts like yours, for a couple of reasons.

              First, you say that warrantless wiretaps have been going on for a very long time. Maybe they have, but they were certainly never standard operating procedure. Good hell they're warrantlessly wiretapping EVERYBODY these days. And back then they never came out and said,"Hey, we're doing warrantless wiretaps, and if you don't like it you can fuck right off" like they do now.

              Second, saying it's been going on like this for hundreds of years makes it sound like it'll always be this way, so you might as well do nothing. It also lends it an air false legitimacy: "If the founding fathers were doing it it must be okay."

              • by causality (777677) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @11:28PM (#45249085)

                You know, I really hate posts like yours, for a couple of reasons.

                First, you say that warrantless wiretaps have been going on for a very long time. Maybe they have, but they were certainly never standard operating procedure. Good hell they're warrantlessly wiretapping EVERYBODY these days. And back then they never came out and said,"Hey, we're doing warrantless wiretaps, and if you don't like it you can fuck right off" like they do now.

                Second, saying it's been going on like this for hundreds of years makes it sound like it'll always be this way, so you might as well do nothing. It also lends it an air false legitimacy: "If the founding fathers were doing it it must be okay."

                The Founding Fathers were adamantly against this sort of thing and were willing to risk everything to try and create a nation that stood for something better. Their real problem is that they had to deal with the social realities of their day that were not within their power to overturn, such as the institution of slavery and the notions of class and wealth. Yet within those suffocating boundaries they instituted something more that we have failed to realize.

                One of their fears about having a Bill of Rights at all, was that the mere existence of such a document may foster the notion that human rights were limited to only those which were enumerated. As it stands today, the Bill of Rights is merely a yardstick by which we measure how far our failures have progressed.

                I sincerely believe that future generations will consider us a Dark Age greater than any medieval period, for never has the average person been so petty, emotionally and spiritually immature, ill-informed in the face of an Information Age, navie, and unwilling to stand up for what was right. The medieval serf at least had the excuse of being at the mercy of the information brokers and gatekeepers of their time. Our ignorant, on the other hand, can point only to their own laziness and failure of priorities.

          • by Tokolosh (1256448) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:50PM (#45248949)

            We have very similar stories, except I am from Africa, and the bit about the swimming. I agree with you entirely.

            I have noticed that people born in the USA take their liberty for granted, and are careless with it. On the other hand, those who have seen oppression (and I have seen the trajectory we are once already) understand the real and present danger we face.

            • by causality (777677) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @11:49PM (#45249189)

              We have very similar stories, except I am from Africa, and the bit about the swimming. I agree with you entirely.

              I have noticed that people born in the USA take their liberty for granted, and are careless with it. On the other hand, those who have seen oppression (and I have seen the trajectory we are once already) understand the real and present danger we face.

              Some of us who were born there do love and cherish our liberty and recognize the many ways in which it is being trampled with impunity. The problem is, we are drowned out by so many who think that professional sports, pop music, consumerism, television, and personal dramas are much higher priority. It's a problem of values and a problem of dehumanization as explained by Erich Fromm.

              You absolutely must have a broken people with malleable values and loyalties before you can have a police state. A strong, intact, whole people who are relatively self-sufficient and value ideals far beyond their own convenience cannot be trampled in this manner.

          • by TheSeatOfMyPants (2645007) on Sunday October 27, 2013 @12:43AM (#45249367) Journal

            Back when I became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America, my new government was still operating under the Constitution of the United States.

            No more.

            Under the Obama administration, I am sorry to say, the Constitution of the United States has become as valuable as soiled disposable diaper.

            Actually, crap like warrantless wiretaps began under Bush shortly after the attacks in 2001, and Obama just expanded the scope of abuse.

            It's also far from the first time that the federal government has shit on the Constitution. The WW2 internment of Americans with Japanese ancestry [wikipedia.org] is one example -- and don't forget the Constitution-shredding fun of McCarthyism [wikipedia.org], the Subversive Activities Control Act [wikipedia.org], and the 1798 Alien Sedition Acts [wikipedia.org], just to name a few.

            I'm not trying to downplay the seriousness of what's going on, to be clear -- just pointing out that the current problem runs much deeper than our current administration, and that it's not the first time deep corruption has fucked over a lot of Americans.

          • When the prosecutors (or rather, persecutors ) can charge people with warrantless wiretaps , what is the difference between the United States of America and the former East Germany under Stasi or China under CCP ?

            As long as it remains limited to national security cases - people in direct contact with an enemy in an armed conflict - the difference remains substantial. If the practice migrates to other areas of the law, then there is trouble.... big trouble. I doubt that will happen in a direct fashion since it is a pretty big cultural gap to cross, but eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty.

      • by causality (777677) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:17PM (#45248813)

        He's a representative sample of what the U.S. government has become, and that's by no means limited to either component party of the Ruling Class.

        He's not a product of an entirely faceless process. He's an individual who has chosen his allegiances, as do all individuals. That must not be disregarded when measuring what sort of man he is.

        The Left Wing and the Right Wing are two body parts of the same Beast. It's a monument to human stupidity that so few seem to truly comprehend that. The purpose of a two-party system is to play "good cop, bad cop" and to periodically switch roles for maximum mindfuck effect. The Founding Fathers foresaw what a two-party system would become because they understood and chose not to delude themselves about a few basic principles of reality. The understanding component is easy and painless compared to the decision to accept no delusion, however comfortable and reassuring it may be.

    • by icebike (68054)

      There have been a lot of firsts for Eric Holder's corrupt and diseased justice department.

      This is the first Hail Mary Pass I've the DOJ throw. We can only hope the Judges remember their oath of office.

    • Wireless wiretaps started around 10 years ago and now your lovely government starts using them as as Kafka style "evidence". Who needs this pesky "proper" evidence after all. Two years ago Obama, (in typical, cowardly way - on New Year Eve), signed NDAA that contains sections 1021 and 1022 that allow government thugs to jail citizens at whim and keep locked them indefinitely in military facilities without evidence and without access to court. Who needs this pesky judge after all. Guess when (NOT 'if') your
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:14PM (#45248259)

    This crap is never going to stop as long as the evil Rethuglicans are in power.

    • by Bartles (1198017)
      What are you talking about? This law passed the House and the Senate, and was signed by the president. It's the law, get over it.
      • by epyT-R (613989)

        So because it's the law we're no longer allowed to have a problem with it? Why are there idiots like you always cheering on the state?

        Democrats vs republicans is irrelevant. Both are the problem.

        • by Bartles (1198017)
          Believe me, I'm not cheering on the state. I'm just giving the canned response that ACA supporters give when anyone tried to argue that it's a bad law that needs to be defunded or repealed.
          • by Fwipp (1473271) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:01PM (#45248745)

            Nobody threatened to default on our debt unless we repealed the PATRIOT Act, though.

    • by craigminah (1885846) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:48PM (#45248409)
      It may have been a Republican President who signed it into law but the current Democratic President expanded it 100-fold. We as citizens need to stand up and oppose this if we deem it too invasive rather than call each other names.
  • by justthinkit (954982) <floyd@just-think-it.com> on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:14PM (#45248263) Homepage Journal
    How are we, the U.S., different from East Germany?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:17PM (#45248271)
      Having lived in East Germany, I can tell you. East Germans didn't pretend they were free.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:19PM (#45248285)

      How are we, the U.S., different from East Germany?

      The US has an independent press that's always critical of the government, no matter which politcal party is in power, like the New York Times.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      In East Germany if you liked your health insurance you got to keep it.

    • by cold fjord (826450) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:31PM (#45248341)

      How are we, the U.S., different from East Germany?

      Easy. The US is using its national intelligence agencies to obtain intelligence on terrorists trying to kill people. The intelligence agencies themselves don't have police powers. The suspect in this case is accused of assisting a terrorist group. East Germany's secret police had both an intelligence function and police powers. Their primary purpose was to keep the East German Communist party in power. The secret police were referred to as "The Sword and Shield of the Party." You could be arrested and imprisoned for such things as making jokes about the nation's leadership, wanting to form a new political party, being a member of an unapproved church, trying to leave the country without permission (could get you shot on the spot), and many other possible infractions. It isn't a small gap between them.

      • by nbauman (624611) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:52PM (#45248417) Homepage Journal

        How are we, the U.S., different from East Germany?

        Easy. The US is using its national intelligence agencies to obtain intelligence on terrorists trying to kill people.

        Except when they entrap people who are too stupid to find their way to the bathroom and lead them by the hand into a Hollywood terrorist plot that they never would have come up with on their own. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/16/nyregion/16terror.html [nytimes.com] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/dec/12/how-terrorist-entrapment-ensares-us-all [theguardian.com]

      • While it is true that the original scope of the intelligence community were not to enforce the law, that role is increasingly becoming part of their previously secret budget. Or that budget just increases with the collaboration between the different alphabet soup agencies. A microscopic gap indeed. That gap is non-existent to foreigners especially if you are in certain regions of Pakistan and Yemen under a CIA drone.

      • by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:09PM (#45248495) Homepage Journal

        You HAVE read 1984, right? We are actually in a Forever War. The War on Drugs has become the War on Terrorism, and every year our "police forces" become more and more militarized.

      • by MRe_nl (306212) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:34PM (#45248623)

        "The US is using its national intelligence agencies to obtain intelligence on terrorists trying to kill people".
        Mostly BULLSHIT.
        "The intelligence agencies themselves don't have police powers".
        Fully BULLSHIT.
        The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has both an intelligence function and police powers. Their primary purpose is to "secure the nation from the many threats it faces". You can be arrested and imprisoned for such things as whistle-blowing, opposing the status quo, being an unapproved immigrant, trying to enter or leave the country without permission (could get you shot on the spot), and many other possible infractions. No gap between them but the propaganda gap.

      • by jagapen (11417)

        The US is using its national intelligence agencies to obtain intelligence on terrorists trying to kill people.

        Yes, and obtaining intelligence on political movements like Occupy Wall Street. [rollingstone.com]

        The intelligence agencies themselves don't have police powers.

        Oh? [theguardian.com] What's that you say? [rollingstone.com] TFA is about warrantless surveillance undertaken by the FBI, which is the federal agency with explicit domestic police powers.

        The suspect in this case is accused of assisting a terrorist group.

        Under the USA PATRIOT Act, providing "mate

    • by gnasher719 (869701) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:09PM (#45248501)

      How are we, the U.S., different from East Germany?

      East Germany had a bigger, richer, and democratic neighbour. That was in the end enough motivation to overthrow the government. The USA has Canada and Mexico. Good luck.

    • In East Germany this would never be subject to judicial review or public comment. The concept of 'warrantless wiretap' would be preposterous because warrants were never required under any circumstances.

      There would also be no notification to the defendant that anything unusual was happening, nor publication of that information in a newspaper. There would be no prior court case on the topic, or appeals related to that non-existent action.

      There would be no publication of how the evidence was obtained, or publi

  • Let's be clear. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jcr (53032) <jcr@NOsPAM.mac.com> on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:17PM (#45248277) Journal

    This is NOT a test of whether a warrantless wiretap is constitutional. It is a test of whether the Supreme Court is willing to blatantly disregard the fourth amendment AGAIN.

    -jcr

    • by Rick Zeman (15628)

      We'll, I'm sure it's the "we have a better chance of having it upheld now than we do down the road" though this isn't a traditional conservative vs. liberal wing of the Court issue.

    • by bfandreas (603438)
      Interestingly the GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 actively and successfully lobbied against admitting their information into courts of law. Not because they thought it improper but rather because they weren't too keen on a parliamentary(and thus public) discussion of how they got their data.

      So this might actually be a bit of a blessing since this could stir exactly that kind of public discussion within...
      BWAHAHAHAHA!
      Sorry, it's awefully hard to finish this sentence with a straight face.
    • Please, stop regarding the Constitution (of any country) as some sacred document. In every country, including obviously despotic states where the judicial system is staffed by the reigning dictator's stooges, the Constitution is simply what the supreme court of the land says it is. So effectively the Supreme Court IS the constitution. Sure there are violent and non-violent ways to fix the problem, throwing out the government or the simpler political expedient of impeaching and throwing out the recalcitrant

      • by jcr (53032)

        effectively the Supreme Court IS the constitution

        Bullshit. The constitution is the entirety of the legal basis for the federal government's existence, and it does NOT grant any such royalist power to the supreme court.

        -jcr

  • Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Todd Palin (1402501) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:23PM (#45248311)
    Like it or not, the Patriot Act effectively suspended the Constitution. Under the Patriot Act the government basically does as it pleases and they don't even have to tell anybody what they do. It is only because of Edward snowden that we even know about any of this. Will the supremes uphold the constitution? I doubt it. The Global War On Terror isn't over until politicians declare it over. Get some new politicians, and we'll see then.
    • Re:Patriot Act (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:18PM (#45248547) Homepage Journal

      Remember - we "knew" a lot of what Snowden reported. We just didn't have public awareness. I could search to see when the first post on Slashdot told us about things like Echelon and Carnivore. Those programs have simply evolved and grown over the past two decades, Snowden didn't actually report anything "new". We gave our tacit consent years ago, and the NSA has taken the ball and run with it. Let's be grateful that Snowden managed to wake up some of the masses, but let's not exaggerate what he has done.

  • Bullshit standings (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Okian Warrior (537106) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:25PM (#45248319) Homepage Journal

    The US can kill an American [wikipedia.org] and his teenage son, yet no one can challenge the action because they were not directly affected. If all the relatives are taken out in one action, then the US is free and clear.

    We can't just protest to have unconstitutional laws removed, we have to prove they were used on us. Simply keep quiet about parallel construction [wikipedia.org] and you're good to go. If the defendant says "yes they did" and the US says "no we didn't", then the constitutionality of the law makes no difference, the US is free and clear.

    This thing about not challenging a law because it doesn't affect you is bullshit.

    If a law is unconstitutional, then it should be possible to challenge the law on its face.

    • yet no one can challenge the action because they were not directly affected.

      Al-Awlaki's father [still alive] and civil rights groups challenged the order in court.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:32PM (#45248345)

    Was that

    A> warrantless wiretapping was only being done when it involved one foreign contact on the other end.
    B> such wiretapping couldn't be used as evidence in any trial anyway.

    Essentially a splitting of hairs but the US citizen be brought up on charges.

    This is now turned on its ear - the Obama Administration is saying they can gather evidence on you WITHOUT permission (IE Illegally!) and they can charge you with a crime so long as they inform the accused they gathered such information... Illegally...

    WTF has this country come too?!

    • by Todd Palin (1402501) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @08:45PM (#45248389)
      "WTF has this country come too?!" A coup, basically. By suspending the constitution (Patriot Act) we no longer have rights. Between the Patriot Act and Citizens United we no longer are a constitutional democracy.
      • AC already stated the obvious - we never were a democracy, constitutional or otherwise. We are a constitutional REPUBLIC. There are some subtle differences between the two. Government seems to like to promote the idea that it is a democratic government, which encourages fools to act in a stupid manner. In a democracy, at least theoretically, the majority rules. In a republic, the majority's voice is easily ignored. With a tyrannical government, no one even listens to the people's voice. We haven't be

      • by Zak3056 (69287)

        Between the Patriot Act and Citizens United we no longer are a constitutional democracy.

        I am vehemently opposed to the PATRIOT act, but I personally cannot understand the notion that people, when acting together, lose their constitutional rights, and that's exactly what an opposite ruling in Citizens United would have implied.

        .

  • A lot of times you don't use information you have because it would reveal your methods and sources. But now that a lot of NSA methods and sources are known, they can use the information out in the open like this. Assuming the court accepts it as admissible under rules of evidence.

  • It's sad, really (Score:5, Insightful)

    by msobkow (48369) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @09:14PM (#45248535) Homepage Journal

    It's sad to see the US turning into a police state. Or perhaps it's too late, that's been done, and they're just dotting the I's and crossing the T's.

    If this evidence is deemed acceptable, you can expect the scope of the surveillance to expand dramatically as there is suddenly a reason for tapping the people in-country: prosecution. You can expect widespread surveillance to capture gang bangers, drug dealers, and probably even the guy next door who works "under the table" to avoid paying the IRS.

    Modern technology gives the government powers far over and above anything that has ever been available before when it comes to monitoring the population. And not merely monitoring, but controlling. Unlike with television, the "message" you get on the internet can be customized and tailored based on where and how you're surfing from. Newspaper sites have already been doing this for years, tailogring the news based on which nation someone is surfing from.

    I must admit I would never have predicted the abuses that I'm seeing happen. There was so much hope for the benefits of the internet when it was starting that no one ever really discussed the potential for abuse. Worse, you can't even try to stop the abuse because if you implement the end-to-end encryption that can prevent it, the government comes down on the companies involved to force them to stop. You're not allowed to maintain your privacy through a service like LavaBit in this new surveillance society.

    There was a Sylvester Stallone movie years ago that porttrayed an idyllic society above ground where it was illegal to even swear, and where in-room monitors spat out tickets for such offenses automatically.

    Is that where our world is headed? Towards a stale and staid managed society where any crime is a major shock because the people have stopped even thinking about performing criminal acts because they expect to be caught immediately if they try? It sounds like a lifestyle of fear and repression far beyond anything even the Nazis or East Germany ever dreamed of.

    I'd say that it all starts with this case, but we all know that's not true. It started years ago, when the surveillance began. This case is merely a continuation of the world government's mission to enslave humanity.

  • by ugen (93902) on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:46PM (#45248931)

    I know it's very fashionable to compare US to the communist countries, which most of you haven't lived in, and aren't even old enough to have seen on TV. I did - and let me just say it's nothing alike.

    Still, perhaps it's worth reading the "FA" to understand exactly what it means?

    tl;dr; version - some US prosecutors have been using evidence so derived in criminal cases without notifying defendants. Sometime during this summer someone higher up in Justice Department became aware of this (I'll take this claim at face value for now) and after some discussion (and presumably some opposition from those prosecutors who found the practice very convenient) it was decided that hiding the warrantless wiretaps from defendants is not acceptable (based on the way the law is interpreted).

    Based on that, find 3 differences between US and East Germany. I'll take a stab at it:
    1. There is a discussion in the prosecutorial branch wrt. legality of application of such law, and the outcome of that discussion is factual information provided to defendants, that may aid in their defense.
    2. The court will take this in consideration, and we will see this debated, probably at every level of judiciary all the way to Supreme Court.
    3. We are reading about all of this in the major media news outlet.

    Do you need me to tell you which of these items did not apply to the "Soviet Russia"? You, people, have no f-ing idea and your childish fits undermine legitimate efforts to create more transparent government and more just society.

    • The fear is that they are no longer taking efforts to hide the shenanigans because they no longer care whether we find out...

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford

Working...