[ale] OT - Non AT&T landline - Further OT

[Jim Popovitch]

On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 15:40 -0400, Jeff Lightner wrote:
> OK I know I said yours would be the last word and had truly intended it
> to be but since this story just posted today that mentions the specific
> law that is believed to have been violated I figured I'd post it:
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070627/pl_nm/usa_surveillance_dc_2
> 
> P.S.  Before you say it - I know THIS story doesn't mention AT&T (or
> Bellsouth or SBC) but that's only because its focus is really on the
> failure to release documents rather than the underlying story which it
> mentions only in passing.

Jeff, what you fail to realize, time and time again, is that which is
specifically mentioned in the "news" article you posted above.
Specifically these words:

    "Critics charge the program, conducted by the National Security
     Agency, violated the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,"

There is no group of well respected, non-partisan, lawyers (those that
truly know the legal precedents and standards) that are challenging the
NSA's actions.  It is "critics" and partisans, on a fishing expedition
no less, that are doing the blabber mouthing.   Jeff, you can't keep
re-quoting partisan talking-heads and calling it factual news.  Please,
look at the whole picture not just a piece here and there.

Here's some home work:

Look up and understand "Executive Order" and then truly learn what the
FISA act is about, it's limits and it's loopholes.

Best wishes, 

-Jim P.