Showing posts with label USA PATRIOT Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USA PATRIOT Act. Show all posts
December 11, 2013
Author Of Patriot Act Says NSA Violates Law, DNI Should Be Prosecuted
[From article]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the original author of the Patriot Act, says Director of National Intelligence James Clapper should be prosecuted for lying to Congress.
"Lying to Congress is a federal offense, and Clapper ought to be fired and prosecuted for it," the Wisconsin Republican said in an interview with The Hill.
He said the Justice Department should prosecute Clapper for giving false testimony during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in March.
During that hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked Clapper whether the National Security Agency (NSA) collects data on millions of Americans. Clapper insisted that the NSA does not — or at least does "not wittingly" — collect information on Americans in bulk.
[. . .]
Sensenbrenner claims that the NSA is overstepping the law and violating the Constitution.
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/192241-patriot-act-author-obamas-intel-czar-should-be-prosecuted
December 06, 2013, 06:00 am
Patriot Act author: Obama’s intel czar should be prosecuted
By Brendan Sasso
Labels:
Intelligence,
NSA,
Perjury,
US Rep.,
USA PATRIOT Act
March 16, 2013
Judge Halts FBI Abuses (Which ones?)
http://www.france24.com/en/20130316-fbi-snooping-tactic-ruled-unconstitutional
16 MARCH 2013 - 03H00
FBI snooping tactic ruled unconstitutional
A US judge has ordered the FBI to stop its "pervasive" use of National Security letters to secretly snoop on phone and email records, ruling that the heavily used tactic was unconstitutional.
The Patriot Act passed after the September 11 attacks gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation strong authority to order that people's telecom records be handed over, without such requests having to be disclosed.
AFP
Labels:
Email,
FBI,
National Security,
Phone Calls,
Surveillance,
Unconstitutional,
USA PATRIOT Act
October 18, 2011
Uganda: Invisible Children
http://www.invisiblechildren.com/history-of-the-war
Recent history of conflict in Central African Republic, Uganda, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of The Congo.
In October 2011 Obama sent US military advisors to Uganda. In 2001 under the USA Patriot Act, the Lord's Resistance Army was declared a terrorist organization in 2001. "In 2004, Congress passed the Northern Uganda Crisis Response Act, the first piece of American legislation to address this disaster."
Recent history of conflict in Central African Republic, Uganda, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of The Congo.
In October 2011 Obama sent US military advisors to Uganda. In 2001 under the USA Patriot Act, the Lord's Resistance Army was declared a terrorist organization in 2001. "In 2004, Congress passed the Northern Uganda Crisis Response Act, the first piece of American legislation to address this disaster."
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Lord's Resistance Army,
Uganda,
USA PATRIOT Act
August 24, 2011
Do Americans Have the Will To Fight Terror?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0811/koch.php3
Jewish World Review
August 23, 2011 / 23 Menachem-Av, 5771
Is the U.S. Willing to Fight Against Islamic Terrorism No Matter How Long, No Matter How Costly in Blood and Treasure?
By Ed Koch
Jewish World Review
August 23, 2011 / 23 Menachem-Av, 5771
Is the U.S. Willing to Fight Against Islamic Terrorism No Matter How Long, No Matter How Costly in Blood and Treasure?
By Ed Koch
March 10, 2009
Clueless Cambridge Journalist
Is this why the Editors 'forgot' to publish Griffin's column? Other references to security cameras disappeared from their blog. Obama's local newspaper keeps the voters informed. Ahem! Why do Homeland Security cameras offend when others do not? Harvard and many private individuals have security cameras operating watching public spaces. They abuse their video tapes power worse than the government. Nothing like clueless voters to support or oppose something for irrational reasons. Amazing how many Cambridge elitists believe that cameras prevent crime. More amazing is that this long term citizen-columnist of the Conformist Party City does not know how the city works. It is a question for him whether the City Manager did this by himself? The unelected one man ruler boasts that he has the statutory power to make contracts in the name of the City. He tells the City Council they should be grateful that he informs them after the fact. Griffin, have you ever seen a City Council meeting? Do you know what form of government the city has? There is no civil or constitutional liberty to be free of cameras in a public space. It is well established law. There's no right to privacy in a public place. Do you really reject the fact that Bush prevented any further attacks on this country? The current mayor of the city of conformists wants a policeman on every corner but opposes the USA PATRIOT Act. How is that rational? For many years the Ashburton state office building required screening before entering. Did Bush control security at the State House? Mexican drug cartels are invading the country and you call them 'alleged terrorists?' Regarding the FBI, were you outraged when they allowed Bulger to murder 19 civilians? Were you comfortable while Joe Salvati, Peter Limone and two who died in prison were framed for murder and jailed for 30 years? Have you noticed that the FBI has not changed? Do you think the City police and the state police have any cameras in the City?
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1676795291/Griffin-Smile-your-picture-might-not-be-taken
Griffin: Smile, your picture might not be taken
By Richard Griffin/Growing Older
Cambridge Chronicle
Mon Mar 09, 2009, 11:48 AM EDT
Is this why the Editors 'forgot' to publish Griffin's column? Other references to security cameras disappeared from their blog. Obama's local newspaper keeps the voters informed. Ahem! Why do Homeland Security cameras offend when others do not? Harvard and many private individuals have security cameras operating watching public spaces. They abuse their video tapes power worse than the government. Nothing like clueless voters to support or oppose something for irrational reasons. Amazing how many Cambridge elitists believe that cameras prevent crime. More amazing is that this long term citizen-columnist of the Conformist Party City does not know how the city works. It is a question for him whether the City Manager did this by himself? The unelected one man ruler boasts that he has the statutory power to make contracts in the name of the City. He tells the City Council they should be grateful that he informs them after the fact. Griffin, have you ever seen a City Council meeting? Do you know what form of government the city has? There is no civil or constitutional liberty to be free of cameras in a public space. It is well established law. There's no right to privacy in a public place. Do you really reject the fact that Bush prevented any further attacks on this country? The current mayor of the city of conformists wants a policeman on every corner but opposes the USA PATRIOT Act. How is that rational? For many years the Ashburton state office building required screening before entering. Did Bush control security at the State House? Mexican drug cartels are invading the country and you call them 'alleged terrorists?' Regarding the FBI, were you outraged when they allowed Bulger to murder 19 civilians? Were you comfortable while Joe Salvati, Peter Limone and two who died in prison were framed for murder and jailed for 30 years? Have you noticed that the FBI has not changed? Do you think the City police and the state police have any cameras in the City?
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1676795291/Griffin-Smile-your-picture-might-not-be-taken
Griffin: Smile, your picture might not be taken
By Richard Griffin/Growing Older
Cambridge Chronicle
Mon Mar 09, 2009, 11:48 AM EDT
January 20, 2009
Terrorism Charges for Unruly Behavior on Planes
Terrorism Charges for Unruly Behavior on Planes
This article frhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifom the Los Angeles Times tells how a woman had her children taken from her after she spanked them on a plane. She is prohibited from flying and her children are being adopted by foster parents.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-airline-felonies20-2009jan20,0,1698279,full.story
In-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges
By Ralph Vartabedian and Peter Pae
Los Angeles Times
January 20, 2009
This article frhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifom the Los Angeles Times tells how a woman had her children taken from her after she spanked them on a plane. She is prohibited from flying and her children are being adopted by foster parents.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-airline-felonies20-2009jan20,0,1698279,full.story
In-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges
By Ralph Vartabedian and Peter Pae
Los Angeles Times
January 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




