Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Jun 2013 14:57 UTC
Legal And yes, the PRISM scandal is far, far from over. More and more information keeps leaking out, and the more gets out, the worse it gets. The companies involved have sent out official statements - often by mouth of their CEOs - and what's interesting is that not only are these official statements eerily similar to each other, using the same terms clearly designed by lawyers, they also directly contradict new reports from The New York Times. So, who is lying?
Thread beginning with comment 564107
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re:
by kurkosdr on Sat 8th Jun 2013 15:35 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

Am I the only one who sees that "secret court orders" violate constitutional rights?

You receive a secret court order. You can't contest it infront of a judge, because you can't reveal it exists. If you contest it and hence you reveal it exists, you are automatically breaking the law. If you don't comply, you are also automatically breaking the law.

As long as there are neckbeards and tools -on a global level- believing all those "do as we say" and "spy on the citizens" acts are being voted to protect us, it will get worse. Dystopian-fiction kind of worse. 'nuff said.

Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; el-gr; LG-P990 Build/GRJ23) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1 MMS/LG-Android-MMS-V1.0/1.2

Reply Score: 9

RE: Re:
by No it isnt on Sat 8th Jun 2013 18:54 in reply to "Re:"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

It's completely legal, there's just one catch, Catch-22.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Re:
by djohnston on Sat 8th Jun 2013 20:31 in reply to "Re:"
djohnston Member since:
2006-04-11

Am I the only one who sees that "secret court orders" violate constitutional rights?


Welcome to the United Socialist States of Amerika. Most of what the government does "under color of law" now violates the U.S. Constitution, whether it's the President, Congress or a government agency. Every day the Federal Reserve exists, it is in direct violation of Article 1 Secions 8 and 10. And it has existed since 1913.

Even worse, the trickle down effect reaches to the state, county and municipal levels.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Re:
by woegjiub on Sat 8th Jun 2013 23:17 in reply to "RE: Re:"
woegjiub Member since:
2008-11-25

socialism != fascism.

It has brought it in the past, but the most heavily socialist states in the world are the freeest; scandinavia, NZ, Aus, EU, etc.

Edited 2013-06-08 23:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Re:
by Drumhellar on Sat 8th Jun 2013 21:16 in reply to "Re:"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Am I the only one who sees that "secret court orders" violate constitutional rights?


Nope. The Ninth Circuit court also finds them unconstitutional.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/nsl-found-unconstitutional

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Re:
by l3v1 on Mon 10th Jun 2013 06:32 in reply to "Re:"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

You receive a secret court order. You can't contest it infront of a judge, because you can't reveal it exists. If you contest it and hence you reveal it exists, you are automatically breaking the law. If you don't comply, you are also automatically breaking the law.


Well, what about ignoring it and denying ever getting it. They couldn't put you in court, since it's all hush-hush anyway. How can you break an order if nobody will acknowledge its existance? Or they'll just send out a black car with tinted windows in the middle of the night ;)

Reply Parent Score: 4