To purchase diclofenac online discover more evidence-based information and resources for headaches and migraine, celexa no prescription visit our dedicated hub. Scientific evidence does not have a alesse (ovral l) for sale consensus on the safety or risk of using hormonal birth lasix cost control and hypothyroidism risk. If they do become pregnant, they order cipro without prescription should discontinue using phentermine and consult a doctor immediately. A cephalexin overdose online purchase free doctor or other medical professional will likely review medical and cheapest ventolin symptom history with the person. If skin begins to grow purchase free toradol low price australia over the back of the labret, a person may need generic cipro to exchange their jewelry for a longer stud for a find cialis no prescription required short time. Novavax isn't effective right after your shot because cheap viagra internet it takes your immune system time to respond to the buy generic lumigan vaccine. Some research suggests a link between a history of purchase cheap cialis online canada disordered eating and the decision to adopt a plant-based diet. cheapest accutane What to do during the seizureWhat to do when the online pharmacy diclofenac shaking stopsA person often feels very tired following a seizure and.

That’s the term the Electronic Frontier Foundation is using to describe the data collection methods it yesterday sued the federal government to stop. Dragnet fishing involves scooping up everything, and throwing back everything except the particular fish you were looking to catch; dragnet surveillance is collecting data on everyone, and then sifting through it to identify the bad guys. Here, from the lawsuit against the National Security Agency, the President, and various other parties, is a summary description of what it alleges the government is doing.

8. The core component of the Program is Defendants’ nationwide network of sophisticated communications surveillance devices, attached to the key facilities of telecommunications companies such as AT&T that carry Americans’ Internet and telephone communications.

9. Using this shadow network of surveillance devices, Defendants have acquired and continue to acquire the content of a significant portion of the phone calls, emails, instant messages, text messages, web communications and other communications, both international and domestic, of practically every American who uses the phone system or the Internet, including Plaintiffs and class members, in an unprecedented suspicionless general search through the nation’s communications networks.

10. In addition to using surveillance devices to acquire the domestic and international communications content of millions of ordinary Americans, Defendants have unlawfully solicited and obtained from telecommunications companies such as AT&T the complete and ongoing disclosure of the private telephone and Internet transactional records of those companies’ millions of customers (including communications records pertaining to Plaintiffs and class members), communications records indicating who the customers communicated with, when and for how long, among other sensitive information.

The “Program” is what President Bush called the “Terrorist Surveillance Program,” instituted shortly after the 9/11 attacks and only revealed in 2005. The plaintiffs are various ordinary citizens who object to the NSA reading their ¬†mail and listening to their phone calls without a warrant or probable cause, as provided in the Fourth Amendment. There is, I expect, no reason any of them should be under suspicion of plans to terrorize anyone.

I had an argument over dinner last night with a staunch Republican who was convinced that one of the reasons to vote for McCain was that McCain would appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court. I asked him if he thought a strict interpretation of the Fourth Amendment would allow this sort of surveillance of citizens, or the warrantless search and seizure of laptops at the border about which I wrote earlier. His non-response was that this sort of thing had been going on for years, even under Clinton. I am amazed that conservative originalists so readily forget that the Constitution was premised on the realization, based on hard experience, that governments can’t be trusted. The restraints on government power are as much a part of the Constitution as their favored interpretation of the Tenth Amendment.

This entry was posted on Friday, September 19th, 2008 at 9:07 am and is filed under Surveillance. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.