> Nick wrote: > Something I found very interesting about the New York Times they acted so > surprised that this was occurring;
A few thoughts: 1.) The shoot-the-messenger and he-did-it-too arguments are pointless. For example, should we ignore information we get from terrorists because they're terrorists? That is, should we say, "look how bad that person is therefore their information should be tossed out"? 2.) In talking with some people about this I've heard the following phrase is the key: "and then provide summaries of these messages to the Federal Bureau of Investigation." Put another way, the NSA can gather the information but only the FBI can analyze it and they must get a warrant to do that and it must be part of their jurisdiction. That's the tenor of what I've been hearing anyway. As to whether the President can order this, it's going to be tricky from what I've heard. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Get help! RoboHelp http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=58 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:189592 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
