The NSA is just a backdrop against the real corruption, which guys like Sen. Ted Cruz, who intentionally manipulate the markets by threatening to default on USA debt. Only an idiot would not assume these Senators are selling their stocks before this stupid debate, drive the markets down, buy on the cheap, then bam! Come up with a deal, and make a huge windfall profit. meanwhile they keep everyone focused on other issues such as NSA while they literally rape the country.
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Scott McEachern wrote: > On 10/08/13 16:36, Martin Schröder wrote: >> YYCIX is subject to canadian laws. >> It likely must have a lawful interception interface for the canadian >> police/whatever. > > Americans are subject to the highest law of the land: The US Constitution. > You know, that document the President and damned near every government > employee has sworn an oath to obey and protect. > > The NSA has broken that oath. Not long after the Snowden leaks started, the > Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, spoke before congress and > explained what the NSA is "up to", in an attempt to play down Snowden's > revelations. Then more Snowden documents came out, proving that the DNI just > /lied/ to congress. Curiously, he's not in jail, and is still in office. > Lying to congress is an indictable offense, er, a "felony offence" in US > legal-speak. > > Now here's another fun bit of trivia for you: The constitution outranks > *all* other laws, like state, regional, municipal, etc. All except one: > Foreign treaties. They hold equal rank to the constitution. Think about > that, vis a vis foreign treaties with other intelligence agencies. The same > applies in Canada with our Constitution and Bill of Rights. > > Lawful interception, you say? Subject to Canadian laws? Privacy laws? > There are no privacy laws in either the US or Canadian constitutions; look it > up. But we /do/ have treaties. > >> Canada is a member of Five Eyes. > > Thank-you for proving my point. Nice treaties with the other members since > 1948. Treaties that have equivalent legal weight to the constitutions of the > respective countries. > > If you think our (Canadian) "morally superior" privacy laws, and our > national/provincial privacy commissioners have any say in the matter, you're > fooling yourself. > > A couple of weeks ago, John Tory, a very well-respected radio commentator > (and former lawyer, former CEO of Rogers, former politician, etc.) on a > respected AM talk radio station, interviewed a fellow who works deep inside > the telecom industry. Sorry, I can't remember the chap's name. Tory asked > the guy, "So what ISPs are giving customer data to the government?" The guy > deadpanned, "All of them. All of them are doing it." > > Of course, there's no actual proof of this at the moment, but given what > Snowden has released so far, and what those documents indicate (eg. PRISM) I > think this theory has moved from "pure speculation" to "most likely" status. > > -- > Scott McEachern > > https://www.blackstaff.ca > > "Beware the Four Horsemen of the Information Apocalypse: terrorists, drug > dealers, kidnappers, and child pornographers. Seems like you can scare any > public into allowing the government to do anything with those four." -- > Bruce Schneier
