|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on July 9, 2008, 1:23 pm
Please log in for more thread options Ed Jay wrote:
> (Matt Probert) scribed:
>
>>
>>>
http://ebn.benefitnews.com/asset/article/621321/court-rules-workers-text-messages-private.html
>>>
>>> Although this is a California court (for those of you outside of the
>>> U.S., they are widely accepted as some of the most radical in the U.S.),
>>> and the order only applies right now to California, it could have
>>> far-reaching implications - I suspect it could even be argued as
>>> applying to web surfing.
>>>
>> Here in the UK we now have new Draconian anti-terrorism legislation
>> which allows full phone intercepts and includes email intercepts.
>>
>> Quite how such rules were slipped in may amaze some people, but after
>> years of indoctrination or "spin" the British public is now a very
>> stupid and gullible animal.
>>
>> They don't even realise that the term "terrorist suspect" actually
>> means "some innocent person" and could include THEM, under our new
>> laws. I can not speak for the USA.
>>
> It's worse here in the Colonies. The gummint is at liberty to tap our
> telephones, read our email, read our text messages, etc., come to our house
> without a warrant break down the door without warning, take us away and lock
> us up without charges, without a lawyer or the benefit of outside contact
> with the world. In short, we disappear. When you read that the bush
> administration has shredded the US Constitution, this is what they're
> writing about.
>
No, that's not entirely true, Ed. The courts threw out the law allowing
warrantless wiretapping several months (maybe a year?) ago. And they
still need a warrant to break down your door. The difference is it may
come from a "secret court" where everything is classified. And they can
scan email and other internet traffic for certain keywords and catch
phrases, but what they can do with that information is tightly
controlled. They can't, for instance, just read your email if they
want, and can't keep emails which are proven to be innocuous.
And they still can't lock you up for over a short period of time (varies
by jurisdiction, but typically 48-72 hours) without charges, and must
provide you with an attorney if you so ask.
The detainees at Guantanamo Bay are being held by the military, which is
an entirely different situation. But even there the Supreme Court
recently ruled they must be tried in civilian courts, provided with
attorneys, etc.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| 
XML Sitemap