From: "Gary Britt" 

I agree if the intrusion is unjustified, excessive, and a material invasion
of a reasonable privacy expectation.  In the current case, in my opinion,
we are discussing a very minor, fully justified, non-excessive invasion of
something without a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Gary

"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:43a3a091{at}w3.nls.net...
> Our disagreement ( the way I see it anyway ) stems from the fact that I
see
> government incursions into our privacy as a substantive danger to our
> liberty and you see it as a needed tool that enhances our security. What I
> see as 'Big Brother' you see as 'Kind Father'. I doubt we'll ever agree on
> this
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:43a395aa$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > Seriously no I wasn't Rich.  I was attempting to clearly define what
> > conduct
> > was in your opinion proscribed at what wasn't.  I wanted to do this
> > because
> > when you look at it carefully the exact same conversation on the exact
> > same
> > phone connection between the exact same people can be monitored in your
> > opinion without a warrant or requires a warrant based SOLELY upon the
> > physical location of the guy pushing the button or hooking up the
> > equipment.
> >
> > My point is that defining what's protectable privacy on such a
> > NON-SUBSTANTIVE basis, but on a purely minutely technical basis  does
not
> > advance the protection of citizens privacy interests in reality, and the
> > cost to our security on the other hand is potentially so great that it
> > outweighs such a non-substantive purely hypertechnical basis for
> > determining
> > what is a good warrantless search and what isn't.
> >
> > Its very real Rich.  You should consider it.
> >
> > Gary
> > "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> > news:43a36c64$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> Because some of your questions were an attempt to deviate from the
basic
> >> topic of NSA domestic monitoring.at hand. It's likely you already knew
> >> the
> >> answers your questions were an attempt to deviate and have nothing to
do
> >> with the issue of the NSA and FISA approval and the lack thereof
> >>
> >>
> >> "Gary Britt" 
wrote in message
> >> news:43a36878$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> > You keep dodging my questions and won't provide any
direct answers.
> > Why?
> >> > That's not like you.
> >> >
> >> > Again nothing was circumvented.
> >> >
> >> > Gary
> >> >
> >>
> >> Because some of your questions were an attempt to deviate from the
basic
> >> topic of NSA domestic monitoring. It appears you already know those
> > answers
> >> anyway.
> >>
> >> My question has always been why the need to alter the FISA (
> >> rubberstamp )
> >> approval process?
> >>
> >> I'm not questioning the need to do intelligence gathering just the
change
> > in
> >> process
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5