Politics & Government - 7 July 2007

Picture this:

A woman is pulled over on a routine traffic stop. She has had too much to drink. When she tests positive and the cop is about to arrest her, she reaches for his holster. The cop fires shots at her. She does not survive.

Her husband finds out about what happened. That night, he goes to the cop's house, bringing his gun. As soon as the cop answers, the widower fires six shots at the cop's head, killing him on the spot. This happens right in front of the cop's wife, his preschool-aged daughter, and his baby son.

The widower turns himself in to police, believing he did the right thing. His defense attorney says he was justified, because the officer killed the one he loved, so he had it coming. The prosecutor says he is guilty of murder and should serve the life sentence (His state does not have the death penalty)

You be the jury...Whose killing was justified, and whose was murder?

2007-07-07 11:55:55 · 13 answers · asked by mikeburmeister@sbcglobal.net 3 in Law & Ethics

Is it illegal to teach someone how to back their own DVD's and provide them with the free software. I just don't want to be liable for my friends actions. Thanks

2007-07-07 11:55:09 · 6 answers · asked by Love LA 2 in Law & Ethics

Aides to Bush have asserted that the president retains the authority to conduct surveillance without court permission.

Lawsuit Against Wiretaps Rejected
Case's Plaintiffs Have No Standing, Appeals Court Rules

By Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 7, 2007; Page A01

A federal appeals court removed a serious legal challenge to the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program yesterday, overruling the only judge who held that a controversial surveillance effort by the National Security Agency was unconstitutional.

Two members of a three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ordered the dismissal of a major lawsuit that challenged the wiretapping, which President Bush authorized secretly to eavesdrop on communications involving potential terrorists shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.


Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Avant News - Deadpan satire from plausible futures - Avant News
KEELER POLITICAL REPORT
Coffee House Poetry


Full List of Blogs (60 links) »


Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web


Save & Share Article What's This?

DiggGoogle
del.icio.usYahoo!
RedditFacebook




The court did not rule on the spying program's legality. Instead, it declared that the American Civil Liberties Union and the others who brought the case -- including academics, lawyers and journalists -- did not have the standing to sue because they could not demonstrate that they had been direct targets of the clandestine surveillance.

The decision vacates a ruling in the case made last August by a U.S. District Court judge in Detroit, who ruled that the administration's program to monitor private communications violated the Bill of Rights and a 1970s federal law.

Yesterday's action in the 6th Circuit means that the principal remaining legal challenge to the NSA surveillance program is a group of cases pending before a U.S. District Court judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in California. The primary issue before that appeals court, differing somewhat from that in the Michigan case, is whether the administration may claim that a privilege covering state secrets precludes the litigation.

The eavesdropping program -- first revealed by news accounts in late 2005 and the subject of intense political wrangling since then -- is one aspect of a broad assertion of presidential power by Bush in the past six years to justify policies meant to deter terrorism here and abroad.

As first devised, the program allowed the NSA to intercept telephone calls and e-mail between the United States and overseas in which at least one party was suspected to be affiliated with al-Qaeda or related groups, without the court approval typically required for government wiretaps, administration officials said.

The program prompted vehement objections from privacy advocates and many Democrats, who contended that it was illegal because it bypassed a secret court, created under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), to provide judicial oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States.

In January, after Democrats gained control of Congress, the administration abruptly shifted its position. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales announced that the surveillance program would be overseen by the FISA court. But administration officials have not described critical details of the new approach, including whether a separate warrant would be required for each instance of monitoring. Aides to Bush have asserted that the president retains the authority to conduct surveillance without court permission.

With the change in the program, the administration argued before the 6th Circuit that the case is moot. The two judges who made up the majority, both Republican appointees, did not address that issue. Judge Alice M. Batchelder, who wrote the 35-page main opinion, focused her lengthy analysis on why she concluded that the plaintiffs -- many of whom have professional ties with people and organizations suspected of terrorism -- do not have the legal standing to bring the lawsuit. She said the plaintiffs could not show that they had been injured directly by the surveillance.

Judge Ronald Lee Gilman, a Democratic appointee, disagreed. In a dissenting opinion, he concluded that the plaintiffs are entitled to sue because they felt a need to alter their communications after the program was disclosed. Gilman also wrote that the case is not moot because "the president maintains that he has the authority to 'opt out' of the FISA framework at any time." And he agreed with the lower-court judge that the program violates federal law.

Administration officials lauded the 6th Circuit's decision. Deputy White House press secretary Tony Fratto called the lower court's finding that the program was unconstitutional "wrongly decided." Fratto said the appellate court "properly determined that the plaintiffs had failed to show their claims were entitled to review in federal court."

Steven R. Shapiro, the ACLU's legal director, said: "As a result of today's decision, the Bush administration has been left free to violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which Congress adopted almost 30 years ago to prevent the executive branch from engaging in precisely this kind of unchecked surveillance." He said the ACLU is examining its options, including the possibility of an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) called the court decision "a disappointing one that was not made on the merits of the case, yet closes the courthouse door to resolving it." The panel has been conducting an investigation into the warrantless wiretapping program. Last month, it issued subpoenas to the administration, seeking documents related to the program's "authorization and legal justification."

The two lawsuits pending before the 9th Circuit include Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. v. Bush, in which the plaintiffs, an Oregon branch of a Saudi charity that has been investigated for alleged terrorist ties and others, contend that they have a document proving they were a direct target of NSA surveillance. The other case, Hepting v. AT&T Corp., has been brought on behalf of a group of AT&T customers who allege that the company intercepted their phone calls and e-mails and disclosed them to the NSA.

The two cases are scheduled to be heard Aug. 15.

Staff writer Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report.

2007-07-07 11:53:31 · 6 answers · asked by trevathantim 2 in Law & Ethics

I am the only one listed on the birth certificate, will it be pretty easy for my husband to adopt her, he has been her "dad" for the last 3 years she is turning 4 this week.
her "sperm donar" has not had anything to do with her since she was born.
thanks so much

2007-07-07 11:53:11 · 5 answers · asked by 3 girls call me mommy 5 in Law & Ethics

I am 17 years old turning 18 in August, I got a lisence and a car and unfortunately, I don't have any money left to pay for gas, food and clothes. What would be your best suggestion about what I should do, where to work, or what?

I don't really want to get one of those jobs that you have to work at for a long time because I do have to go back to school in the fall and don't want to work somehere like that and quit after about 1-2 months so I don't know what to do.

2007-07-07 11:52:40 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

I've played enough "Call of Duty" and "Medal of Honor" to familiarize myself with a few of the sniper rifles of World War II. But could any of those sniper rifles have been fitted with silencers back then?

I read that the Nazis had silencers for certain types of machine guns. But what about the sniper rifles?

Even if it wasn't practical to use in combat situations, was it possible? Did silencers for sniper rifles exist in the 40s? Even if it were just for state-side civilian or police use?

Any details would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance!

2007-07-07 11:52:08 · 16 answers · asked by nitejrny282 2 in Military

Fred Thompson gained an image as a tough-minded investigative counsel for the Senate Watergate committee. Yet President Nixon and his top aides viewed the fellow Republican as a willing, if not too bright, ally, according to White House tapes.

DOES THIS MEAN FRED THOMPSON IS SURE TO WIN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY?

2007-07-07 11:49:00 · 12 answers · asked by PD 6 in Politics

2007-07-07 11:48:24 · 2 answers · asked by Ron 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

He is a world famous chess champion.

2007-07-07 11:47:05 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2007-07-07 11:46:23 · 3 answers · asked by Ron 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

hey anyone watching live earth! it's amazing! non-stop concerts around the world for raising awareness about global warming! some of the bands i don't like, sure, but it's a great event and you should check it out if you care! the one playing in new jersey is being broadcasted live right now. you can go here to watch it and previous concerts!!!!

http://entimg.msn.com/i/LiveEarth/landingpage/altplayer/q.html

SUPPORT AL GORE AND STOP GLOBAL WARMING!

www.climatecrisis.org

send the message and save the earth

2007-07-07 11:46:18 · 22 answers · asked by 〜ベラベル〜 4 in Politics

2007-07-07 11:45:56 · 6 answers · asked by Ron 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

...than Hillary Clinton as President?

2007-07-07 11:45:54 · 6 answers · asked by naiveidealist 2 in Other - Politics & Government

2007-07-07 11:44:55 · 3 answers · asked by Ron 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

>
>
>YA GOT TO LOVE HIM....A MUSTREAD...PLEASE DO YOURSELF A
FAVOR....READTHIS!
>The Plan!
>?
>
>Robin Williams, wearing a shirt that says "I love New
York" in Arabic.
>
>You gotta love Robin Williams......Even if he's nuts!
Leave it to RobinWilliams to come up with the perfect plan.
What we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and
repeat this message.
>
>Robin Williams' plan...(Hard to argue with this logic!)
>
>"I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not
heard of a planfor peace. So, here's one plan."
>
>1) "The US will apologize to the world for our
"interference" in their affairs,past & present. You know, Hitler,
Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega,Milosevic, Hussein, and the
rest of those "good '  ole' boys",we will never "interfere"
again.
>
>2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world,
starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the
Philippines .  They don't want us there. to be cont.,

2007-07-07 11:44:21 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Elections

I work with temporary agents for catering in London. What Im asking is if theres some union or some organisation that will help if there are problems with not getting paid properly or health & safety issues etc.

There's alot of agents abusing their staff & particularly travellers from other countries. They dont know who they can trust & who to get advice from when pay day comes. Can anyone help? Thanks.

2007-07-07 11:43:35 · 8 answers · asked by tezsa 1 in Law & Ethics

2007-07-07 11:43:32 · 11 answers · asked by Maakies 3 in Law & Ethics

or will they just say that no one said that ?http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=49750&cl=3276618&ch=49799&src=news

2007-07-07 11:41:39 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

America?

2007-07-07 11:41:36 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Granma who is a naturalised British and with British passport wants to take the grandson to Disney World in Paris during this school holiday. Please advise

2007-07-07 11:41:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

Is it illegal to notify "friends" of a Sex Offender via MySpace? So, say sex offender Bob Jones has a MySpace page... would it be illegal to message everyone on his friends list with the link to his sex offender profile and his MySpace profile??

2007-07-07 11:39:40 · 7 answers · asked by Astrid A 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

There is a guy in my group who has been extremely nasty, didn't get his work in on time, and didn't show up on time for work sessions. He now wants a copy of the final powerpoint with everyone's work included on it. I gave hima copy of his work only. He has threatened to sue me for the rest of it. Does he have a leg to stand on?

2007-07-07 11:39:20 · 3 answers · asked by apark3 2 in Law & Ethics

"Not so far beneath the surface, I think, we are becoming more, not less, alike.

I don't mean to exaggerate here, to suggest that pollsters are wrong and that our differences--racial, religious, regional, or economic--are somehow trivial, [but] facile expectations and simple explanations are being constantly upended. Spend time actually talking to Americans, and you discover that most evangelicals are more tolerant than the media would have us believe, most secularists more spiritual. Most rich people want the poor to succeed, and most of the poor are both more self-critical and hold higher aspiration than the popular culture allows. Most Republican strongholds are 40 percent Democrat, and vice versa. The political labels of liberal and conservative rarely track people's personal attributes."








Guesses, anybody? And what makes you guess the way you do?

2007-07-07 11:37:01 · 6 answers · asked by oimwoomwio 7 in Other - Politics & Government

and fight them there? If we do, won't they just go back to Iraq or Syria, or Lebanon or a host of other countries. Are we going to bankrupt ourselves running around the globe fighting an enemy we can't identify until after they attack? Wouldn't it make much more sense to secure our own country to the best of our ability?

2007-07-07 11:36:47 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

What do you think? Would Republican voters go for her?

2007-07-07 11:30:54 · 25 answers · asked by Middy S 2 in Politics

See video, is he a liberal?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a30rJQbDDno&mode=related&search=

2007-07-07 11:30:20 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

Example: The Talmud condemns Jesus to boil in excrement.

2007-07-07 11:29:38 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

to the people who lost hope I fell sorry for you. Oh and we learned that first hand remember the first bush and clinton.

2007-07-07 11:23:45 · 12 answers · asked by Jeremy P 2 in Politics

Who do you think undertakes more operations which are kept secret from the public, the SAS or SBS. It's a matter of who gets chosen; is the SBS the better choice or is the SAS the better choice? I heard that the SAS is now less trust worthy because they are trigger happy and reckless. While the SBS' low profile allows more covert operations. Well what do you think?

And what would be better is if you have any source (book or web site) that has proof (or something like that) that can tell you who gets chosen (more often as it isn't always the same group) to do the covert operation.

2007-07-07 11:22:28 · 9 answers · asked by Sh4rpsh00t3r 1 in Military

EVERY able bodied American should pay their FAIR SHARE and a FLAT TAX is FAIR.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8Q7VUIG0&show_article=1&catnum=3
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) - Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani ran into a buzz saw of opposition Saturday when he explained his opposition to a flat federal income tax.
Several dozen people jeered when Giuliani, in response to a question, said he would not be in favor of a flat tax.

"I have to study it some more," the former New York City mayor said. "I don't think a flat tax is realistic change for America. Our economy is dependent upon the way our tax system operates."

HE DID SAY HE WOULD LOOK INTO IT THOUGH ...We'll see...

2007-07-07 11:20:52 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics