I did not say it was OK. I said they can. It is not unconstitutional for them to do this. Your indignation is amusing though. I agree with you. It's a stupid move, particularly the getting caught part.

A capture rate of 100% is unreasonable. By definition, every document is grabbed and analyzed. It is unreasonable because there is no reason for the seizure of the documents. There must be a reason for the necessary warrant in order to capture of the documents.

The government's behavior in that manner is completely contrary to the protections laid out in the 4th Amendment. Anyone who disagrees with this is wrong, full stop. As there is no war declared, there can no national security argument to be made to override the Constitution. Until we repeal the 4th, a capture rate of 100% is unconstitutional because there is no specific warrant process. The judiciary may not exempt themselves form the warrant process, nor may the Congress pass a law declaring warrants unnecessary - the Constitution overrides both these actions (or inactions).

Thank you for calling me out about the moron part. But respectfully, I disagree with you. I will not be kind, nor civil to someone who disagrees with me on this point of Constitutional interpretation. Anyone who trades freedom for security (in peacetime) is wrong - morally, ethically, and practically. As there is no declaration of war, these Government actions are illegal and the support of these actions traitorous. The people who enacted these warrantless programs should be tried, found guilty, and then places in jail / banished / put to death / pardoned (pardoning would be best, much as Ford pardoned Nixon).

I'm not sure this is a troll. Disagreeing with a moron is not a reason to mod someone down.

That being said, the NSA can spy as much as they want on foreign countries. However, the people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The emails and faxes definitively qualify as papers and effects. The 100% capture of these constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure. The NSA has prima facie been violating the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. Their actions are unconstitutional. It's as simple as that.

No man can be a traitor for upholding or protecting the Constitution, which is what Snowden did.

Probably the same thing the British did when the Russians sent an assassin into London in 2006. Which is to say, nothing at all.

Good. It's nice that they're having a good time. And I'm pleased to meet their friends on Slashdot!

He makes America look like a foolish and ineffectual power mad state. Part of the Great Game is marketing, after all.

He was a craptastic Khan. Khan is supposed to be menacing and be able to sell Chryslers. Cumberbatch can barely sell Fords and is about as menacing as a hummus and wheat sandwich.

I think I played this one. It's the one where the power company turns everyone into mutants and a blond haired Bruce Campbell goes around cracking wise and blowing up the mutants.

I disagree. MIT was involved. They did not step back from the process. They allowed the process to occur, knowing that the boy would end up in jail, dead, or both.

By doing nothing, MIT implicitly condoned the prosecutor's infamous behavior. Neutrality was a pocket signature. They knew this and they persisted in their inaction.

Even after the death of a person, MIT's refusal to condemn its actions shows a lack of moral courage. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Absolutely to this and some more besides. Austen was, particularly in Persuasion, mocking the very society that read her books.

Further, her ideas of the novel as an internal monologue were revolutionary. Before Austen (ok and maybe Murasaki in some sort of weird lost art way), novels were based on action rather than ego.

Austen is a British treasure. She definitely belongs on the bill.

Lends a whole new meaning to the term computer piracy. Yarr.

Oh, absolutely. They also tried like hell to sink an American ship back in the 60s. The US will forgive Israel anything, as long as Congressmen can count on the pro-Israeli lobby.

Hmmm. The fact that most (or all) Lenovo chief executives are Communists is not a legitimate concern? Heh. At the end of the day, Lenovo is owned and run by the CCP. That alone is a reason for concern.

This country is out of control. My great x 3 grandparents left Germany during the rise of Bismarck. They came to the US. Where's to go now?