Communications Assistance Law Enforcement Act, Oct 94, Dem House, Dem Senate, Pres. Clinton pass it

Epic.org ^ | May 13, 2006 | Electronic Privacy Information Center

[TheEaglehasLanded]

Why are Republican politicians not mentioning this, these guys are taking a dive. It's that simple

[battlecry]

And if it is indeed a duty, whzzup with Quest???

[tet68]

Ya know, that's probably just the way it ends up going to
congress, unreadable, no wonder they just vote not knowing
what's in it.

[Mo1]

.

[Roccus]

Part of setting that "...new tone in Washington" don'tcha know.

[Sacajaweau]

That's not the problem. The Dems are not mentioning this and inferring that they know nothing about the legal aspects of this.

Where's Hillary? Bubba discussed EVERYTHING with her. Has she spoken out on this?? and put her foot in her mouth again or has she just appointed "boot lickers" again.

[MizSterious]

Where's Hillary? Well, didn't I hear her give a soundbite saying how "disturbing" this is? (Not mentioning, of course, that her "husband" had signed off on it...)

[hedgetrimmer]

delivering intercepted communications and call-identifying information to the government, pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, in a format such that they may be transmitted by means of equipment, facilities, or services procured by the government to a location other than the premises of the carrier;

So the government is requiring information services to set their networks up with hooks so they can just divert information to government agencies? Who owns the networks, the private carriers or the government?

[Sacajaweau]

Most of the Senators and Reps are Attorneys in fact and they all have their own counsel to interpret in "ordinary terms". They know what they're voting for AND why they're voting for it.

Thousands of innocent people are searched everyday at airports, bus terminals, subways, bridges, border crossings AND photographed.

Atta had a phone number written on a map in his car. It probably was one of the hottest numbers we had and likely provided the reverse trail to the others. But it was too late and we will never be the same.

We never want to be "To Late" again.

[hedgetrimmer]

A telecommunications carrier shall consult, as necessary, in a timely fashion with manufacturers of its telecommunications transmission and switching equipment and its providers of telecommunications support services for the purpose of ensuring that current and planned equipment, facilities, and services comply with the capability requirements of section 103 and the capacity requirements identified by the Attorney General under section 104.

It also says a communications carrier cannot design a network that the government can't snoop in. I wonder, are telecommunications companies private? Are their systems private property? Why do they have to design their privately owned systems to specifications designated by the government?

[hedgetrimmer]

a manufacturer of telecommunications transmission or switching equipment and a provider of telecommunications support services shall, on a reasonably timely basis and at a reasonable charge, make available to the telecommunications carriers using its equipment, facilities, or services such features or modifications as are necessary to permit such carriers to comply with the capability requirements of section 103 and the capacity requirements identified by the Attorney General under section 104.

An equipment manufacturer MUST provide equipment set up for snooping, for what the government believes is a "reasonable charge"? No free market operating here, folks.

[hedgetrimmer]

Reimbursement Required for Compliance: The Attorney General shall review the statements submitted under subsection (d) and may, subject to the availability of appropriations, agree to reimburse a telecommunications carrier for costs directly associated with modifications to attain such capacity requirement that are determined to be reasonable in accordance with section 109(e).

Taxpayers must pay for telecommunications networks to set their equipment up for snooping?

[Mr. Brightside]

I'm with you.

I also hate paragraphs!

[randog]

I also hate paragraphs!

They're over-rated, IMO.

;^)

[GiovannaNicoletta]

bookmark

[Roccus]

Kinda like seatbelts, octane blends, low flow toilets etc. Regulating is what the government does best/worst.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Where's Hillary? Bubba discussed EVERYTHING with her. Has she spoken out on this?? and put her foot in her mouth again or has she just appointed "boot lickers" again."

She went on record as to say this is once again an administration not following the rules of law and there is no oversight.

"No Oversight" She just announced the Libs agenda for November.

[CyberAnt]

Rush was talking about it yesterday - there's an article up at his website - www.rushlimbaugh.com. It's on the free side of the website.

So Mrs. Clinton's remark WAS A JOKE! She knew full well her husband signed that bill into law. And .. if she uses the excuse, "I don't remember", she's lying or she is suffering from Alzheimer's.

People need to know HILLARY WASN'T CONCERNED WHEN HER HUSBAND SIGNED THIS INTO LAW - ONLY NOW THAT A REPUB IS IN OFFICE DOES SHE HAVE ANY CONCERNS.

Years ago the dems would have gotten away with this - but the dems still haven't figured out we CAN GO BACK AND FIND OUT WHAT THEY SAID AND WHAT THEY DID. No wonder they hate us.

[CyberAnt]

Thanks for doing that - a big blob of text is very difficult to read. I was about to do it myself, so I could read it.