There is also evil and/or stupid life in DC

Big Brother is still watching you, and you can't sue him for it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369492,00.html

While I have more respect for President Bush than a lot of people in this country (and the media in particular) seem to, I'm no fan of a lot of his policies, and particularly his (IMO) blatantly Unconstitutional violations of individual and state rights.

Is terrorism a threat to the US? Yes, I believe it is.

Does electronic surveilance help prevent terrorist attacks? Yes, I believe it does.

Would allowing citizens to carry sidearms with low-velocity ammunition at will on domestic transportation virtually eliminate any possibility of highjackings? Yes, I believe it would.

Am I going to have a better chance of taking over a plane with a 20oz bottle of water than a 2oz bottle of water? No, not so much.

Does the US government have the authority to search or seize individual property (including email) without a court order? HELL NO! Fourth Ammendment, people: "The right of the people 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. " You can't search my Gmail inbox without a court order to search that particular inbox any more than you can search my physical mailbox without a court order for same.

Note that I have no objection to the NSA reading the email of people in Saudi Arabia, or Mexico, or Micronesia if they feel like it. The US Constitution only applies to the US and its citizens, not anyone else's. For that matter, I have no legal objection to MI-5 or the Mossad hacking into my email. I'd rather they didn't, but they are not obliged to protect my Constitutional rights. MY government, MY Constitution, MY rights. What is so freaking hard about this, for Zarth's sake?!

OK, it can be hard to tell who's inbox it is. Fine, I get that. So if Congress wants to pass a law that says the NSA can eavesdrop on any server outside US territory until a citizen identifies the contents as their property, that's fine. If they pass a law that the NSA can eavesdrop on conversations known to be between non-US persons in US territory, well, I personally don't approve, but I'd accept it as legal.

OK, the Constitution didn't anticipate telecommunications. Right, got that too. Item the first: Ammendments. We've done 27 of them so far. If you really need to do something, make it Consitutional, and do it. I may not like it, but it would be legal. Item the second: The 10th of those 27: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." A.K.A. "Yeah, really, the Federal Government can ONLY do the things we say it can do here. We mean it. Sure, we just clarified a few things they CAN'T do, but that means the states can't do them either. Things that we don't allow the Feds to do, nor prohobit the states from doing, are still things the Feds are prohibited from doing. IMO, this is THE key to the US Constitution.

I'll close with one of the best summations of legal authority I've ever heard (props to The West Wing, Ms. Donna Moss): "In a free country you don't need a reason to make something legal. You need a reason to make it illegal."