*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Saturday, June 15th, 2013 7:56am PDT - promote requested by MrFisk.

Mad props to his props.
I'm glad to see he's back in office, after losing 1 election (likely due to re-districting).

If this is true, then they must have had similar data on Adam Lanza, possibly including recorded conversations with others.

What would happen if Google, for example, just refused to comply?
I feel like people would stand up for Google a lot more readily than they would for the 4th amendment... certainly any of these corporations is a lot more popular right now than the government. What could they possibly threaten with that wouldn't trigger a massive pro-Google outcry and martyrdom?

There are no 5th amendment rights to the people of foreign countries, but that doesn't mean it is ok to spy on all the citizens of your "closest Allies" either.

Laws apply to the geographical area in which the establishing state has domain.
The constitution is a set of laws.

If you are inside the bounds of the U.S. and/or its territories, all U.S. laws apply.
(Unless the laws themselves say 'does not apply to <group X>').

All persons outside the bounds of the U.S. are not covered by U.S. law.
(Hence why extraordinary rendition is so useful to the U.S. government - it's a way to avoid U.S. laws.)

-scheherazade

No telling. But it is worth noting that Qwest was the lone telecoms holdout under a similar program during the Bush administration. Result: all government contracts cancelled and CEO in jail for 'insider trading'. Not saying this is a direct result, but there are real consequences to not playing ball with the powerful.