Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You're kidding, right?> No. <So why do you suppose they have refused to seek warrants from the FISA court?> They haven't refused. They just haven't sought them in situations where they are not required, because that would hamper intelligence gathering.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> I want to know what everyone is so spooked by other than heresay. << <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T otal_Information_Awareness</a> You might like to read about the "Total Information Awareness" program - developed during the bush administration - who's goal was to create a massive orwellian database on voer 300 million americans - everything from your credit card purchases to your favorite brand of peanut butter. But some are just willing to accept on faith that this government would NEVER do anything inappropriate or even (gasp) illegal. >> And not letting them listen to these calls stops this ? How ? << Oversight. Checks and balances. Sunshine. Other people knowing what's going on. Fear of reprisal if plots are discovered. Honor and honesty. These are what prevent our government from encroaching on our civil liberties. If they occur even with all of the above, then it's a conspiracy between branches of government, which is much less likely. to happen. But the bush gang is brushing aside all that oversight, sunshine and checks and balances. Not to mention of course honor and honesty. "Trust" in their basic integrity is never enough, especially with this administration. I want real oversight. >> Exactly, who are you supposed to trust? << No one. >> Liberals seem to trust the government when government bureaucrats and Democrats are in charge << No they don't - and they never did. A healthy dose of skepticism is always a good thing. >> yet they don't trust Republicans. << ESPECIALLY republicans. Not with their track record. >> They haven't refused. They just haven't sought them in situations where they are not required << "THEY" say it's not required, but it's not their call. So that's "refusing". >> because that would hamper intelligence gathering. << How? Especially since they're even permitted to obtain the warrants after the fact. The reason for this is obvious - because it provides some "oversight", which is what the bush administration doesn't want. That's the reason. You didn't find the answer on your own, so I just gave it to you. That's a strong indicator of illegal activity. And who would be surprised to find out that's the case?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <who's goal was to create a massive orwellian database on voer 300 million americans> Actually, its goal was to apply information technology to counter transnational threats to national security. <"THEY" say it's not required, but it's not their call.> If Congress doesn't like it, they are free to pass a statue forbidding it, or defund it. <Especially since they're even permitted to obtain the warrants after the fact.> It would be a tremendous burden to apply for a warrant for every international call they might monitor, whether it's before or after. A FISA warrant requires a fair amount of paperwork - FISA wasn't designed for the timely exploitation of what are often anonymous phone numbers - it was designed to allow the monitoring of suspected foreign agents working in the United States.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Every time this subject comes up and the libs are certain the big bad geovernment is spying on their calls to the porn store it's fun to ask them for a few cases where people have actaully been arrested or where people were dragged out of their house because of this supposed spying. Then it's fun to ask them where the ACLU lawsuits are at regarding this supposed illegal spying. Because the ACLU LIVES to have a few cases of the Bush administration violating someones privacy rights. Uh oh....there are no cases??? What?? A liberal with no proof, just paranioa? No way! This is serious business otherwise we could just laugh at the left like normal. But in this case we have radical Islamofacists trying to kill us. The Bush administration takes this serious and have thus far prevented thousands of people from being killed. The people what did not die on those planes last week can thank Bush and the other authorities who used the tools liberals want us to stop using. the toold that stopped yet another terror attack. If anyone ever was confused about putting democrats into power in todays world get a clue. They should not get any more power than the local arcade or a bagel shop. They had ONE GUY who was serious about national security and winning the war, Joe Lieberman, and they ran him out of the party because he simply wasn't a big enough appeasing terrorist supporter. When the libs lose again I hope they spare us the voting machine excuse.
Originally Posted By EdisYoda <<It would be a tremendous burden to apply for a warrant for every international call they might monitor, whether it's before or after. A FISA warrant requires a fair amount of paperwork - FISA wasn't designed for the timely exploitation of what are often anonymous phone numbers - it was designed to allow the monitoring of suspected foreign agents working in the United States.>> We're not talking about International calls, we're talking about DOMESTIC calls. You know, those calls that originate and terminate INSIDE the United States! This has been said time and time again, yet you keep saying International calls. Please read what others have been saying.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> If Congress doesn't like it, they are free to pass a statue forbidding it, or defund it. << Exactly. But the 'republican' congress won't do it - they will not take on their mandated responsibility to provide oversight on the bush administration. That's corruption. Look at the criticism leveled at spector when he had the temerity to suggest hearings on the matter. This is what happens when one (corrupt) political party controls all the levers of power. We americans have the ability to change that - put the dems in control of at least one of the houses of congress. By doing so, we will be providing for an opportunity for true oversight within our own government. And there will be none until we do.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <We're not talking about International calls, we're talking about DOMESTIC calls.> Yes, and you're wrong. There's been no evidence presented that the NSA is listening in on purely domestic calls without a warrant.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <But the 'republican' congress won't do it - they will not take on their mandated responsibility to provide oversight on the bush administration.> Or they are providing oversight, and have decided that the program is both lawful and necessary.
Originally Posted By EdisYoda There's been no evidence that they HAVEN'T been listening on purely domestic calls without a warrent. Look, I voted for Bush both times, I'm a life long Republican. In the grand scheme of things I think the only thing that Nixon did wrong (compared to others) was that he got caught doing it. I don't trust Bush anymore, and I'm beginning to not trust the Republicans as a party. I've rarely trusted the Democrats either. Frankly all politicians should have term limits as they are all (ok, it's a general statement, almost all) out of touch with reality. They care more about special interests then the people who actually vote them into office. Now, that said, that's the type of conversation that I might have on a phone call that could get me in trouble with someone listening to calls who wants to guarantee the status quo. Now, just because they haven't done it (or at least we don't THINK they've done it), doesn't mean they won't. I'm not paranoid. I'm realistic. I've studied the history of this, and other nations, and I see us headed down the same road as the ancient Romans, pre WWII Germany and others... IF we're not careful and watchful of our Civil Liberties. Most, if not ALL, of the surveliance can be done within the legal framework we have today... including getting wiretap authorization after the fact through the secret FISA courts. Sure, there is documentation that is needed, however this assures the checks and balances that our founding fathers knew that we needed. If you don't want to provide that documentation, then either don't perform the wiretaps or change the law. Don't just ignore it. OK, rant over.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I could cite you chapter and verse on what goes on at the levels I work at but I'd like to stay employed. To think that "things" don't go on at other levels is incredibly naive. < I worked with City government in a major city for 3 years in the 70's- so I am far from naive...it is naive however to think that wire tapping into potential terrorist calls ( still have to have some cause ) - is the worst thing that goes on...so stopping it changes none of the rest of the stuff
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <There's been no evidence that they HAVEN'T been listening on purely domestic calls without a warrent.> Occam's Razor teaches us that a lack of smoke generally indicates a lack of fire. <If you don't want to provide that documentation, then either don't perform the wiretaps or change the law.> But if the law doesn't require them to get warrants to monitor certain calls, why would they have to get the documentation or change the law?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <who's goal was to create a massive orwellian database on voer 300 million americans - everything from your credit card purchases to your favorite brand of peanut butter< and you don;t think that every purchase at the grocery store where you use an Albertson's card ( Jewel here )- and every purchase with a credit card...etc doesn't do exactly the same thing ? Between what goes on on line ( including the availability of your posts here ) - school regitrations, the fact that the sattes sell your info to credit card companies etc etc isn;'t already building your profile is overlooking the obvious
Originally Posted By vbdad55 < Frankly all politicians should have term limits as they are all (ok, it's a general statement, almost all) out of touch with reality. They care more about special interests then the people who actually vote them into office. < agreed
Originally Posted By jonvn This is true. Whenever you purchase something at a grocery store with one of those cards, they record everything you buy. I recall one case where a lawyer had subpoened the grocery shopping activities of a witness, and tried to portray that witness as an untrustworthy lush due to the alcohol purchases they had made.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Yet people willingly do this every sngle day they sign up at stores for 'discount cards' 'frequent shoppers' etc where they create a marketing profile for them...all available I am sure to the same government people they are worried about listening to their calls to sleeper cells... seems a little ostrich like... People write unbelievable things in blogs that are also fairly easily traceable yet don;t think about it...andmy guess is type thingsin they would never say on the phone...
Originally Posted By jonvn "Yet people willingly do this every sngle day they sign up at stores for 'discount cards' 'frequent shoppers' etc where they create a marketing profile for them..." I don't think people realize just how much information is out there on them. They think they have some envelope of privacy in their purchases or their activities. Really, they don't. There was a news story on KNBC many years ago already where they walked up to someone at a grocery store, and asked if they could find out what they could about them. The person said sure. All they got was the vehicle license plate. From that, they got credit info, bank statements, everything. The person was shocked. There's even more information out on everyone now.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Indeed there is, they have caught many crooks by tracing where a certain item was purchased and it was always done via a credit card or using a frequent purchase card-- couple that with the amount of info the DMV sells to people etc...cell phone records, lan line records and the footprints of every transaction in the PC ( I know some people think delete means delete - yeah right ) - and that is why I say the whole hub bub about being able tolisten to suspected terrorist conversations is much ado about nothing..
Originally Posted By jonvn The reason there is a hub bub is because people don't want the government involved with their lives or listening in. It's one thing for Ralph's to record what type of hot dog you eat, it's another to have the government listening in with no probable cause on whatever you doing, trying to find something to pin on you. It would be different if people thought of their government as trying to do the right thing. But far too many times what they do is play some sort of GOTCHA game with whatever law they want to prosecute you on. There are so many laws about so many things now that no matter what you do, you're probably going to violate something somewhere. Look at Martha Stewart. They couldn't pin the original crime of stock manipulation on her, so they managed to dredge up some nonsense charge and that went through, and she ended up in prison over it. That is what people are concerned about. What it shows is a total lack of faith in the government and that the people in this country now actually fear it more than they support it.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <it's another to have the government listening in with no probable cause on whatever you doing, trying to find something to pin on you. < does no one read- there still has to be 'suspicion' of terrorist activity.. they are not listening in on John Smith calling his girlfriend Suzy Q -- this is pure paranoia. <That is what people are concerned about. What it shows is a total lack of faith in the government and that the people in this country now actually fear it more than they support it.< and for what reason ? Too often I hear on the news how " my baby was innocent - he was carrying a gun yeah, but he wasn't going to shoot anyone, even when he pulled it put and pointed it at police" -- show me the people who have been harmed by any of this...line up the cases and you have a discussion, fear of something is irrational without some reason for it....people fear UFO's and aliens - show me one and I'llbe concerned or review- but until then is is all speculation and nothing more.
Originally Posted By jonvn "they are not listening in on John Smith calling his girlfriend Suzy Q" How do you know? "and for what reason ?" Because the government has made a good job of basically criminalizing the entire population. A lot of it via the "war on drugs" which sends basically innocent people to prison over nothing. But just anything can get you into prison these days. This country has an absolutely huge percentage of its population in prison. One out of every 142 people in this country is actually in prison right now. And I've read that upwards of 25% of all black men either are or have been in prison. People don't trust the government to do the right thing, because for the last few years, they haven't. "people fear UFO's and aliens" I don't fear UFOs. But it does seem that a lot of people are really afraid of Mexicans.
