Originally Posted By Beaumandy Dabob, the reason I just shake my head at your last post is because it has been explained many times that nobody is listening to your phone calls. Nobody. Unless you fit the pattern of a risk we don't have the manpower or the need to spy on your life. Even if they did spy on you by accident there is nothing they could do with that info. So why even talk about losing civil rights, Bush spied, and all the other nonsense the liberals deal in? Yet, your buddies on the left will claim the opposite with NO EVIDENCE whatsoever. To make it worse, these same people leak our national security to the press who then tell the enemy what we are doing to keep the country safe. The Muslims in Toronto were busted because people were watching them on the internet... this is the exact thing you seem to be against.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Again, Beau, how many times do we need to say this? NO ONE IS AGAINST SPYING ON TERRORISTS, on the phone, on the internet, or anywhere else. If you've got probably cause, get a warrant, that's all we're saying. I believe the Canadians did. I don't think anyone's syping on me, but how do we know Bush isn't spying on the DNC? Nixon tried to. How do we know President Hillary wouldn't spy on the RNC? Those are just two obvious examples. We already know the FBI infiltrated various anti-war groups with agents. These people weren't terrorists. Just people opposed to the war. If the FBI expended actual manpower to the effort, how do we know these groups weren't illegally tapped as well? We CAN'T know, because there's no oversight. And what would prevent Hillary from tapping, say, a pro-life group? There's a way to make sure they don't. Require a warrant. That's all we're saying.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Dabob, you at least sound sane. I just don't think anyone is breaking any rules and spying on people that they shouldn't. Since nobody knows for sure except the people at the top we can keep guessing. I don't even think Hillary would abuse the power...even though Bill did. It's guys like Russ Feingold and the ACLU that make the liberals appear like they want to abondon all counter terrorism measures.
Originally Posted By JeffG >> "Dabob, you at least sound sane. I just don't think anyone is breaking any rules and spying on people that they shouldn't. Since nobody knows for sure except the people at the top we can keep guessing." << And this is exactly the point of objection to the programs in question. At least within the political mainstream, nobody is calling for an end to spying programs directed at uncovering terrorists. All that is being asked is that the traditional methods of oversight (such as warrants) be kept in place to ensure that the focus does remain on terrorists. You are correct that the only people that know for sure who are the targets of these programs are certain top figures within the executive branch. That is the very specific problem. We are supposed to have a system of checks and balances to keep this type of thing from being a guessing game. -Jeff
Originally Posted By Beaumandy << All that is being asked is that the traditional methods of oversight (such as warrants) be kept in place to ensure that the focus does remain on terrorists. >> But you can't have warrants for every phone call that is being tracked. Thus far the programs have been deemed legal by the top lawyers and judges who have looked at them. My concern is that we do what WORKS and we do what is effective. What if you found out that they didn't have warrants to bust these terror wannabes in Toronto? Let them go?
Originally Posted By jonvn "But you can't have warrants for every phone call that is being tracked." That's right. You have warrants for people whom you suspect, for good reason, may be involved in such activity, though. "My concern is that we do what WORKS and we do what is effective." Rounding up all Moslems into camps and gassing them would work, and be effective, too. But just because something would work and be effective does not mean that's the thing you want to do. You can't just go by "what works and what is effective." Because that opens the door to ANY kind of abuse of power a government wants to impose. We are a nations of laws and freedom. Throwing out the basic tenets of what we are about would be a major coup for the terrorists, indeed. In fact, it is one of their goals. Bin laden said "soon, america will be a complete police state." That's one of his goals. I'm sorry to see that you are in support of our enemies and what their goals are for us.
Originally Posted By jonvn "What if you found out that they didn't have warrants to bust these terror wannabes in Toronto? Let them go?" Well, that might happen, if it were here. I don't know the laws in Canada. So this is why you need to do things in a properly legal manner, according to the laws of our land. That's why OJ Simpson is free. The government messed up in the prosecution, and a murderer goes free. That's how our system works.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy << You can't just go by "what works and what is effective." Because that opens the door to ANY kind of abuse of power a government wants to impose.>> Tell ya what... when you come up with a list of people who have been " abused " by the government people will take this comment serious. Until then, the main priority is to keep people alive from Muslims like they busted in Toronto. << We are a nations of laws and freedom. Throwing out the basic tenets of what we are about would be a major coup for the terrorists, indeed. >> All of the programs in question are legal. Until you give us a ruling from a court that they are illegal, this also will not be taken serious by the American people who are interested in staying alive. Want to stay alive and be pro-active against terrorism? Vote GOP.
Originally Posted By jonvn "when you come up with a list of people who have been " abused " " Anyone who has had their phone tapped in any way without probable cause. That is the list. "All of the programs in question are legal." You do understand what the Supreme Law of the Land is, right? That's the Constitution. If it violates that, then it is NOT legal. A legislature can pass any kind of "law" it wants, but if violates the Supreme Law, it's not legal. "Want to stay alive and be pro-active against terrorism? Vote GOP." You seem to be more interested in the GOP maintaining power than you are in actually protecting the people of this country. I find that disturbing.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy << Anyone who has had their phone tapped in any way without probable cause. That is the list. >> Show me a list of people who have had their privacy violated, maybe some ACLU lawsuits. Otherwise you will not convince anyone that your concern is to be taken serious. <<You do understand what the Supreme Law of the Land is, right? That's the Constitution. If it violates that, then it is NOT legal. A legislature can pass any kind of "law" it wants, but if violates the Supreme Law, it's not legal.>> The constitution has not been violated. If so, please show us the legal decision to support your opinion. Until then, you are going on more " theory " a popular habit of liberals and worthless college professors. <<You seem to be more interested in the GOP maintaining power than you are in actually protecting the people of this country. I find that disturbing.>> The GOP is for counter terrorism measures that work and keep people alive. The left, and in this case you, are more interested in theory and baseless claims that people have lost civil rights, all while providing nothing better to stop terrorists like the ones in Toronto. The problem for you jon is that reality happens. Busting Muslims in Toronto who were planning an Oklahoha City style bombing by spying on them makes your argument seem irresponsible at best. That is the reality.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I already have shown you a lawsuite regarding this from the EFF. And if you want a list of people, go look in the phone book. EVERYONE'S privacy has been violated.>> The EFT lawsuit is a joke and will never go anywhere. It was a publicity stunt. Just admit it jon, if peoples privacy rights had been violtaed as you claim the ALCU would have high profile lawsuits all over the place. Since you have exactly zero cases where people have been victomized by the government and they have filed suit your claims are not to convincing. <<It's called the Fourth Ammendment. It's part of this thing we have called the "Bill of Rights," which are the first 10 ammendments to the document, which are what protects us from an overzealous government.>> Yet legally the Patriot act and the NSA spy program has not been found to violate the 4th amendment. Go figure. <<The GOP is a political party out to gain power for itself and not much else. It's main goal has for over a century been to pad the pockets of the wealthy at the expense of the poorer classes.>> Class envy, the liberal call to arms. The GOP today is a conservative movement to protect the culture and tradtions of this country. Socialism and surrendering to the terrorists along with open borders is not the GOP. That would be the democrats. << Your arguments are that we need to do whatever possible to stop some violent acts. Well, that's simply wrong. We're a nation of laws, and they are there for a reason. And the REALITY is that if we throw out our freedoms and our protections, then we are no better here than if we lived in a totalitarian regime.>> No laws have been broken, you don't have a legal decision where any laws have been broken, and worse, you have no better plan how to stop a deadly terrorist attack. This is why you are going to lose on election day if and when you push this.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Thus far the programs have been deemed legal by the top lawyers and judges who have looked at them.> You keep saying this, but you need to get your facts straight. The White House's OWN lawyers have declared these programs legal, but AFAIK no indepdendent court has done so. We haven't gotten there yet, and it wouldn't surprise me if when we did get there, they were declared unconstitutional and therefore illegal. The problem is that by then Bush will probably be gone anyway.
Originally Posted By jonvn "The EFT lawsuit is a joke" Yes, you keep saying that. But your simple statements do not make it so. "if peoples privacy rights had been violtaed as you claim the ALCU " OH brother. Look: "Privacy Groups Challenge FBI Wiretap Standards. EPIC, ACLU and EFF have asked a federal appeals court to block new rules that would permit the FBI to dictate the design of the nation's communication infrastructure. The challenged rules would enable the Bureau to track the physical locations of cellular phone users and potentially monitor Internet traffic. The appellate brief (PDF version available) challenges an FCC order implementing the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). See the joint press release for additional information. " There, happy now? "Yet legally the Patriot act and the NSA spy program has not been found to violate the 4th amendment." So far, but "separate but equal" was found to not violate the law either, at one time. "Class envy, the liberal call to arms" SO now you've resorted back to labeling people as "liberal." Running out of things to say from the playbook? How about simply responding to what I've said without childish remarks? "The GOP today is a conservative movement" Which is why, I suppose that many conservatives are now talking about abandoning it, because it's really not conservative. Shall I find a link for that, too? Oh, look, this took 5 seconds: <a href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/05/conservatives_abandoning_the_gop/" target="_blank">http://www.outsidethebeltway.c om/archives/2006/05/conservatives_abandoning_the_gop/</a> "you don't have a legal decision where any laws have been broken" Oh, I see. So, until we have a legal decision that says a law is broken, a law is not broken? So, if someone goes and robs a bank, but no one is convicted of robbing that bank, the bank was never robbed? Is that what your trying to say?
Originally Posted By jonvn Oh, and one from CNN: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/01/17/aclu.nsa/" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/01 /17/aclu.nsa/</a> Some comments on here are so far off base from what is actually happening in the world, it's amazing.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Jon, you have shown us a few lawsuits the ACLU filed agasint the program. Same goes for the EFT. Big deal. These people in the ACLU also want to impeach the president and usher in socialism. They can file all the lawsuits they want. That is not the point. The point is that you have no cases where people, you know, people like us, have had their rights violated or their privacy trampled on, so they sued the government. If you had a good arguemnt, you would have a list of individuals who have suffered the fate that you are so paranoid about. But you don't. << Which is why, I suppose that many conservatives are now talking about abandoning it, because it's really not conservative. Shall I find a link for that, too? >> The real conservatives want the GOP to be conservative. Not moderate or liberal, conservative. <<Oh, I see. So, until we have a legal decision that says a law is broken, a law is not broken? So, if someone goes and robs a bank, but no one is convicted of robbing that bank, the bank was never robbed? Is that what your trying to say?>> No the bank was still robbed. But you don't even have a case where " the bank has been robbed " regarding these so called civil rights violations. You are living in the land of theory and shadows and think we should abandon programs that save lives, like in Toronto, just because you are " worried " someone "might" be spying on your phone calls.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy If the USA is the cause of terrorism and Iraq is creating more terrorists, like the left claims... Why are the Muslims trying to blow up Canadian buildings when Canada is totally anti war? Is anyone on here even going to bother to defend Islam anymore?
Originally Posted By jonvn "Jon, you have shown us a few lawsuits the ACLU filed agasint the program" I only showed them because you asked to see them. Now, you're saying "big deal." Well, if you hadn't asked to see where they were suing, I wouldn't have provided it. "The point is that you have no cases where people, you know, people like us" You're not understanding. People like us are incapable of knowing whether or not their phones have been tapped, at this point, so there can't be lawsuits. Yet. In the meantime, parties that are able to file suit in the matter have already done so, and this will now be dragged out in court. "But you don't even have a case where " the bank has been robbed " regarding these so called civil rights violations." Well, actually, yes. Because they are wiretapping and listening in on phone conversations without warrant. Now, are you saying that this did not happen at all? Because that is not my understanding of the news on the matter. If it did not happen AT ALL, then there was no violation.
Originally Posted By jonvn "If the USA is the cause of terrorism and Iraq is creating more terrorists, like the left claims..." Who here has said the US is the "cause of terrorism?" What we have done, however, is given them yet one more haven for their activities in Iraq, due to the basic anarchy that is slowly growing there.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I only showed them because you asked to see them. Now, you're saying "big deal." Well, if you hadn't asked to see where they were suing, I wouldn't have provided it.>> I asked for cases where PEOPLE had had their rights violated, not left wing organizations suing the government. <<Well, actually, yes. Because they are wiretapping and listening in on phone conversations without warrant.>> Jon, that is a lie. Nobody is listening to your conversations. That would be illegal. They however are tracking phone numbers and calls from outside the country that are suspect terror suspects.
