House approves warrantless wiretap law

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by wannabeit, Sep 29, 2006.

Loading...
  1. wannabeit

    wannabeit New Member

  2. Laser200

    Laser200 Guest

    Lost Liberties

    What amazes me is that most people don't appear to be alarmed by lost civil liberies.

    Now that the Bush administration has pushed this law through they will try to stretch the interpretation even further to obtain new powers. You soon will not be able to tell your spouse you love them without the government monitoring you.
     
  3. wannabeit

    wannabeit New Member

    I'm glad someone notices this. What's next?
     
  4. Laser200

    Laser200 Guest

    Big Brother is Born.

    What is next?

    Read George Orwell 1984. Big Brother is born!

    We live in the times where technology can see through the walls of your home. Cameras on street lights and satellites can track you from the time you leave your home to where ever you are going.

    The bottom line is your privacy is gone and there is nothing you can do about it but vote.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 3, 2006
  5. Laser200

    Laser200 Guest

  6. Laser200

    Laser200 Guest

  7. Alex's Mom

    Alex's Mom New Member

    Let's hope that a large amount of thinking people do get out and vote.
     
  8. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member


    Exactly!



    Abner
     
  9. lspahn

    lspahn New Member

    How come you guys dont get upset when they take away our second amendment right???

    Anyway...

    And would you expect to be able to send packages to Nazi Germany During WWII or Soviet Russian in the 1960 without government intervention?



    There is NO expectation of privacy when your communication leave US soil and are being recieved by enemies of the state. This has been our position for many years including WW1 and 2 and the Cold War. Opening letters was a very common practice in WW2.

    Is the real expectaion here that you should able to consipire with a forgein power against your country without intellegence agencies being able to investigate? Once you communciation leave US soil they are no longer subject to our laws.

    Just a few thoughs...I personally think this is a simply political issue of convienence since most people against it dont really mind when the democrate trample over our other rights such as freedom of speach, association, or our right to bear arms....Either you are a constitutionalist or you are not...you cant have it both ways....


    IMHO of course...

    Vote Libertarian Reform!!!! Click Here
     
  10. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Lou,

    I believe in the rights behind the second amendment as much as I do those behind the fourth. The others aren't bad either.

    The problem with warrantless wiretapping is that if history shows anything it's that if you give the government an inch it will take a mile, and that the more secrecy they get the more they abuse their power. Judicial oversight, in this case warrants, helps mitigate that.

    As far as being a constitutionalist, well, like the saying goes, the constitution may not be perfect, but it's better than what we have now.

    Laissez Faire,

    -=Steve=-
     
  11. tigerhead

    tigerhead New Member

    I believe in the rights granted by our Constitution as much as anyone. I also believe the government has a responsibility to protect our safety.

    This may very well be a tired argument, but it does cary some merit. How do you protect us against someone who is willing to strap a bomb to his body and walk into a shopping mall? Defending against terrorism requires a different type of thinking, and I suspect that if/when we get attacked again, the questions about wiretapping will be replaced with questions about why we didn't do more to prevent it. Let's please remember, the government is trying to stop terrorists, not invade your privacy, or limit your cival liberties.

    For the record, I am very anti George Bush, but I do not buy the argument that this is some kind of conspiracy to get more power and control. The motives for this are simply to prevent a terrorist attack. There are many more and better reasons to criticize the president than this.
     
  12. lspahn

    lspahn New Member

    i agree..


    Also, there is the fact that technology has added complexity to the debate. Without alot of techno jargon, the requirements to review data is completely different then records and analog phone converstations.

    My contention is that this is simply particain politics and an issue of convenience...
     
  13. wannabeit

    wannabeit New Member

    I disagree. Remember the Conspiracy Law.
    Initially, Robert Kennedy has play a role in getting this law into effect. The law was supposed be temporay. Supposedly, the intends was to go after the Mafia. Now, 35+ years later, the law is filling up jails. (actually not a bad thing) My point is, I really don't believe that Terrorist bullcrap argument. If you look harder under the real intention, you would understand.

    Because of the Conspiracy law, there has been alot of money made. The commissary in the jail (things that prisoner buys) are own by. Guess who is on the board? The Bush family. (Barbara) Right now, I can't give you a reference because I cannot remember the name of the company.

    The phone company that rip off the prisoners and their family with their outrageous fees. Especially the poor ones.

    I'm not condoning the prisoners. I am pointing out that because of the laws that were implemted some body is making serious money. I've been in telecommunication for years and the government will not let me bid on the telephone service. I could save the prisoners and their family money as much as 75%). Voip have would been the best thing for them. No, they have contract with someone who is gouging the people and getting away with it. Umm, who do you think own this company.

    Now, let assumed for a minute that these laws were repelled, well the prisoners (non-violent) population will decreased tremendously. We can't have that because the good old boy network would lose money.

    I do not and never will trust this government. There're alway alternative motives. Money is the name of the game.
     
  14. sentinel

    sentinel New Member

    Anybody can walk into a shopping mall carrying a bomb, a gun, a knife or dynamite. Your point is meaningless since no society can ever be 100% safe, including tyrannic dictatorial regimes.

    The terrorists have scored a higher victory than even Osam Bin Laden could have dreamed in his most lucid moments. Welcome to 1984! Enjoy the Kool-Aid.


    With all due respect, I suggest you read a few history books. Do the names Martin Luther King and John Fitzgerald Kennedy mean anything?
     
  15. tigerhead

    tigerhead New Member

    With all due respect, I can do without the implication of not being educated and you can disagree with me without using a back-handed insult. I am just expressing my view on the matter.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2006
  16. lspahn

    lspahn New Member

    ok..lets try to play nice....:)


    The real problem here is this problem is uncharted territory. There is little debate over wether politicians are power hungry, or cannot be trusted, but the focus should be on how to defeat terrorist. Simply opposing the taps isnt sufficient, what is the alternative? I dont think anyone really knows, and why I think this is a partician issue, not to mention the democrates wont publcily oppose it.


    What do the "anti-bush" people suggest they do? I mean honestly, if you believe I should be able to conspire with terrorist in forgien country where exactly is the line? I really reaks of the liberal mentality that nobody is ever really doing anything wrong..they ole "dont judge me cause i steal". Please, I deplore you, give me an alternative....a suggestion....an idea...anything beside venom, hate, and bile.


    There is no doubt that most people here love their image of their country...or they wouldnt participate with passion. But dont let that passion get in the way of common sense..these people want to kill me, my children, and you!
     
  17. tigerhead

    tigerhead New Member

    Very well said!!
     
  18. sentinel

    sentinel New Member

    I apologize if you interpreted my remark as an insult on your intelligence or education. I was attempting to make the point that history is replete with examples illustrating the limitless thirst for control over the citizenry exhibited by governments.
     
  19. tigerhead

    tigerhead New Member

    I of course accept your apology, although it was probably not needed as I have a tendancy to overreact to things. And I agree with your point, I just think that when it comes to terrorism we are dealing with an entirely different animal, which unfortunately may require a different set of rules.

    To me warrantless wiretapping is no different than warrantlless baggage searching at the airport. We all understand the reasons why we are searched at the airport, and virtually nobody complians about it. Sadly, I just think maybe we have reached a point were this has become necessary, just like we all know it's necessary at the airport.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2006
  20. Khan

    Khan New Member

    Freedom:
    Taking it from us, giving it to them.
     

Share This Page