4th amendment

[KarlMarx]

Because this is the U.S - not George Orwell's 1984. I have a right to not have my private conversations listened to by the executive branch without the executive branch showing probable cause to do so to the judicial branch.

But if you had been communicating with known or suspected Al Queda operatives, that would be probable cause. That is exactly the circumstance of the intercepts in question.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I don't care about them listening to terrorists. Or criminals for that matter.

In case you jokers hadn't figured it out yet, the 4th amendment was written to protect THE INNOCENT. And it was written by a bunch of people who had a FUNDAMENTAL MISTRUST OF GOVERNMENT, something you jokers seem to LACK.

That's right. You libs are the protectors of freedom. You're so mistrustful of government you want it to handle all aspects of our lives.

 

[KarlMarx]

That's right. You libs are the protectors of freedom. You're so mistrustful of government you want it to handle all aspects of our lives.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's right. You libs are the protectors of freedom. You're so mistrustful of government you want it to handle all aspects of our lives.

Yeah they are protectors of freedom. Unless your a radical religious group and then there has to be a stand off in front of their compound for months and then slaughter all of them. Or unless you are a child whose mothers dying wish was to have her child free, and then they can rip you from your home with your legal guardians and hand you over to a communist dictator.

What is amazing is these guys seem to think the Constitution gives the President authority to bomb the crap out of people to protect the american people, but not gather the military intelligence needed to protect americans.

Does that make sense to anyone? Apparently that makes sense, but its somehow not reasonable to listen to terrorist suspects outside the country. Its ridiculous.

And why does Congress seem to suddenly think it has authority to have any say on how any president wages a war other than through the funding?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Spiderman - I couldn't help but notice your signature. Can you please point out where GWB "willfully lied" to us? Not your biased rhetoric or unfounded conspiracies but proven lies.

And before you even think about replying, keep in mind that you need to prove that he LIED - in other words he knew the truth but told us something else anyway.

I find it amusing how right wingers are plenty willing, and in fact, enjoy, being intentionally misled and deceived by their President, as long as it isn't a "lie" by the strictest terms of the definition.


At any rate, here is an outright LIE:


"When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." 4-20-2004

" Law enforcement officers need a federal judge's permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist's phone, or to track his calls, or to search his property. " 7-20-2005

"You see, what that meant is if you got a wire tap by court order -- and, by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example." 4-19-2004

 

[SpidermanTuba]

This is incredible... we are at a time of war and the President has to explain himself. It's almost as if FDR had to stand in front of the cameras every day and explain that what was done during D-Day didn't transgress the law.

How incredible, that the American people actually have the gall to suggest that the President is accountable to them. Oops! We forgot, we live in a dictatorship, my bad!

I'm sure if the Lefties of the NYT and other newspapers had gotten their hands on the exact time and places of the D-Day landings, they would have published those, too.

Oooooo, what a secret, we are spying on the terrorists. Boy, now that they know that, they are gonna win! I'm sure they had NO IDEA we were spying on them.

 

[KarlMarx]

I find it amusing how right wingers are plenty willing, and in fact, enjoy, being intentionally misled and deceived by their President, as long as it isn't a "lie" by the strictest terms of the definition.

Oh, I see, but if a president lies under oath, as long as it's just about sex, that's OK, though. And furthermore, legions of Left wingers will battle to their dying day defending his honor!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

But if you had been communicating with known or suspected Al Queda operatives, that would be probable cause. That is exactly the circumstance of the intercepts in question.

How do you know the circumstances of every single interecept in question? Do you have access to some sort of classified information that we do not? Fine then, tell us all the names of everyone tapped, and what the specific reason for tapping each one of them is.

Oh, wait, you mean you can't do that? You mean that for security reasons, the people shouldn't have that information, therefore, the only way to insure that the executive is not abusing its authority, is to say, have another part of the government, I dunno, perhaps the judiciary, look over these wiretaps and determine whether or not they are warranted?


Sounds good to me.

 

[KarlMarx]

How incredible, that the American people actually have the gall to suggest that the President is accountable to them. Oops! We forgot, we live in a dictatorship, my bad!

Oh, OK, so FDR should have told us all about the Manhatten Project, the fact that we had broken the Enigma codes... all for the sake of accountability, right?

Oooooo, what a secret, we are spying on the terrorists. Boy, now that they know that, they are gonna win! I'm sure they had NO IDEA we were spying on them.

As a matter of fact, it's pretty obvious that they didn't know, otherwise why did the NSA continue to do it? There must have been a pay off in intelligence value.

Similarly, wiretaps of mobsters also helped to nab them.

 

[KarlMarx]

How do you know the circumstances of every single interecept in question? Do you have access to some sort of classified information that we do not? Fine then, tell us all the names of everyone tapped, and what the specific reason for tapping each one of them is.

is that the best you can do?

Oh, wait, you mean you can't do that? You mean that for security reasons, the people shouldn't have that information, therefore, the only way to insure that the executive is not abusing its authority, is to say, have another part of the government, I dunno, perhaps the judiciary, look over these wiretaps and determine whether or not they are warranted?


Sounds good to me.

So, ST, should we share our stealth technology with the Chinese? How about our nuclear secrets? Hey... let's publish all the classified codes ... after all, in your world view... everyone's friends, there are no hostile foreign powers!... the government shouldn't have any secrets! It should be totally transparent...

 

[dmp]

I'm convinced ST is a communist; and likely feels the Soviet Union was a uptopian empire before the evil Ronny orchestrated their downfall.

 

[manu1959]

I find it amusing how right wingers are plenty willing, and in fact, enjoy, being intentionally misled and deceived by their President, as long as it isn't a "lie" by the strictest terms of the definition.

At any rate, here is an outright LIE:

"When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so." 4-20-2004

" Law enforcement officers need a federal judge's permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist's phone, or to track his calls, or to search his property. " 7-20-2005

"You see, what that meant is if you got a wire tap by court order -- and, by the way, everything you hear about requires court order, requires there to be permission from a FISA court, for example." 4-19-2004

quote 1 references chasing terrorists not wiretapping citizens phones

quote 2 says law enforcment not national security agencies and does not refernce that if probabale cause is eveident then the 4th amendment says all bets are off

quote 3 the quote clearly references wiretapping phones withouth probable cause

 

[Hobbit]

During the Civil War, all people who publicly sympathized with the Confederates were thrown in jail by executive order from Abe Lincoln himself. In WWII, FDR ordered a similar thing done to anyone of Japanese descent living in America. On June 3, 1944, 3 days before the Normandy landings, one of the words in the London Times crossword was "overlord." The author of the puzzle was detained and questioned until the allies had landed. And you're worried about us eavesdropping on a few phone conversations with foreign terrorists. I mean, do you really think that if FDR could trace phone calls and find out which ones were coming from Nazi Germany that he would have actually told the CIA not to listen to any of those conversations unless they got a warrant? You're insane.

At this point, there are only two possibilities. Either a) you are an idiot child who cannot grasp even the most basic legal concepts and only trounce out this story, which you have no understanding of, because you hate Bush or b) you think we are all idiot children and will suddenly join your anti-Bush rampage because we can't understand basic legal concepts well enough to see through all this smoke and mirrors crap. I'm really not sure which one is true, so I don't know whether to feel sorry or insulted.

I, personally, think those who disclosed this classified information should spend at least 10 years in a federal maximum security prison and be forever stripped of their press credentials.

 

[manu1959]

During the Civil War, all people who publicly sympathized with the Confederates were thrown in jail by executive order from Abe Lincoln himself. In WWII, FDR ordered a similar thing done to anyone of Japanese descent living in America. On June 3, 1944, 3 days before the Normandy landings, one of the words in the London Times crossword was "overlord." The author of the puzzle was detained and questioned until the allies had landed. And you're worried about us eavesdropping on a few phone conversations with foreign terrorists. I mean, do you really think that if FDR could trace phone calls and find out which ones were coming from Nazi Germany that he would have actually told the CIA not to listen to any of those conversations unless they got a warrant? You're insane.

At this point, there are only two possibilities. Either a) you are an idiot child who cannot grasp even the most basic legal concepts and only trounce out this story, which you have no understanding of, because you hate Bush or b) you think we are all idiot children and will suddenly join your anti-Bush rampage because we can't understand basic legal concepts well enough to see through all this smoke and mirrors crap. I'm really not sure which one is true, so I don't know whether to feel sorry or insulted.

I, personally, think those who disclosed this classified information should spend at least 10 years in a federal maximum security prison and be forever stripped of their press credentials.

yea.....and no soap on a rope for them either

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Oh, OK, so FDR should have told us all about the Manhatten Project, the fact that we had broken the Enigma codes... all for the sake of accountability, right?

I'm failing to see how conducting the Manhattan project violated the rights of any American. Perhaps you can elaborate.

As a matter of fact, it's pretty obvious that they didn't know, otherwise why did the NSA continue to do it?

I don't see how that follows. And they did know. They didn't just all of a sudden ralize they had intercepted domestic calls coincidently at the same time that we found out about the program.

Similarly, wiretaps of mobsters also helped to nab them.

Wiretaps of mobsters are gained through warrants. So I don't see what you're trying to say here. You can hardly justify wiretaps gained without warrants by pointing out that wiretaps with warrants are issued. I'm really not following your logic. If there is any.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

is that the best you can do?


So, ST, should we share our stealth technology with the Chinese? How about our nuclear secrets? Hey... let's publish all the classified codes ... after all, in your world view... everyone's friends, there are no hostile foreign powers!... the government shouldn't have any secrets! It should be totally transparent...

I'll take your resorting to intentionally mischaracterizing my views as an admission of defeat.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I'm convinced ST is a communist; and likely feels the Soviet Union was a uptopian empire before the evil Ronny orchestrated their downfall.

Yeah, in the Soviet Union, all the searches they conducted of their citizens were conducted with warrants. Right. Yeah. Dream on.


You're the commie.

 

[dmp]

Let's role play! I'll be SMT:


"okay, all that make sense, but as it's contrary to my opinion I'll just take that to mean you accept your defeat, and I win."

/rollplay

 

[SpidermanTuba]

quote 1 references chasing terrorists not wiretapping citizens phones

quote 2 says law enforcment not national security agencies and does not refernce that if probabale cause is eveident then the 4th amendment says all bets are off

quote 3 the quote clearly references wiretapping phones withouth probable cause

"When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so."


Since December Bush has been talking about chasing down terrorists without a court order.

Which is the lie?

I know there is a subtle difference between "with" and "without", but please, try to comprehend.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

During the Civil War, all people who publicly sympathized with the Confederates were thrown in jail by executive order from Abe Lincoln himself.

Lincoln had declared martial law. Bush has issued no such declaration.

In WWII, FDR ordered a similar thing done to anyone of Japanese descent living in America.

And Congress has since determined the internment was wrong and unneccessary and issued an apology to those who were interned.


Not to mention we were under an actual declaration of war.

On June 3, 1944, 3 days before the Normandy landings, one of the words in the London Times crossword was "overlord." The author of the puzzle was detained and questioned until the allies had landed.

OK - that's Great Britain? What's your point? I thought we were talking about the U.S. here.

Incidently, the words Omaha, Utah, Sword, and Gold were also in the same crossword puzzle. Its not like they detained the guy because of one word that popped up.

And you're worried about us eavesdropping on a few phone conversations with foreign terrorists.

How do you know they are only investigating terrorists? You don't know, because they have failed to obtain the proper check from the judiciary branch. That's the WHOLE F*****G point. The Founding Fathers mistrusted the government, which is why they made a government with three branches which keep each other in check.

I mean, do you really think that if FDR could trace phone calls and find out which ones were coming from Nazi Germany that he would have actually told the CIA not to listen to any of those conversations unless they got a warrant?

FDR didn't have the FISA court, which would have enabled him to gain a legal warrant issued in secret by a closed court.

There is no reason for Bush not to get a warrant. He can even apply for it AFTER the tap has already started. It is no hinderance whatsoever to the process. It neither impedes the speed of which the wiretaps can be obtained nor does it sacrifice security, as the FISA court judges have security clearances, and their proceedings for these cases would be conducted in secret. The only reason Bush would circumvent the court is if he wanted to tap someone's phone for which there was no reasonable reason to tap.

I, personally, think those who disclosed this classified information should spend at least 10 years in a federal maximum security prison and be forever stripped of their press credentials.

I think we should give them a medal.