4th amendment

Back to your original post, to which I responded before.

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!
1) Bush was accountable to the American people. The wiretaps were done in accordance with FISA, its amendments and according to the opinions of the courts. Since Bush followed the law, he was being accountable.
2) Since you expect the President to be accountable to the American people, then I have to ask, why you apparently don't expect the news media to also obey the law. As I posted before, the public disclosure of classified information is a federal offense. The operations covered by FISA and overseen by the FISC (the court that oversees FISA acitivities) are classified. The reason they are classified is because disclosure of such activity compromises national security.
3) You claim that we live in a dictatorship, how so? Dictators are not usually elected, they control the media, they do not tolerate criticism or dissent. Yet, you are posting on a public forum and have been bad mouthing this administration for months. If you were actually living in a dictatorship, you would now be in a labor camp, jail, or dead.

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.

Oooooo, you think you're so clever, have you ever considered that the intercepted messages were encrypted?

Terrorists ARE smart enough to encrypt their communications. Or havn't you realized that? They also use code words, phrases and operate under code names. You don't actually believe they are on the phone saying "Hey Abdul, meet me at the corner of Chow and Main, with the plans for the top secret nuclear bomb on Saturday at 2PM. I'll be the tall guy in the orange turban".

They use code names for their operatives, code phrases for their operations, they even use code names for times, places, targets, objectives and so forth.

The CIA and NSA use intercepted communications and have an army of people who work on decrypting the phrases, code words, code phrases, breaking the keys. Of course a lot of it is computerized, but it still may take years to find the right set of keys using computers. That is how the Soviets operated, they used code phrases, names and terms.

The Venona project, intercepted communications between the Soviet KGB and people like Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs. It sometimes took years to figure out what the Soviets were up to. It took the CIA and NSA years to figure out who "Red Owl" was, or what "Big Tent" actually meant.

But, once the spies know they're being monitored, guess what they do? THEY CHANGE THEIR CODES, they use a different encryption algorithms, they use a different set of keys, they reassign new code words to people, they reassign code phrases, they reassign people who they believe have been compromised (by killing them or getting them out of the country) and they start with a new slate.

Another thing that happens, is when the enemy has been compromised, they start asking themselves... now just HOW did the Americans know about this? They then start getting suspicious of someone or more likely a bunch of people. And those people are what are euphemistically known as "intelligence assets" or spies.... and then what happens is they die. And then, our intelligence community is back in the dark as it was on 9/11....

So, you see, ST, this isn't a laughing matter. It's a serious business and because the newspapers blabbed not because they give two craps about the public's freedoms but because they just wanted to embarrass Bush and get themselves a big "W" trophy to mount on their walls.... people are going to die or are dying right now...

Congratulations, I'm sure you Lefties are very proud of yourselves.

SPEAKING OF THE VENONA PROJECT!!!!! You know that's such a coincidence that came up. The Venona project was a classified operation undertaken by our very own intelligence community, authorized by FDR and Truman, carried out all the way up to through the Carter years. (let's see, that's how many Democrat Presidents?!?!?!), that eavesdropped on suspected spies within our own borders without warrants. Many of those spies were... American citizens!!!!! And guess who they caught? The Rosenbergs! Remember them? The ones who gave the Soviets our A-bomb secrets? Thanks to them, the Soviets got the bomb five to ten years early.

And guess what? The Venona project went on for forty years. And some of the intercepts are still unencrypted because the Soviets enventually realized they were being monitored did exactly what I said the terrorists probably did, they changed their codes and made it almost impossible for the NSA and CIA to decrypt their messages.

And even more incredibly, this was all done without FISA, without search warrants, without judicial oversight... yet we managed during those forty years of unchecked power to have elections, had freedom of the press, freedom of religion, the Writ of Habeus Corpus was not suspended, we still tried people by juries of their peers..... in short, American Democracy survived and thrived....

Isn't THAT amazing!!!
 
SpidermanTuba said:
I think we should give them a medal.

ST... the government disagrees with you...

From Title 18, Part I, Chapter 37, Section 794, Subsection b of the United States Code... "Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government"


(b) Whoever, in time of war, with intent that the same shall be communicated to the enemy, collects, records, publishes, or communicates, or attempts to elicit any information with respect to the movement, numbers, description, condition, or disposition of any of the Armed Forces, ships, aircraft, or war materials of the United States, or with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed plans or conduct of any naval or military operations, or with respect to any works or measures undertaken for or connected with, or intended for the fortification or defense of any place, or any other information relating to the public defense, which might be useful to the enemy, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life.

Hobbit is being nice, if the Feds convict them, those reporters could be spending the rest of their days in prison or worse.
 
I heard that today on CBS news they revealed poll results showing that a whopping 69% of people polled believed that the reason President Bush was allowing warrantless wiretaps was to target terrorists, not to spy on Americans. The American people get it.

I don't have a link for that poll, but here is a poll from last month:

WASHINGTON - The White House on Tuesday touted a nationwide survey indicating broad support for the secret surveillance on U.S.-based terror suspects, including Americans, that was ordered by President Bush following the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the survey, by Rasmussen Reports, confirmed the administration's repeated contention that "the American people strongly support the efforts that we're undertaking to save their lives."

McClellan spotlighted the survey, released Dec. 28, which said 64 percent of 1,000 adults questioned nationwide believed eavesdropping by the National Security Agency should be "allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States."

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0104wiretap-poll04.html
 
Just because a majority of people believe lies doesn't make it right. :rolleyes:













I thought I would get that out of the way before someone else said it.
 
SpidermanTuba said:
"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.

do the police need a court order before they chase criminals? no.....the are suspects they have probable cause......
 
SpidermanTuba said:
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.

Big differrence between a fundamental mistrust of government and loony-left partisan hackery, which, is about ALL you're about.
 
SpidermanTuba said:
"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.

Apparently the lie is this:
SpidermanTuba said:
And your error in thinking is discounting the fact that intercepts of calls between two people within the border of the U.S. has occured under this program. The aforementioned case only applies when one party is outside the U.S.

And if you don't know the difference between chasing down a terrorist and getting the evidense to chase down a terrorist, I suggest you find another subject to rant about.
 
KarlMarx said:
Terrorists ARE smart enough to encrypt their communications. Or havn't you realized that? They also use code words, phrases and operate under code names. You don't actually believe they are on the phone saying "Hey Abdul, meet me at the corner of Chow and Main, with the plans for the top secret nuclear bomb on Saturday at 2PM. I'll be the tall guy in the orange turban".

They use code names for their operatives, code phrases for their operations, they even use code names for times, places, targets, objectives and so forth.

The CIA and NSA use intercepted communications and have an army of people who work on decrypting the phrases, code words, code phrases, breaking the keys. Of course a lot of it is computerized, but it still may take years to find the right set of keys using computers. That is how the Soviets operated, they used code phrases, names and terms.

The Venona project, intercepted communications between the Soviet KGB and people like Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs. It sometimes took years to figure out what the Soviets were up to. It took the CIA and NSA years to figure out who "Red Owl" was, or what "Big Tent" actually meant.

But, once the spies know they're being monitored, guess what they do? THEY CHANGE THEIR CODES, they use a different encryption algorithms, they use a different set of keys, they reassign new code words to people, they reassign code phrases, they reassign people who they believe have been compromised (by killing them or getting them out of the country) and they start with a new slate.

None of the terrorists have any more information than they had before. An individual terrorists still has as much of a clue as to whether or not he in particular is being spied on as he did before.

Another thing that happens, is when the enemy has been compromised, they start asking themselves... now just HOW did the Americans know about this?

How did we know about WHAT? The fact that terrorists were making calls to people in the US? How could we have NOT known about this?

"Boy, we've sure got those Americans fooled! They haven't a clue that we are making phone calls to people in the US!"

Whatever!

They then start getting suspicious of someone or more likely a bunch of people. And those people are what are euphemistically known as "intelligence assets" or spies.... and then what happens is they die. And then, our intelligence community is back in the dark as it was on 9/11....

So, you see, ST, this isn't a laughing matter. It's a serious business and because the newspapers blabbed not because they give two craps about the public's freedoms but because they just wanted to embarrass Bush and get themselves a big "W" trophy to mount on their walls.... people are going to die or are dying right now...

There wasn't any specific information revealed, other than that we were spying on their phone calls, which they already knew. Are you suggesting the terrorists may have believed that perhaps we were not intercepting their calls?


Frankly, I don't see why a terrorist would care if he was being spied on with a court order or not.

Do you think that using a lot of words to make yourself sound smart is going to change the fact that nothing specific about our wiretaps was revealed - such as who in particular was being spied on, what was found out, etc.?
 
KarlMarx said:
ST... the government disagrees with you...

From Title 18, Part I, Chapter 37, Section 794, Subsection b of the United States Code... "Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government"


(b) Whoever, in time of war,


"in time of war" only refers to in time of a formally declared war.
 
Abbey Normal said:
I heard that today on CBS news they revealed poll results showing that a whopping 69% of people polled believed that the reason President Bush was allowing warrantless wiretaps was to target terrorists, not to spy on Americans. The American people get it.

Yet a majority of them agree that what he is doing is illegal.
 
manu1959 said:
do the police need a court order before they chase criminals? no.....the are suspects they have probable cause......


So you honestly believe that in the following statement, Bush is only literally referring to the physical act of running and catching a fleeing terrorist?

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


Boy, you righties will go to any lengths to excuse his lies!

And at any rate, YOU are saying that you DON'T need a warrant to literally chase a criminal, BUSH is saying you DO, which makes what he said a LIE! Thanks for helping to show that Bush is a liar, I appreciate it.
 
GunnyL said:
Big differrence between a fundamental mistrust of government and loony-left partisan hackery, which, is about ALL you're about.


What is so looney about expecting that my phone conversation won't be listened into w/o a court approved warrant?
 
SpidermanTuba said:
What is so looney about expecting that my phone conversation won't be listened into w/o a court approved warrant?
Not too worry, as long as you are not communicating with a 'KNOWN' terrorist-without and I'll assume, within.
 
Jimmyeatworld said:
Apparently the lie is this:

And if you don't know the difference between chasing down a terrorist and getting the evidense to chase down a terrorist, I suggest you find another subject to rant about.


I apologize, I should have posted the full quote:

Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.
GEORGE W BUSH APRIL 2004
 
SpidermanTuba said:
So you honestly believe that in the following statement, Bush is only literally referring to the physical act of running and catching a fleeing terrorist?
"When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so."
Boy, you righties will go to any lengths to excuse his lies!
And at any rate, YOU are saying that you DON'T need a warrant to literally chase a criminal, BUSH is saying you DO, which makes what he said a LIE! Thanks for helping to show that Bush is a liar, I appreciate it.

what makes you think i am a righty and voted for bush?

i have proved you are a liar...i don't belive anything you say

oh and bush got congress to approve chasing the terrorists
 
Kathianne said:
Not too worry, as long as you are not communicating with a 'KNOWN' terrorist-without and I'll assume, within.

You are stating that the only way my phone could be wiretaped without a warrant is if I am doing something wrong, yes?


How do you know this statement to be true?
 
SpidermanTuba said:
"in time of war" only refers to in time of a formally declared war.
What do you think happened in Iraq? What do you think is happening in Afghanistan? Frankly, you are playing with semantics, which means you don't have a leg to stand on. Admit defeat, you know you're wrong and that you can't come up with a rebuttal.
 
SpidermanTuba said:
You are stating that the only way my phone could be wiretaped without a warrant is if I am doing something wrong, yes?


How do you know this statement to be true?
That is NOT what I said.
kathianne said:
as long as you are not communicating with a 'KNOWN' terrorist-without and I'll assume, within.
I said NOTHING about your doing something wrong.
 

Forum List

Back
Top