Are our rights being violated by the USA Gov't????

Question

Is it true, that I am no longer able to buy a virtually untraceable prepaid cell phone and call afghanastan, during this time of war,without it potentially being monitored??????


AAAAAAHHH IMPEACH BUSH.

I wan't my right to call a terrorist and not have my privacy violated!

wow, it took 8 answers before someone realize I was being sarcastic.

edit, *9 answers before*

Answer 1

Yes it's true!

It's amazing!!!!!
It has completely interfered with my normal style of life. I am constantly in fear of having to possibly buy a prepaid cell phone for the purpose of calling Afghanistan, during this time of war. I feel grateful every day that passes that I am able to make it without having that need, but if the day ever comes that I do then I will be very nervous. I often cry just thinking about how my right to have unmonitored phone calls to Afghanistan, that is protected by the Constitution, is being threatened by this horrible administration. We must do something to make a change for the better so that myself and terrorists can enjoy a phone call to Afghanistan and not have to worry about it being monitored for the safety of our nation. Weep, weep, sniff, sniff, boo hoo.

Answer 2

Encompassed by a nation in fear and a White House that was willing to exert extraordinary pressure to enact a political agenda, Congress overwhelmingly passed the US Patriot Act six weeks after 9/11. Most members didn't read any of the 342-page bill, having been given less than 48 hours to do so by the Republican leadership. President Bush had called the Act necessary to defeat the terrorists; Attorney General John Ashcroft had said that anyone not supporting the bill would be aiding the terrorists. There was only one problem in the legislation — it violated six Constitutional amendments.The Act gave wide latitude to the government to search and seize property and to probe sensitive documents, such as medical records, without a court warrant, and to restrict defendants from using the courts to protest the intrusion upon their rights of privacy or even to be allowed to be brought before a court to defend themselves. To mitigate that somewhat inconsequential unconstitutional problem, Congressional leaders inserted a "sunset" clause, calling for 16 of the more controversial 150 sections of the Act to terminate by Dec. 31, 2005.Congress made 14 of the 16 "sunset" clauses permanent and extended the other two sections by four years. Congress did allow citizens to challenge the Act's "gag order" which had forbidden anyone from disclosing they were being investigated, removed a requirement that citizens under any kind of federal suspicion must inform the FBI if they contact an attorney, removed most libraries and bookstores from requirements to disclose who read what book, promised to look into the issue of civil liberties, and then claimed that some minor cosmetic changes was a "compromise." That "compromise" ends one year after President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney are out of office - and several thousand other Americans will have had their civil liberties compromised.

Answer 3

Let's assume that it is true. Now would you like your "rights" to call Afghanistan unmonitored or would you like to go live in a tall building in New York? I tell you what, take your ungratefully attitude and go live in Afghanistan, you can call your neighbor with a couple of tin cans and string.
By the way, you do NOT have the "right" to call a terrorist, this country is founded on Christian laws, not Islamic hate.

Answer 4

In honor of Pastor Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the 6th Amendment, but I hadn't been accused of a crime, so I didn't object to denial of counsel.

Then they came for the 4th Amendment, but I wasn't talking to anyone overseas, so they wouldn't be monitoring me.

Then they came for the rest of the 4th Amendment, but I only called my mother, so there was nothing suspicious in my phone records.

Then they came for the 1st Amendment, but I never associated with criminals, so I didn't worry about being convicted purely based on what other people might do.

Then they came for the 14th Amendment, but I never really understood the rules for Due Process (and wasn't allowed an attorney), so I didn't object.

Then they came for the rest of the 1st Amendment, but I never told anyone about what the government was doing, so again I remained silent.

Then they came for the 5th Amendment, ...... and I no longer had the right to remain silent.

Answer 5

I think most people realized that you were being sarcastic (I say most, not all). What I think may be closer to the truth is that it took YOU 9 answers to figure that out.

I think you're the kind of person who likes to think they're more clever than they actually are.

Good luck to you.

Answer 6

I live in the U.K, London and I can see American rights being violated against your Constitution. I came over for two months this summer, and stayed with my friend Jenny and Colin from Answers here. You Republicans are ridiculous, and spread unfounded rubbish about my Country to Americans. Fuel cost, and the pounds exchange rate, it's more expensive to stay here then outside London...

Answer 7

You must be very specific with a question like this. Only a court can really decide. In some areas of personal freedoms, he certainly appears to be walking a thin line, doesn't Pres. Bush?

Answer 8

Between Republican hatemonger Shiraz STILL Impersonating me to smear this Democrats good name,Bush viewing the world as a toy store to trash all he wants,and desperate reactionaries calling moderates and liberals terrorists,or worse,I pity that you are left with nothing to defend except the most miserable administration of all time.

Impeach Bush.Impeach Shiraz.Impeach you.

Answer 9

Is it true, I have my basic privacy rights violated? AHHHHHHHH! IMPEACH BUSH!!

Answer 10

They use the accused, convicted and homeless for wet work.