Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday that Congress should require Internet service providers to preserve customer records, asserting that prosecutors need them to fight child pornography. Testifying to a Senate panel, Gonzales acknowledged the concerns of some company executives who say legislation might be overly intrusive and encroach on customers' privacy rights. But he said the growing threat of child pornography over the Internet was too great.
Here is the next in the Fourth Reich's (read: Bush Administration's) policies that is leading our country into a fascist regime where the citizens have no privacy and no rights. Americans need to take heed. Soon, the American Secret Police will be goose-stepping straight for your doors.
2006-09-19 09:25:42 · 16 answers · asked by Mr. Pink 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Give them an inch, and they take a mile. This all started with the seat belt law. Once the government took that freedom of choice away from us, losing the rest of our freedoms was just a domino effect. It stands to reason that they taken most of our freedom of choice now they must work on our freedom of privacy. The screws of the Orwellian society are tightening.
2006-09-19 10:13:48 · answer #1 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Fascism? Are you kidding me? You must be a kid (not an excuse), or an uninformed adult.
If you are not a criminal and not trolling for little kids or anything else on the other side of "funked-out", than you have nothing to worry about. Different times (and technology) requires different means to fight crime and protect the innocent.
Wake up to the new world of technology and its role in weeding out the scum of society. If we used this tool more in stemming the flow of illegal immigration, the problem would be relatively minor. The time is now.
2006-09-19 10:49:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is a difference between 'privacy' and 'anonymity'. There is no right to perform actions anonymously, especially those in which you use the property of others to perform those actions (such as surfing the internet).
Privacy relates to your actions within your own sanctuary that do not affect or involve others. Once you act in a way that involves others, your anonymity is already relinquished.
That is why any companies to which you provide your identity to use their services may pass that information along to law enforcement agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes such as finding out where you live if you've spent the past week downloading kiddie porn and pirated movies.
[Regarding the goose-stepping - the Socialist Workers Party of Germany (NAZIs) did what Leftist tyrannies are infamous for doing. Beware ambitious Leftists!!]
2006-09-19 09:30:13 · answer #3 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
in trouble-free terms a concept right here from somebody who has had loose wellness look after life on the area of use - and no greater desirable clinical coverage to pay.... sure I stay in the civilised international. Are you merely afraid that the unfavourable of the US could have get admission to to first rate wellness care? Or afraid that the wealthy might loose the dissimilar privileges that money provides? Taking this greater desirable.... you have become a communist state!!
2016-12-12 11:18:03 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's simply a matter of the greater good. If you are not engaging in child pornography, why would it matter? We go thru searches at the airport and live with it because it reduces the chance of a terrorist smuggling dangerous items onboard. This is slightly different where we must be willing to make sacrifices to curb the illegal activity going on using the internet.
2006-09-19 09:31:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
OMG!!! We're not going to protect child pornographers?! This is insane! How much farther can this evil administration go? If I want to look at little children having sex or find one for myself, I have that right. How dare these Nazis take that away from me!
Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it? If this is what it takes to get those evil bastards off the Internet and we stop just one predator from having his way with a child, then I say "Heil Bush!"
And not one of you thinks these people should be hunted down? Do you hate Bush that much that you are willing to sacrifice children in the process? What's wrong with you people?! It's not about the Constitution or Bush....IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS!!!!!!!
2006-09-19 09:29:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Just another example of "We the People" turning into "We the corporations". Soon they will pass a law that we cannot freeze our personal information from corporations that sell our information. Right now you can call your credit card company and tell them to freeze any credit info they have and then unfreeze it just before you buy things like cars and houses etc. But they want you to buy identity theft protection instead because people are stating to catch on about freezing your credit which is free.
2006-09-19 09:37:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is exactly the answer I gave to someone on a blog about why should I worry about the government listening in on my phone conversations? We gradually step down in needs, until we are listening for people who admitted they ran a red light.
It should be a wake up call to Americans everywhere: our president now wants Congress to give him authorization to torture potential terrorist suspects. Where does it end, do we go after child pornographers next, then continue to step down saying the next batch of people are truely horrible and THIS is justified?
2006-09-19 09:29:33 · answer #8 · answered by The Doctor 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
That's been an ongoing fight for several years now.
It started when several Congressional statutes relating to internet porn were declared unconstitutional by Supreme Court. The govt went seeking material to support their claims to get the laws re-passed and survive a second constitutional challenge.
As part of that, they demanded access to search logs for Google, Yahoo and several other search engines. Google (at least) refused. That court fight is still ongoing.
2006-09-19 09:27:29 · answer #9 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yea, he is going to turn the United States into a fascist regime over the next two years. That's why he supports my right to bear arms.
Get it?
Stop looking at naked babies, perv.
2006-09-19 09:32:00 · answer #10 · answered by SVern 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋