they seem to be more interested in "stopping terror" by invading our privacy than by actually hitting the source of terror...
it's like changing you're lifesytle living in a house because you see an ant in it? why don't you just kill the ant?
they spy on Americans, yet come up with excuses not to get bin Laden... shouldn't they try and get bin Laden and find excuses not to spy on us?
why do they run into Iraq, but are afraid of going into Pakistan? nukes? come on... is Pakistan going to nuke us for going into a region that they can't even control and killing people that hate the current Pakistani government?
did we fight Hitler by taking away American's rights or did we go get Hitler?
some will probably say.. it's not just Osama.. then why doesn't the president ever quote or talk about anyone else except al-queda and Osama? why doesn't 99 percent of America know any other terrorist's name besides Osama? If anyone else was such a threat, wouldn't they have hit us, like Osama did?
2006-09-19 17:20:30 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
WHY is it that when I say we should get Osama... everyone just says "get some common sense"... is this all you can say? Getting the man that killed 3,000 is apparently a "stupid thing to do" according to conservatives...
you don't care that they don't need warrants... do you all trust the government that much and think that they are that infalable?
2006-09-19 17:35:56 · update #1
You should read the the one the Senate just passed!
It gives a Fisa Judge sweeping powers to APPROVE AN AGENCIES PROGRAM for spying in one swoop! All they have to do IS SAY THAT IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL!!
The kicker is, the bill makes anyone sueing the government over illegal wiretapping, the case will be heard~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BY THE SAME COURT THAT AUTHORIZED IT THE WIRETAPPING!!!!!
Why are they trying to pass all these spy bills and other unconstitutional bills now!! Could be there is an election!
Why do they want so much power and control?
FASCIST AT WORK!!
The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved two competing bills designed to overhaul electronic surveillance laws and address the legal ambiguity of the NSA's wiretap program. One of those bills, the National Security Surveillance Act (S.B. 2453), would legitimize the NSA's controversial domestic surveillance activity, and thwart current efforts by the EFF and ACLU to challenge the legality of the program in court.
Authorized by an executive order signed by President Bush in 2002, the extralegal spying program enables the NSA to engage in covert domestic surveillance of American citizens and foreign nationals. Revealed to the public last year by the New York Times, the NSA's controversial program has become the subject of contentious debate. After the Senate decided not to pursue an inquiry into the program at the insistence of vice president Cheney, the EFF and several other organizations filed suits against the government and the telecommunications companies that facilitated the program. The federal government tried to crush the litigation by invoking the state secrets privilege. Although the ACLU's case was dismissed, Judge Vaughn Walker rejected the state secrets argument, and decided to permit the EFF to pursue it's case against AT&T. The Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation lawsuit against the NSA was also permitted. Characterizing the program as unconstitutional, Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ordered the NSA to halt unwarranted surveillance activity earlier this month.
Sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter and described as a "compromise" with the White House, S.B. 2453 radically redefines surveillance, dramatically expands the power of the executive branch, substantially weakens fourth amendment protections, and imposes limitations on judicial and congressional oversight to an extent that critics (including myself) claim is antithetical to the Separation of Powers doctrine and the American system of checks and balances.
If passed, S.B. 2453 would legalize the NSA's current domestic spying activity, and permit the government to establish entire electronic surveillance programs with a single FISA warrant. The bill would also change the definition of surveillance to allow the government to intercept "dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling" data from purely domestic electronic communications without requiring a warrant. In essence, the government would be free to compile massive databases that track the source and destination of practically all domestic e-mail messages and phone calls as well as the web browsing habits of American citizens. The bill further expands the NSA program by permitting interception of the content and substance of purely domestic communications in cases where one party is located on "property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power," enabling interception of messages sent to or from foreign embassies located in America.
S.B. 2453 would also allow the government to move all litigation and legal challenges to federal surveillance programs into the FISA courts, where only government lawyers are permitted to see and present evidence. The bill would permit the FISA court to "dismiss a challenge to the legality of an electronic surveillance program for any reason provided for under law." If passed, S.B. 2453 would easily put an end to the lawsuits pursued by the EFF, the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, and others. It would completely prevent public scrutiny of domestic intelligence gathering programs and silence those that have been subjected to such programs. Finally, the bill would expand executive authority by removing all restraints on presidential power from FISA. The bill allows the President to authorize domestic electronic surveillance programs without any judicial oversight at all.
Condemned by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as "a rubber stamp for the administration's abuse of power," S.B. 2453 has infuriated privacy and civil liberties advocates. ACLU Senior Counsel for Legislative Strategy Lisa Graves comments, "The approval of partisan bills to ratify the illegal spying on Americans demonstrates cowardly obedience to the president, to the detriment of the liberty and privacy of the American people and the rule of law." According to the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), Specter's bill paradoxically "define[s] large categories of electronic surveillance as not being electronic surveillance," and "divests the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of jurisdiction to review the President's program." The CDT also points out that the scope and nature of the data mining permitted by S.B. 2453 is "reminiscent of the Total Information Awareness program," which we have discussed in the past in relation to the NSA program."
Polly. think you would know if they are wiretapping you, going thru your Bank records, all your e-mails and every website you ever visited???? I don't think so! It took Bush a year to stop lying about secret prison camps run outside the US by the CIA!!
And Nicola, why don't you read the damn bill? IT IS FOR DOMESTIC harvesting of ANYTHING THEY WANT!!
IT GUTS THE 4TH Amendment!!!
2006-09-19 17:30:38 · answer #1 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Now here's a thought provoking question for you.
"Actually hitting the source of terror."
And just exactly what kind of a target does that statement present us with? We are not battling a nation or nations - it is a war against a violent and very dangerous ideology.
It is a war like no other. Do you believe that if we capture or kill Osama, we will have defeated the "enemy?" Of course not.
Incidentally, during WWII when we went after Hitler, the home front wasn't exactly a bastion of freedom - do the research - rationing, Japanese interment camps, gas stamps, restriction of private enterprise and the forced allotment of raw materials for the war effort and so on.
2006-09-20 00:34:05 · answer #2 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, to find Osama you'll have to do something more intelligent than just send in an army. Spying on your own people at least gives the impression you'll do anything (to fight terrorism, of course).
2006-09-20 00:28:13 · answer #3 · answered by Dick V 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We could care less what happens in your little world ... the spying that you reference is keeping YOU safe. They are gathering intelligence to stop planned attacks on the US ... Do you want another 9-11 ?
Get a life.
2006-09-20 00:25:40 · answer #4 · answered by ValleyR 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
are you calling afghanastan during a time of war?
That is the only privacy being violated. Something that has been done in every war since WWII.
So stop repeating every bs comment that your hollywood liberal hero's say, and start using common sense.
2006-09-20 00:31:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
they spy on terrorists or suspected terrorists. they dont have time to spy on random civs.
huh.? im not worried bout no govt spyin on me. im no terist
no need to go kill no pakis
hitler was there not here. hitler didnt send no suicide bombers here.
yer rite all i know is osama. al qaeda is big big threat. we sure will find out bout other threats afta day hit us
2006-09-20 00:27:03 · answer #6 · answered by hhio 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If your talking to ANY terrorists overseas then they need to know. Osama isn't the only one that wants to harm America.
2006-09-20 00:24:10 · answer #7 · answered by elong 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
phone tapping isnt against your "rights".......but it may be against your "lefts" (since your such a good neo-marxist libbie)
and besides, unless your calling out of country, theyre not gonna tap you.
yeah i know who some more terrorists are, osama, saddam, arafrat, castro, and mike moore
2006-09-20 00:25:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
They need to control the wealth and the population in America
Osama is just a distraction
2006-09-20 00:28:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well osama maybe their spy as well as he was a CIA agent.
2006-09-20 00:25:21 · answer #10 · answered by dream_to_death 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋