English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070117/ts_nm/surveillance_bush_dc_5

Another Bush assault on the (our) Constitution rebuffed.

Note: We will not let Bush act like the KGB or STASI in America.

2007-01-17 16:40:12 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

17 answers

Yep, good try Neo cons but you cant peek in our windows quite yet.

I wonder how frustrated Dubyas feeling right now? After 6 years of Democrats cant get it done, Democrats have no organization, 6 year sof a Republican congress doing nothing but trying to take citizen's rights away, and still the neos think its appropriate to attack a man based on his skin color, or a female because shes female.

I mean they have alienated most everyone so badly, the moderates have a harder and harder time defending them. I know I used to defend them myself, then started thinking, ummm this is making no sense, time to think for myself.

2007-01-17 16:49:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 7

Wow Unconsitutional? This is a very sad day for America. Why dont you do a little research? Did you know the Federal Courts upheld wiretaps on enemy communications with out a warrant NUMEROUS times? Every president in history has intercepted communications from the enemy without a warrant. Lincoln did it when we were fighting the Civil War. Truman did it during WWII. Hell everyone's beloved BJ Clinton did it! Hell did you know that everything on the internet goes through a database including your emails? Whose administration set that up ohhh wait BJ Clinton. Was there a big hype? nope!

These wiretaps are not being used for criminal court, they are being used against the enemy which is protected by United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972).

Oh and by the way the 4th Amendment protects us from "unreasonable" search and seizure, not warrantless search and seizure. Just have to throw that in there for ya.
So I guess this is a great victory for your libs huh? terrorists can now plan other terrorist attacks with ease.

2007-01-17 17:13:24 · answer #2 · answered by Greg M 3 · 3 1

right here is the topic......i'm no longer against the NSA spying difficulty. My difficulty is that we've a corrupt administration and there are no ensures what they'll do with the innovations they assemble. we've already considered huge abuses with our "inner maximum" tax innovations and the IRS abuse. by using the way...that's my expertise that when the government is going to the "FISC" courtroom for a secret warrant, that's in comparison to going to the preferrred courtroom and getting a majority to agree on it. they only would desire to discover one decide to sign off. that's my expertise that when Obama asked this mass government surveillance of telephone communications, it became into rejected by using the 1st 3 judges it became into presented to....however the fourth one signed off. anybody else heard of this? FISC is super secret so no longer a lot information available. yet i've got examine this in 3 places now.

2017-01-01 08:46:28 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

What do you think stopped these past schedualed terrorists attacks that were to go off in this country??? What do you think will stop the next ones now that they don't have anyway of detecting them? Oh you liberals will get exactly what you want before it's all said and done and then we'll listen to your KGB talk!!

2007-01-17 16:57:36 · answer #4 · answered by Brianne 7 · 2 0

Ever hear of media generated manufactured consensus...uh you say.
Remember you only tackle the man with the ball in football, cause he is the only one who can score.
So you are just proving to me how much on the Ball he must be.
As a Canadian it seems to me He must be a great president , as well very effective, a man of great stature. Years a head of his time. Only many years from now will they honor Him.
Bush is a man of God. He can not tell you everything now can he? So others take advantage of that.
He is an honorable man of God.

2007-01-17 16:53:06 · answer #5 · answered by Mijoecha 3 · 3 1

Oh it is not rebuffed, he has found another way to do it!

Under the Torture Act of 2006 and the Oxymoronic "Patriot Act", The Government goes before a special court and presents nothing but their word (Would you believe anything the government says?) that they need to do wire tapping, Eavesdropping, Confiscation of Records! They do not meet the test of probable cause, and it is done in secret by a rubber stamp court, like the Constitution mandates:

"Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized".

He's made people like you, and many others in the country reading that BS in the news that he is going to stop his illegal activities! Well he isn't!

And Lauren, I know the Constitution means little to you, but a lot of people have fought and died for it and you want to compare it with phone sex?

2007-01-17 16:54:40 · answer #6 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0 4

Um...whatever. Does wiretapping bother anyone? If you want, annoy them with three straight hours of phone sex for all I care.

The real problem is with a certain group of people who "care so much about our health and welfare" that they might as well ban cigarettes and other things since they made it illegal to smoke anywhere. There's the real problem. And you know, it starts with cigarettes. Tomorrow, I don't know, maybe chocolate cake because some poor individuals might not know it makes them fat.

2007-01-17 16:51:23 · answer #7 · answered by Picard Facepalm 5 · 4 1

Spying on foreign nationals involved in hostile acts against the United States is far from unconstitutional. Look up the words Magic and Enigma, without them you would be speaking either German or Japanese.

2007-01-17 16:47:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

The NYT.....they bark from a platform of civic-servility?

**** no!
Those rat-bastards should be GITMO bound.
You won't be chortling "unconstitutional" when Akbar detonates himself on a subway car.

2007-01-17 16:49:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

What's interesting about this decision is the fact that Alberto Gonzales is going to get grilled tomorrow by the Senate. Coincidence? I think not.

2007-01-17 16:52:13 · answer #10 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 2 2

the CIA has through out history planted spooks in the New York Times and help forge public opinion towards making war and over-throwing foreign governments... Guatemala... Iran...

2007-01-17 16:47:09 · answer #11 · answered by lovefights 3 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers