What are some points to counter wiretapping?

Question

I have to debate in my class on Friday. One of the topics we can debate is wiretapping.
I need to counter: "Wire taps- the president, in a national security, should be allowed to use extra-legal methods helping track down terrorist."
What are some points I should use?

Answer 1

It might help you to know who actually does wiretapping and who doesn't.

A wiretap is a physical device attached to a single phone line. At the federal level, wiretaps are used by the FBI and the CIA (not the NSA). The FBI can tap into a phone line in the US, while the CIA taps in foreign countries.

The job of the NSA is "signal intelligence", which involves any signal that passes through the air, not through a phone line. The NSA is required to get permission from the FBI or CIA to use anything on a landline.

While I was in the navy, I worked with equipment designed by the NSA, so for me, the difference is pretty obvious. If you need anything more technical, I think I can help you without giving away national secrets.

Another thing you should know is that Clinton signed into law something called the "Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act" (1994). This law requires telephone companies to build their systems in such a way that law enforcement can access the signals easily. That means that cell phone signals aren't encrypted, and the NSA can listen to them any time they want--because they travel through the air. It also means that, upon getting warrants, the telephone companies will give detailed listings of phone calls that include each individual call, the phone numbers, and the times of the call.

Most people in this century don't understand that the Patriot Act added very little to existing law. On my ship back in 1998-2001, we used to listen to cell phone calls all the time because we had the equipment necessary to break down the digital packets and interpret them.

(It might also help if you knew what "data mining" is and how it works. I'm writing too much already. If you want to know any more, just e-mail me.)

Answer 2

Ok, here are some arguments.

The US constitution says "

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.

Note: it says UNREASONABLE

Now is monitoring a phone call placed by a known terrorist overseas to a phone number inside the US reasonable ???

Now many will say it is against the law and we have FISA Courts.

It may well be against the law, but the President does not swear to uphold the law, he swears to uphold and protect the Constitution.

Congress pass's unconstitutional laws all the time, thats why we have a USSC , US Supreme Court.

I provided a link below that has an interesting article about the NSA wiretapping, the comments in the COMMENTS section are a must read and provide much analsyis about the actual laws involved.

Answer 3

Laws cannot have no exceptions; otherwise, they are mere rules to distinquish those in power from those who are subjugated by tyranny. In times of national emergency, extreme measures are often invoked to solve extraordinary circumstances but there must be rules of conduct to ensure against abuse of powers.

We must first answer a few questions:
1- WHAT constitutes a so-called National Security "emergency"?
2- WHO makes the determination that a National security situation exists to warrant breach of fundamental rights, freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution that are the supreme Law of the Land?
3- WHAT measures are there to ensure that said wiretapping isn't an abuse of powers to spy on the current President's political opponants?
4- WHAT are the checks and balances to ensure against contrived National Security "emergencies"?
5- WHAT impartial legal body can ensure against abuse of the Constitutional rights, liberties and freedoms guranteed to all?
6- WHO or WHAT ensures against abuse of powers against an individual or group not in favor with the standing President that would use said power to wiretap during a so-called National Security "emergency"?
7- WHAT impartial body is there to punish without exception those who would use extreme wiretapping means to abuse the Constitutional rights, freedoms and liberties guaranteed in the Constitution of a person or group?

Answer 4

With the implemenation of the Patriot Act, the executive branch can wiretap BUT it still requires a court order.

With that said, I would use the argument that by surrendering freedoms we are forfeiting the war on terror = the terrorists win.

Answer 5

Wiretapping is illegal because it is an intrusion into the privacy of citizens. The government must use other methods to capture the terrorists but must not use systems to basically decapitate the rights of the people.

Answer 6

The civil rights aspect is obvious.........the privacy issue....what information will be shared ?and with what agencies?and the most important .....is the intelligence /actual or a salem like witchhunt????