Why do you oppose warrantless surveillance now if it was ok and proven successful in world war 2? We are in a war right now...the war on terror.....correct?
Hoping for some real cerebral responses here.
2007-08-19 13:51:50 · 11 answers · asked by ningis n 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
There's that IF word again.
Was censorship ok in WWII? No, not if it was mail read without permission without a warrant. Are you sure it was warrantless? I believe that everything that was done then had court approval. Anyway, wasn't the censoring done with cooperation from the citizens?
Is it ok to catch spies and traitors? Yes. No one objects to that, even today.
Also, "war on terror" is not a war. It's a slogan. To be in a war, we have to have a defined enemy. Otherwise, how will we know when we won? You'll notice that we never declared war against Iraq or Afghanistan, like we did with Germany and Japan, so legally, we're in an entirely different framework, too, if that matters.
Oh, I like that term, though. I'm a "Constitution thumper". Yep, proud to claim it. I'm one of those crazy people that thinks our freedom really matters, and not just as a slogan. I'm talking ACTUAL freedom.
2007-08-19 14:06:56 · answer #1 · answered by skip742 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't have a problem with the government reading the mail. I have a problem with the government reading anybodies mail they feel like without oversight. Where does it stop? All I want is a government body to go to a judge and say "These are the reasons we need to look at this mail" If there is no time, the I don't see anything wrong with doing it and THEN ask a judge if they (law enforcement, CIA, etc) were in the right. If not, then the evidence gets thrown out.
2007-08-19 15:23:04 · answer #2 · answered by Kenneth C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fundamentally, this is an issue of law. FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was established in 1978 to address a wide variety of issues revolving around Watergate, during which a president used foreign intelligence agencies to collect data on U.S. citizens. As part of FISA, the NSA has to get warrants to analyze and maintain collections of data involving U.S. citizens. FISA has withstood all tests until now, and it involves a fundamental aspect of the U.S. Constitution -- its system of checks and balances.
2007-08-19 14:09:59 · answer #3 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm glad that we spy on people. We should spy on people. If people don't want to be watched, they can go hide under their beds, I don't really care. And, nobody cares about joe blow who wants to pick his nose in private.
People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.
Criminals are always trying to hide behind their imagined right to privacy.
Spying is good. I love spying. I love busting the worst of the worst. It's amazingly rewarding!
How do we know who poses a threat to our security if we don't spy on them? (sheesh. does anyone have any common sense anymore?)
2007-08-19 15:00:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ummm, the authorities received warrants to view potential spy mail. Why not now? Sounds like something the Soviets would do, there, Comrade.
2007-08-19 14:04:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Oh...you're asking for intelligent answers when your last question was about setting up spy-rooms in each neighborhood to look out for suspected terrorists and suspicious behavior?
You've really lost me now, but I assume you're one of those outrageously paranoid conservative christians, right?
Next you'll be saying how nice American women will look in a burka.
Calm down and take a chill pill....there's nothing for you to be afraid of, cupcake. Everything's gonna be just fine.
THAT is an intelligent answer, my dear.
.
2007-08-19 14:08:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because we live in a world full of bureaucrats. We do it, we just don't say we do it anymore, and we say its wrong and bad to do it. But behind the scenes that is exactly what we are doing. Society is ran by nothing more than contradicting, hypocritical, condescending bureaucrats.
2007-08-19 14:03:24 · answer #7 · answered by innamorta2000 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because it is used for malevolent purposes at times, like they did with Martin Luther King and countless other US citizens who were no threat to security. And this is isn't WW2. Nixon miused this power as well.
2007-08-19 13:58:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
I am in full agreement with warrentless surveillance. I think, unless they are a constitution thumper, most people who have nothing to hide would have no problem with it. I get tired of the constitution protecting the criminals and not the Innocent.
2007-08-19 13:59:20 · answer #9 · answered by corgiesrule 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
do you have the slightest idea what you are talking about?? censorship and warrant less surveillance aren't the same thing, they aren't even close to being the same thing
2007-08-19 13:58:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋