Is spying on an American citizen, with no probable cause, and with no warrant....a crime?

Question

To Nice Lady - You have done well, grasshopper. Spewing out the Right party line.
first of all - FISA allows for "warrantless wiretapping" WITH JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT. bush doesn't *do* judicial oversight.
secondly ECHELON is not what bush is doing.

Methinks YOU should "get your facts straight" toots.

hey? A question for you?

Would you care to make a stab at why exactly QUAKERS are a "threat to security?"

To john gal - It's really hard for me to comprehend that there are American citizens who are still unaware of this, but bush is surveilling political dissidants, my friend.

To the posters using the "Patriot Act" as legitimacy to VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION, thanks! Thanks for proving my point.

To THIS CAN'T BE GOOD - You are wrong, sir. And this is precisely the reason rational American citizens are livid about the Patriot Act.

The ONLY requirement is that bush points the finger at you.

Period.

To TJTB - I just read your post, and I must tell you I practically teared up. I have gotten lots of nice comments from people, and some great emails, too.

But I have also gotten some of the most vicious, threatening and hate-filled remarks and emails, as well.

Sometimes it's easy to fall into a pattern of pettiness and spitefulness, out of sheer self-defense.

Your comments remind me of my better side.

Thanks. A lot.

Answer 1

The Government should not be able to "do what it wants." The Government should follow the law, and warrantless spying is against the law. Even with probable cause, a warrant is necessary, even if it is after the fact.

Our Constitution is being ignored, neglected, avoided and neutered. The President has a battery of lawyers who have advised him on just how to evade that "piece of paper," and avoid International Courts. Vote this bunch out and get someone else in. It's our only hope of salvaging what is left of our freedoms.

Answer 2

According to the Bill of Rights yes it is a crime as defined by the Supreme Court. But because of the Patriot Act, under certain very broad definition it isn't. All that has to be done is to say there was a suspicion which removes probable cause from the equation entirely. The suspicion under certain circumstances according to the Patriot Act and under the guise of National Security supercedes the need to attain a warrant. All the law enforcement agency has to do is say they believed that the evidence wouldn't be there etc had they waited for the warrant.

Answer 3

Unfortunately, due to the Patriot Act, no. This is considered a legal expansion of power afforded to the Department of Homeland Security, which includes the CIA, the DEA, the ATF, and the FBI.

Answer 4

Bottom line here: If I'm on the phone and spoke of a murder I committed and the NSA had my line tapped as a suspected terrorist , there is NOTHING they could do with that taped conversation to incriminate me as it would completely be inadmissible in a court of law. If I sold drugs,was a pimp, or if I stole a car or perpetrated an aggravated battery against my fellow man, NOTHING could be done about it because it was not linked to terrorist activity. It would even be illegal for them to notify the local police. FACT: they don't give a rat's behind if I sell drugs. There function and only function keeps them busy enough, FINDING AND FIGHTING TERRORISTS!!!

Glad to prove your point and thanks for the 2.

Answer 5

The Patriot Act gives broader latitude, but not just open season on spying. They still have to have a reason, other than they want to.

Answer 6

Pretty sad people are getting their facts from wikopedia.
Pretty sad people don't understand the depth of the P.A.

Pretty sad people don't protest like we use to...but then again many of these kids today are wired to iTunes and distracted by so called reality shows (which are actors btw).

And these kids are our future,,,,even sadder.

Answer 7

Under the Bill of rights yes. However king George disagrees.

Answer 8

According to FISA, yes it is.

Under FISA Sec. 1809 it's a crime punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment.

Apparently cons like Nice Lady above either can't read, or just don't want to.

Nice Lady: Try reading the ACTUAL STATUTE instead of Wikipedia. I thought cons hated Wikipedia anyway.

Answer 9

Is it a crime? Perhaps it's more serious. It's the destruction of Hebeas Corpus and a huge step toward the desecration of the Consitution of the United States.

ps You're welcome! ;o)

Answer 10

It violates the US Constitution, but the Bush Adminstration has been getting by with it for years. I guess those checks and balances are only a guide line.

For Nice Lady: FISA requires a warrant signed by a judge. Bush and his buddies didn't feel that part was neccesary.