Posted on 12/14/2023 10:04:48 AM PST by RandFan
If they are overseas, they are not in America. "terrorism" is not the root password to the Constitution. This law should have been allowed to expire, but the Leviathan has no interest whatsoever in being constrained in its ability to surveil and control in even the smallest way.Your support for such a provision of law shows beyond a doubt that you have no concept whatsoever of the republican form of government we are supposed to have. In addition your knee-jerk support of the murderous thugs in big pharma pretty much proves that you lack reasoning skills. Trolls like you disgust me.
zeugma wrote: “If they are overseas, they are not in America...”
OK, so what does that have to do with monitoring the communications of an overseas terrorist who is in communications with an American in Indiana?
You know, Dugway is right down the road from the NSA's $1.5 billion Utah data center...
If they're talking to a US citizen, hell yes! Those white, middle-aged mothers at school board meetings have rights too!
NaturalScience wrote: “If they’re talking to a US citizen, hell yes!”
Do you think NSA should, before targetting a terrorist, contact that terrorists to see if they’re talking to US Citizens?
You're obviously ignorant if you think it's that cut-and-dry. Why don't you try to educate yourself on the many, many, many abuses of this system? Over and over, including lying to the secret court about a presidential candidate so they could spy on his campaign. This is what you're defending.
Do you really have no idea why so many people, myself included, (even Dems!) are so upset with this? At the very least, you could advocate for reforming this, but you've obviously had too much kool-aid...
NaturalScience wrote: “Do you really have no idea why so many people, myself included, (even Dems!) are so upset with this? At the very least, you could advocate for reforming this, but you’ve obviously had too much kool-aid...”
No, you’re the one drinking the kool-aid. I’ve have asked multiple times for suggestions for how to reform this law. No one on this forum has responding with suggestions for reform. Instead, they’ve responded with ad hominem attacks. Now, what are your suggestions for reform?
My point was that I'm surprised YOU are not even asking for reforms, just the law as written. The reason you're not getting suggestions is because I (and others) think it should be killed.
I can't believe you have no suggestions on reforms -- it's not hard. How about more oversight, maybe at the State level? Mandatory notifications when a citizen has been "accidentally" spied on? Mandatory prison sentences for abuse? I'm sure you could come up with some on your own if you didn't have such blind trust in the government.
Quit thinking of the government as an entity and think about who the people pulling the strings actually are. They are NOT our betters, and are NOT to be trusted. All they did was manage to get more votes (counted) than the other guy. They are supposed to answer to the people, including you and I.
you are so disingenuous, as usual. You know that this is not the extent of what they are doing. They are using any overseas communications to expand their wiretapping and data vacuum operations to third and forth persons removed from such conversations. This is because there is no one in government that has any sense of decency whatsoever. They always extend their grasping hands to whatever they can without considering any negative consequences of same. Even without their obvious venality, if they are monitoring the communications of an American citizen, they should have to have a warrant. I don't give a damn who they are talking to. Again, it's not like they don't have pet judges who will sign any paper presented to them.
It is unfortunate that so many people such as yourself put faith in men who have shown over, and over, and over that they do not deserve it. Kinda similar to your doglike faith in the medical establishment, who have also revealed before the world that they too have feet of clay, and will bow down before anyone with power who claims 'authority'.
Such craven support given to those who do not deserve it reveals much about your character, or lack thereof.
NaturalScience wrote: “I can’t believe you have no suggestions on reforms — it’s not hard. How about more oversight, maybe at the State level? Mandatory notifications when a citizen has been “accidentally” spied on? Mandatory prison sentences for abuse? I’m sure you could come up with some on your own if you didn’t have such blind trust in the government.”
I’ve already called for prosecuting those who abuse the system. I just don’t see the rationale for throwing out the baby with the bath water.
eugma wrote: “This is because there is no one in government that has any sense of decency whatsoever.”
IOW, if the government is doing it, it must be bad?
zeugma wrote: “You know that this is not the extent of what they are doing. They are using any overseas communications to expand their wiretapping and data vacuum operations to third and forth persons removed from such conversations.”
NaturalScience wrote:”They always extend their grasping hands to whatever they can without considering any negative consequences of same.”
Reverend Wright wrote: “Allowing for unlimited Regime surveillance of domestic dissidents on the off chance that they catch the next 911.”
Identify the logical difference:
Some can’t be trusted not to abuse FISA, therefore ban FISA.
Some can’t be trusted not to abuse ARs, therefore ban AR’s.
“Identify the logical difference:
Some can’t be trusted not to abuse FISA, therefore ban FISA.
Some can’t be trusted not to abuse ARs, therefore ban AR’s.”
One refers to a constitutional right for the People of the United States.
One refers to a legislatively created power which has been frequently abused by a malevolent bureaucracy.
Reverend Wright wrote: “One refers to a legislatively created power which has been frequently abused by a malevolent bureaucracy.”
Irrelevant. Both are logically the same.
The conservative response to those who misuse firearms is to prosecute them.
The conservative response to those who misuse FISA should be the same.
Yet some would respond as the liberals do and demand that FISA be banned just like the liberals want to ban firearms.
Individuals who misuse their firearms get banned from owning them.
Should be the same for the FISA bureaucracy.
Reverend Wright wrote: “Individuals who misuse their firearms get banned from owning them. Should be the same for the FISA bureaucracy.”
Those that abuse FISA should lose their jobs and go to jail.
FISA is like RICO. A repeated pattern and practice of illegality.
Different bureaucrats are shuffled thru there, but the illegal surveillance continues because it is inherent in the program itself.
It is inherent in the Five Eyes.
They have been spying on each others nationals, and exchanging the information since the start.
Ted is in real danger of being unseated in 2024, as “blue” TX reasserts itself after decades.
Owning weapons is a pre-existing right that is protected explicitly by the Constitution with the second amendment.
The deep state really isn’t sending their best anymore.
If I find someone who actually cares about your rants on this or other subjects, I’ll let you know, I’m sure it gets lonely here for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.