Posted on 05/12/2006 6:27:29 AM PDT by ziggy_dlo
Hmmm. About the same number that voted for Clinton.
The numbers of people behind an issue don't make it right. Those are the people who have traded thier freedom for pretense of security.
Have you calmed down enough to realize that there is no threat to liberty by collecting a bunch of phone numbers?
Spying; One who secretly keeps watch on another or others.
No the White House just gave the ok to NSA
good points, and, to be honest...yes...I don't like filing income tax. Yes, it was wrong for FDR to read and censor the mail. Yes, prosecutors probably should pull medical records. But you and I are ordinary citizens...interested in contributing to our country. Not criminals. Not suspects. Not terrorists.
Is it really a defense of NSA intrusions into our homes--and make no mistake about it...when the records are this vast, it includes us, too, you and me--is it really a defense that a democratic president who founded the massive welfare state also abused his power? How can that possibly justify this? How do we stop more government invasions into our lives if we give in to them just because we know government already invades our lives?
Maybe you're right...maybe we just have to accept it for what it is, in this day and age. But can you imagine where we'd be if the resources spent on compiling records on millions of average Americans actually were devoted to finding bin Laden? He's the ONE person we know who isn't calling the U.S. on his cell.
Yeah, how "controversial" can it be if 2/3 of Americans support it?
Who's against it, besides Nancy Pelosi and CAIR?
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.
If the program squares with the above then its OK. If not then its wrong. To me this program is a clear violation of the above.
yeah, I suppose I deserve that by the tone of what I wrote. I feel strongly about it, though...and it's not a knee-jerk reaction. It's just based on my core values, which tell me this king of government intrusion is un-American. I apologize for the way I said it before, but as a Conservative I can't support such a colossal old-style communist government-type operation. If we have an honest disagreement on this, then that's how it is...but it's not because of a kneejerk reaction.
They are not collecting phone numbers. They are recording the conversations based upon "key words in context". The audio is passed through a battery of DSPs, which pick up the WORDS. The words are processed and the conversation is analyzed for content. The source and destination information, time-stamp, and audio is preserved if certain screening criteria is met.
The original system was Echelon. The latest one is even better.
"...but as a Conservative I can't support such a colossal old-style communist government-type operation. "
Do you /did you support the opening of private mail, monitoring of phone calls, telegrams, etc., during WWII? Or, was that an old-style communist-type operation as well?"
Sink, we don't agree at all on this. And I really don't care whether the American public doesn't see a problem with this - they don't see a problem with a lot of the stuff that the fedgov does that is beyond their Consitutional powers.
All I see is the government getting data that they have no business having without due process or a subpeona. And now I see that Hayden doesn't even realize that the words probable cause are in the 4th Amendment. So excuse me if I don't join you in chewing cuds.
Yep. I'd like to see the Prez announce those changes in an address on TV, rather than keep 'splainin' the wiretaps (which do not bother me, BTW).
I'd also throw in firing Norm Mineta as well.
They aren't collecting phone numbers. Echelon processes every phone conversation for content.
I would to. By getting a subpeona. Not by getting every call made by everyone covered by large telecomes.
I would even favor an expedited process with a lower threshhold of probable cause. But there has to be some process and it has to be a rifle, not a shotgun.
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.