FCC approves Net-wiretapping taxes

TalkBack 26 of 51:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Let's clarify a couple of things

This thread is one of those topics in which the original author (TimeBomb) is completely misinformed. It's also one of my pet peeves.

So, let's clarify a few things, some of you might even learn something new:

"They really hit the lottery on 9/11, didn't they?"

First of all, to suggest that the current administration "lucked out" by having over 3,000 murdered on national television is probably the must disgusting thing I've ever read. To suggest that the president even wanted something like this to happen is outrageous. More on this in a bit (it's part of a bigger puzzle that apparently people like TimeBomb don't understand).

"Now, everything they do is justified by it."

What part of watching two aircraft slam into the WTC did you not understand? We are at war. When at war, sacrafices are made. There are people out there who want to KILL us. People like TimeBomb have a hard time accepting this fact and continue to try and live in a pre-9/11 world. That simply doesn't work anymore.

"Issue an executive order allowing unconstitutional spying on Americans."

Bzzzt! sorry, wrong answer. Read the wording in the authorization granted by Congress to the president that allows him "any measures to prevent further terrorist attacks on American soil". So much for the "unconstitutional" part of that attack. Second part of that is who exactly we are spying on. If anyone actually believes that we should not be listening into phone conversations from OVERSEAS directed to KNOWN phone numbers of terrorists or terrorists supporters, please let me know why. The numbers in question were acquired from Al Qaida sources. To NOT listen into them would be irresponsible.

There are some who argue that there are already legal provisions in place that allow for this form of wiretapping and that courts can still be used to get a warrant. What people fail to understand is that there are usually time elements in play that prevent the use of courts. Again, people will incorrectly claim that there are provisions in place that allows for warrants to be acquired after the fact, but the problem with this is that these regulations prevent ACTION based on evidence gathered until the warrent is acquired. Therefore, while intelligence forces could gather intel and then get a warrant, UNTIL they have that warrant under those provisions, they are unable to act on the data. Bush's executive order is specific. It acts without a court order or warrant only on overseas calls to know Al Qaida linked numbers. To claim that these are innocent Americans who just happen to know known Al Qaida operatives is simply ludicrous.

"So, we can't even legally challenge the illegal spying that is being justified by claims of anti-terror investigations, and the reason we can't is that they claim those legal challenges threaten anti-terror investigations"

Partially correct. We've already established the "spying" is not illegal (and if you think Bush was the first president to order wiretapping or searches without a court warrant/order, you better look back to the Clinton and Carter administrations:
http://dontgetstuck.blogspot.com/2005/12/dont-do-as-we-do-do-as-we-say.html )
We've also established that it is necessary. Terror cells work quickly. If orders are given from overseas to execute a plan within 4 hours (or less) do you honestly think a court has enough time to grant the president authorization to act upon it quickly enough? It doesn't.

Lastly, I'd like to add that in a time of war, our military uses whatever electronic surveilence is necessary to find the enemy and kill or neutralize them before they can act. This is a different kind of war. The enemy looks like us and lives around us. As the commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Services, the president of the United States is fully authorized to authorize any intelligence gathering methods as seen fit to defeat the enemy.

You are right, TimeBomb, America at large does need to get it's head out of it's collective ass. Unfortunately for you, you and people who believe the things you've written are part of that collective.

I'll end with this:

Bush spied, terrorists died.

You have a problem with that?

Posted by: Dave P.   Posted on: 05/03/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now