How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 What the heck   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

What the heck

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
LeeJ
Member Patricius
since 06-19-2003
Posts 13093
SE PA


0 posted 02-07-2006 02:58 PM       View Profile for LeeJ   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for LeeJ

I've been looking in this forum, and perhaps my eyes aren't completely open...but I'm a little surprised that no one has started a forum on the wire tapping that presumably Bush broke the law over.

OK...I'll start.

Most of you know, I'm not a Bush person...but...to me, this is nothing but a witch hunt....ah hem...Mr. Spector, are you listening?

First and foremost, don't people of the US know that this has been going on for years?  I know both republican and democreatic reps do.  

Big Brother has been listening to telephone conversations for a long time...geeze louise, what could they be thinking, & how are they getting away with this?  or are the Americans that disconnected, that they really believe, this is the very first time something like this has happened?  

Second, if it's going to eleviate and divert another terrorist attack, well sir, I for one am glad that somebody's doing something?  Right?

What do you think?


Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


1 posted 02-07-2006 03:17 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Big Brother has been listening to telephone conversations for a long time...

Do you have something to support that contention, Lee? Or are we just talking tin foil hats here?
Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


2 posted 02-07-2006 03:34 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

I'm sure there's plenty who will holler about the civil liberties of the US citizen getting a cell call from a known terrorist organization from outside the US, then that US citizen calling others inside the US getting wire tapped.  Yanno, like that ACLU lawyer who got busted for transporting messages between her client, accused of terrorism, to the rest of his buddies who just happened to be known terrorists, who then cried foul that her civil liberties were being compromised along with suppresion of free speech, press, and expression.  Shame President Clinton and Bush didn't have the express authority to tap Atta's phones, much less the rest of the 9/11 hijackers.

There is something funny about the entire NSA wiretapping thing.  There's a section of the 'rules' which allows for a substantial cash payment (I think it's about $30,000) to anyone tapped erroneously, falsly, or vindictively.  To date, not one cent has been paid out.
icebox
Member Elite
since 05-03-2003
Posts 4246
in the shadows


3 posted 02-07-2006 05:21 PM       View Profile for icebox   Email icebox   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for icebox

I think if Big Brother is going to listen in on my phone calls then he should help to pay the phone bill!

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


4 posted 02-07-2006 05:47 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

There is plenty to support it, Ron. Just view the transcripts from the past days when it was shown that the same techniques were used in WWI, WW2, Korea, the cold war. Vietnam and others. This is nothing new and has been used by many presidents.

It still amazes me that Democratic leaders can't understand why they keep losing elections when they continue to make these bonehead grandstand plays that a child can see through and make voters choke, or smile. Fortunately for the Republicans, it seems they will never learn....may they continue to be what they are.  

Don't worry, icebox. Big Brother could care less about your phone calls....or mine, for that matter.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 02-07-2006 05:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

As Paul Harvey said this morning, there have got to be a lot of militant Muslim leaders laughing themselves to death that we are even discussing an issue like this.

Maybe that's the answer to getting rid of them. We can continue to make our idiocy public so they can all die laughing...
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


6 posted 02-07-2006 07:03 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

This was brought up before - my response hasn't changed one iota: http://piptalk.com/pip/Forum6/HTML/001321-2.html#27
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


7 posted 02-07-2006 07:55 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

There is a legal way and an illegal way in carrying out eavesdropping in our nation. I believe it can be virtually unanimously agreed that there are absolutely legal ways in going about this, especially for tracking down those who threaten our soils and bringing them to justice.

The issue here, plainly, is that Bush chose the illegal route in going about these operations, by not obtaining the court approval. Even during a state of war, the law still exists, the law doesn't dissolve, and Bush must have believed he has the right to disobey any established law during wartime, as the John Yoo memo appears to suggest.

I can absolutely understand why this is such a big deal. Whether this administration means it or not, it is in my understanding that Bush went above the law here, and out of it he is making many young Americans think, "Hey, if he can get above the law and get away with it, we sure can too!" What good is our valuable checks and balances system if our own representatives that work to hold it up exploit and try crawling around it? What's the point of even having laws like this in place to begin with if this behavior continues to go on excused?

Beyond that, there appears to be a political intent behind this endeavor; spying on political opposition and dissent. There's much evidence that shows many dissent groups, from anti-war activists to peace groups to Quakers in Lake Worth, Florida, were the ones targeted through this practice. Much of this appears to be all political, and the press doesn't appear to be taking a note of that as these hearings go forth.

The bottom line here, this really isn't about being against eavesdropping or not, for I believe we can all agree eavesdropping is necessary in times of crisis........this is about our President aggressively, willfully and shamelessly breaking the law.......and continuing to make lame, changing excuses repeatedly about why he did it.

Alberto Gonzalez can go on all he wants about General Washington intercepting letters from the British and Abraham Lincoln advocated telegraph taps.....Bush has broken the law here, and the trifecta which is our Constitution, the law that made the FISA court possible and the Supreme Court generate a mountain of evidence showing that such a blank check in time of law contradicts the reality.

If you may remember, it was Bush himself who agreed (while defending the unmodified Patriot Act), "By the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order... When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do."

*

*

Forget the way the question is formulated in the recent polls that show a clear polarizing divide on the issue of warrantless eavesdropping. Take the issue of identity theft, for instance. A unanimous bi-partisan majority agree it is a HUGE problem and must be cracked down on. Meanwhile, government officials have admitted themselves to The Washington Post and other sources that this program has went through like a fine-tooth comb "hundreds of thousands of faxes, emails, and phone calls", and a vast majority of those monitored were founded not to be suspicious enough of having monitored increased to the next stage.

Meanwhile, Cheney continues to claim that this illegal practice has saved thousands of lives, yet cannot offer any proof or evidence of that, Gonzalez has failed to answer Feingold's question of if he knew any other president who authorized warrantless wiretaps outside of FISA since its origin in 1978 (when the answer is obviously no).....their attempts at defending this sound like a fruitcake of molded excuses.

I'm telling you, I believe this particular issue is going to hurt the GOP come this November...especially if the Democrats stick in framing the debate on how the law was violated.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


8 posted 02-07-2006 08:32 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

Noah - if it's so "plain," then why is there such an issue about it? Goes back to what I said in the topic I linked to about how it's funny that the opposition always complains about how unseeing the other side is. Your glasses must be better than mine if you can be so certain of everything.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


9 posted 02-07-2006 08:48 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Because that IS the debate. I specifically said: "The issue here, plainly, is that Bush chose the illegal route in going about these operations, by not obtaining the court approval.". This is why this has escalated into a national issue. The problem has nothing to do with whether eavesdropping Americans is right or wrong...the problem is of Bush going about doing this without obeying the law.

Democrats and Republicans like Arlen Specter and Chuck Hagel aren't crying out because there was eavesdropping to begin with, almost all Americans believe eavesdropping on suspected groups and inviduals that threaten our security is a must. They're crying out because they either believe or are skeptical in that Bush went about allowing this eavesdropping unlawfully.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


10 posted 02-07-2006 09:15 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Noah, would you please refresh my mind as to the law that Bush has broken here...and how his actions are labeled by you as illegal?
Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


11 posted 02-07-2006 09:50 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

I think he means the 1978 law signed by Carter which allowed for domestic spying so long as certain parameters were met, such as court orders and search warrants.  His and others beef is that Bush's administration (umbrella term encompassing the NSA which is Congressionally funded) quite failed to get court permission, even after the fact, and that these activities have been going on for several years.  Never mind the listening posts are not even on US soil and monitor satellite transmissions.  Never mind the cash bounty should such eavesdropping be unwarranted.  Never mind America is at war.  And never mind how leaky the Capitol is....sometimes I think Washington DC is laid out less like a wheel, and more like a sieve.

Of course there are those in the US who firmly believe terrorists should be accorded the same rights as say an illegal alien with regards to civil liberties found in America...unless they are American citizens.  Yanno, like Kennedy's wiretapping of MLK, Nixon's wiretapping of the DNC, and the infamous Clinton fiascos of Ruby Ridge and Branch Davidians.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


12 posted 02-07-2006 10:17 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

aha..

The bottom line here, this really isn't about being against eavesdropping or not, for I believe we can all agree eavesdropping is necessary in times of crisis........this is about our President aggressively, willfully and shamelessly breaking the law.....

So, in other words, it's not about the actions, which are necessary, it's about how he went about it. That's an interesting viewpoint. I wonder, Noah, if during the Clinton fiasco, you said "It's not about the sex - it's about him committing a shameless and willful felony by lying to the grand jury". I don't recall you saying that, sir...but rather the opposite.

Of course you consider this investigation of vital importance. It's against Bush, which I'm sure automatically qualifies it as such.
LeeJ
Member Patricius
since 06-19-2003
Posts 13093
SE PA


13 posted 02-08-2006 07:51 AM       View Profile for LeeJ   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for LeeJ

Again...wire tapping has been going on for years...they listened in for years for key words, like the presiding President's name at the time, bombs, etc.  and to my knowledge it has been going on since the 40's.  

Believe me, we had the technology then, and it's been happening now and basically I'm for it.  What I don't understand is politicians...we're such a divided country, and right where they want us to be...if there were more parties, one wouldn't feel obligated to back up their party and I don't care what anyone says, both sides are corrupt.  

It never ceases to amaze me that people are afraid to change parties, and lobby for more parties...instead of defending corruption...if that there were more parties, it would surely afford more honest politicians not afraid to work for the people, instead of themselves...I'd vote for the first politician that stands up and announces, he's going to take a cut in his pay/bonus, and get rid of some of his aides, and try to do more of the work himself.  

But, people honestly feel, b/c their families were democrates/replublicans for years, it would be a dishonor to them to change. So, instead, we all fight and back up our arguments with articles from others who are simply people with an opinion, which is good, yet not so good.  The extreme lefts and rights really scare me...seriously...look at what is happening over some stupid cartoon...it's annal, stupidity, self imposition...this world will be destroyed by religion...  

Anyway, sorry for getting off the subject here...I'm really really worried about the extent that people will go.

I don't like what Bush has done to this country...he's tried and not done such a good job, although, he's also done some good things, in my opinion, but on this issue...to me, this is simply a witch hunt!!!!  

Have they asked the American's how we feel about this?  I'm telling you all straight from the heart...I have nothing to hide, and they can wire tap me all they want, or anyone else for that matter, if it's going to help deter another 9-11.  

I cannot believe this country...we have such marvelous opportunities, we are still the best country in the world to live in, and yet, we allow our government to get away with something like this...

a waist of time and our money, just b/c they hate Bush.  When in fact, they know, Big brother has been listening in for years and years.  

Frankly, I'm glad they do, especially after we've found all those tunnels from Mexico to the US...I swear to you, another terrorist attack has been forwarned.  We are so lax with our laws and with allowing anyone into this country...it's bound to happen soon.  When it does, it's going to seriously effect the stock market again...and that's exactly where they want to hurt us.

So, if a little wire tapping is going to save some lives, then I'm all for it!

Christopher, I agree with you whole heartidly...
both your link and your comment...

Thanks be to all of you for joining in this forum...
please feel free to tear me a new one, if you'd like
  I'll try and be strong...

and Ron, years and years ago, my uncle worked for the secret service...so if the tin foil hat fits, so be it?  But I really wanted a blue one...

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


14 posted 02-08-2006 01:56 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

The 1978 law known as the "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" made it illegal to authorize wiretaps without a warrant, even if the goal is to protect the nation against particular attacks or if we're at war. Moreover, FISA requires that the government demonstrate that the target is an "agent of a foreign power," and it gives U.S. citizens and permanent residents special protections.

It's no accident why this was formed in the first place. The Ford and Nixon Administrations most notably engaged in similar abuses of executive power, and there was a time even "enemies" like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. were being eavesdropped on, where they then made lame excuses that the taps were justified because the president had uninhibited power to protect the nation.

It isn't always a requirement to obtain a warrant within 72 hours to begin a wiretap. FISA also allows provisions for emergency situations. When war is declared, FISA allows warrantless wiretapping for 15 days, then Congress mus be consulted after that period of time.

These safeguards have been violated, as have the Separation of Powers and the Fourth Amendment of our Constitution, which reads, ""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."

And while the Supreme Court has never upheld warrantless wiretapping within our country, hundreds of thousands of Americans are being monitored, with approximately an additional 500 added each day since 9/11. Compare that to a total of 1758 warrants all throughout 2004.

But what particularly made Bush's drive to eavesdropping illegal was that if he truly felt that FISA was insufficient, he could have went to seek legislative amendment. That's part of what makes our democracy and checks and balances system so great; the President and citizens always have the ability to discuss, debate, and seek and change the law. It is also beyond dispute that in a democracy like this, the President can't go violating laws just because he finds them obsolete or trivial.

Therefore, I find what Bush did was simply illegal on these grounds.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


15 posted 02-08-2006 02:20 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

quote:
And while the Supreme Court has never upheld warrantless wiretapping within our country, hundreds of thousands of Americans are being monitored, with approximately an additional 500 added each day since 9/11.
Where did you get these numbers, Noah? Seems to me an impractical way to go about securing, well, anything. How many people would be required to monitor conversations that would number in the millions? If there truly are hundreds of thousands, as you claim, we can rest assured that no one will likely get to the conversation you had with your mom the other day for at least 50-60 years, since they're obviously so back-logged with all the rest that they haven't been able to get to yet.

Think about it - how much of your time could you devote to listening to even just one person's phone conversations on a given day? I, myself, spend several hours on the phone each day. You'd have no time to sleep. Multiply that by the hundreds of thousands you're talking about and you'd need four times that amount of personnel just to monitor them.

Of course, you'd need someone to monitor the monitors as well... and someone to monitor them...

In as far as it's "clear," I still disagree. If it were clear, there wouldn't be the arguement that the [recent] powers granted by congress weren't a "blank check" to do what he wanted to. I can see implied in that bill (I can't remember what it's called, sorry) that he did indeed have granted to him the powers to do what he, as Commander in Chief, felt necessary to further peace and security.

What I find even more interesting, however, is that I haven't heard too many questioning whether he's done a good job with those powers or not.

Has he saved us from even one bombing on home soil due to listening in on phone conversations (legally or illegaly)? I've heard several situations quoted.

Would preventing another attack on American soil justify an illegal action by the President? I'd say so.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


16 posted 02-08-2006 02:37 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Balladeer, it's interesting you bring up the Clinton parallel here, because there is a sharp contrast in coverage of the Lewinsky investigation of 1998 and the current domestic spying program coverage.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200601210001#1

On January 22, 1998, the first full day after the Lewinsky story was first broke, the two papers often ridiculed for "liberal bias", The New York Times and The Washington Post, ran a total of nineteen articles about it with five on their front pages with at least 28 reporters, totaling 20,888 words.

Contrasting that with December 17, 2005, the first full day after the story of warrantless wiretapping was released, these two papers ran a total of five articles with 12 reporters, totaling 6,303 words.
http://www.pollingreport.com/clinton-.htm

Now, I'm no fan of Bill Clinton either, but it is also noteworthy in pointing out that in even the months after the story was first released, Clinton's approval ratings remained quite high, where many of these archived polling trends even reveal only the occasional 50's-range approval percentage following January 1998, and moreover he left office with an approval ratings in the 60's range. Other archived polls you look up will also show you that a majority of Americans did not approve of impeachment of the president on the grounds Kenneth Starr provided.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm

Contrast that with Bush's recent approval numbers, where they haven't been in the 50's since March of 2005, and certainly a tragic fall from the months following September 11th when they hovered in the high 80's and even lower-90's. Those are approval ratings any president would ever envy to have even at one point in office.

Moreover, a slight majority of Americans believe that this administration should be required to get a court order before going ahead with wiretaps, and a slight majority also believe Bush should be impeached if it is found out he broke the law, which in my opinion I do believe he did.

*

I'm not thrilled about Clinton lying whatsoever, but come on...you among others I'm certain were already screaming at him long before he lied under oath, when the media and politicians joined forces and spent millions of dollars to try and defame him when it wasn't even n the public's interest. So it comes to no surprise why because you think otherwise of Bush, you'd defend, seemingly even deify him sometimes, at all costs, regardless of whatever suspicion may be in the back of your mind.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

LeeJ
Member Patricius
since 06-19-2003
Posts 13093
SE PA


17 posted 02-08-2006 02:46 PM       View Profile for LeeJ   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for LeeJ

I wonder what homeland security and the President is going to do, if they suspect a cell is going to attack the US tomorrow...will they sit there tapping their fingers waiting 72 hours, allowing the attack to happen, or listen in on phone conversations for the names of places involved, and go get inialate the crazy men from carrying out their intended attack?

What would you do.

yanno, if I were the President, I'd be sitting there with my hands out like a scale saying to myself....hmmmm
wiretapping, or another attack on the US?
Guess what I'd do?  Would you wait 72 hours?

I'm sorry, but that's how really stupid this whole thing is, to me anyway.

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


18 posted 02-08-2006 02:59 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Lee, with all respect, I believe you're missing the point here on what this issue is about.

I repeat: this is NOT about whether eavesdropping is right or wrong. I believe wiretapping is essential to protecting our nation, and there is a legal way about going about doing it and if it is ensured it won't be abused for political reasons, like spying on peaceful political opposition.

This is about LAW & ORDER, and if Bush broke the law or not.

Yes...if we're indeed at war and Bush believes FISA is bologne, he has every right to work and try to change the rules to not wait 72 hours for a permit to authorize wiretaps. I would hold nothing against him if he did just that. But he didn't do that, and rather than working to change the rules regarding obtaining permission, he just walked around the law without doing so and went ahead with everything he wanted.

Is this the message we want to send to our children...that it is OK to walk around neighborhood laws, city laws, any law, if you feel your life is under attack or so? What's the point of even having laws, a democracy, when those who swear the oath to protect and defend our democratic ideals and law don't hold their own?

THAT'S what this issue is about.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


19 posted 02-08-2006 03:54 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

So, Noah, obeying the law as you interpret it (let's just assume for the moment it is, in fact, illegal) is more important than protecting our people?

That is what you're saying, regardless of how you try to phrase it. You recognize a legal method of wiretapping - that has no small amount of limitations and time constraints placed upon it. Under normal circumstances, I'd say those were reasonable constraints.

These are not normal times.

Thousands of people lost their lives. Drastic times, drastic measures, eh? There may be many situations where waiting the proscribed time limit is reasonable. Even getting a post-action warrant would work most of the times. But will that cover any and all situations? What if there are suspected leaks? What if the warrant is denied based off of too much speculation and it turns out that the people that could have been wiretapped are the same ones who just bombed downtown Seattle? What if, during the processing of a warrant - in the 48th hour - the person who was going to be tapped gets off the phone with his girlfriend and breaks into San Francisco’s water supply to dump a ton of nerve poison in it?

There are scenarios and scenarios that can support Bush's actions, legal or not. Should he be called to account for his actions? Absolutely. Should we prevent him from securing our future by miring him down in bureaucratic sludge? Not on your life. Not on mine, either.

Brad asked in another thread if [we] felt any safer now. This, makes me feel a little safer.
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


20 posted 02-08-2006 03:57 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

quote:
Is this the message we want to send to our children...that it is OK to walk around neighborhood laws, city laws, any law, if you feel your life is under attack or so?
No, Noah, I'd much rather teach my son to obey the law, even if it means he's killed. After his funeral, I'll make it a point to go to the courts to see if I can get the rules changed... well, if there are any courts left that haven't been reduced to rubble.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


21 posted 02-08-2006 05:11 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


Don't worry,
(be happy);
just before the big bang
there'll be some big strong
don't give a damn
action hero to save us all.


Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


22 posted 02-08-2006 05:51 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

I don't feel any safer when our liberties and law of the land are being compromised for uninhibited presidential authority. In fact, I believe this John Yoo mentality that the Constitution does not apply in a post-911 wrld hurts our national security, and frankly makes me at least feel less safe.

Bush himself agreed (at least before) well after the 9/11 attacks that law enforcement officers must seek a federal judge's permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist's phone, track his calls, or search his property, as these strict standards are fully consistent with the Constitution. I can point to at least five times since April 2004 when he reiterated that point.

I for one will begin to feel much more safe when our government ends or at least tones down this ongoing interventionist form of foreign policy in places which aren't focused on the exact threats to our nation, and money is redirected toward our schools, health services, power plant security, etc. In my heart, each time money is taken from food stamps and health programs that reach out to the poorest of Americans, that is in itself a huge interior threat to our national security.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


23 posted 02-08-2006 06:30 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

I'm senior management here at our company. As such, I have developed or taken part in the development of numerous policies (read as "laws" in context) for my direct employees as well as those they supervise.

The employees don't have the option of going outside of the established policies. If they do, they are [breaking the law] and will be dealt with accordingly.

I, however, as management, can choose to circumvent or disregard any policy I choose. I grant that I will have to answer for the results of any such action, but I still have the authority to make that decision.

Bush, in effect, is manager over those federal officers and can certainly dictate policy for them. As the most senior management, he can also find need to not abide by those policies. One can claim "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," but in reality, he not only has the ability, but the responsibility to act as his office demands in order to meet his "Scope of work."

I still don't agree with you that it is so clearly illegal for him to circumvent the warrant process, but even so (again, I say) even so, he has the responsibility to do so if it is a course of action that will help meet his job description... the part about protecting us.
quote:
...in places which aren't focused on the exact threats to our nation...
Huh? How is wiretapping suspected terrorists not an exact threat focused on our nation? Or, are you suggesting that we have to have definitive proof prior to listening in on someone's conversation? If that's the case (and I may be reading too much into what you're saying), then that's a ridiculous notion. Placing the ability to have a private conversation over the welfare of even a single human life is just... ridiculous.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


24 posted 02-08-2006 07:05 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I'm not thrilled about Clinton lying whatsoever, but come on...

That's it, Noah.."not thrilled" but "come on" about Clinton committing a felony but screaming bloody murder that Bush committed an illegal action even though the results are beneficial to the security of the country. Along with Christopher, I would like to know where those figures you are tossing around come from.

Shall we just publish all security measures we employ against terrorists on the front page of the Washington Post? That way everything would be above board......I think that's what some of the Democratic leaders would like to do....guess who is not going to be using cell phones anymore to communicate with their agents in the US? Thank you, senators..
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> What the heck   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors