America... Spying on Americans

It is logically inconsistent and indicates that a citizen's rights just aren't important at all to them.

None of us were informed that this was happening or even might happen.

This case isn't going to go away. It isn't legal. And Bush is going to get killed politically over it. Why? Because most Americans believe that they have a right to not be spied upon by their government. And secret police, secret taps on the phones, sounds a lot like the Communist State that I and others like me were taught was the opposite of what America stood for.

I just don't get how the Righties on one hand want small government b/c you can't trust government and bueracracies to do a good job, but on the other hand want the same goverment to have unlimited spying power on Americans. It is logically inconsistent and indicates that a citizen's rights just aren't important at all to them.

Cycloptichorn

Yes, I understand you are aghast. And I'm trying to figure out why you are aghast since it is perfectly legal to intercept the communication if a terrorist in Afghanistan calls a terrorist in the US, but you are aghast if the communication from a terrorist in the US to a terrorist in Afghanistan is intercepted.

So if the government has reason to believe it needs to monitor a particular phone call for national security reasons, it would be idiocy to have to wait to get a FISA warrant in order to monitor that particular call. The more reasonable approach is to monitor the call, and advise the FISA court that the call was monitored, and advise members of the Congressional Intelligence Committees (hopefully ones that can keep their mouths shut).

I think you are right that there will be a public fight about how serious this country should be in its fight against terrorism. I'm afraid that people who believe like you do will win out, and as a result we will have a terrorist attack in this country that might have been thwarted if we had given our government the necessary tools to monitor and stop the attack.

Quote:

Yes, I understand you are aghast. And I'm trying to figure out why you are aghast since it is perfectly legal to intercept the communication if a terrorist in Afghanistan calls a terrorist in the US, but you are aghast if the communication from a terrorist in the US to a terrorist in Afghanistan is intercepted.

No, I'm aghast because there is no judge involved. Every American has a right to be presumed innocent of any criminal activity before their conversations should be tapped.

It is so easy to get a Judge to approve a tap, that it is amazing that they even resorted to this. I saw that judge on Fox talking about it (Napitilano? I still can't remember the name). He said that judges sit shifts where they sit up all night to sign warrants exactly like these, when time is an issue. He said agents came to his house at 3 in the morning.

So there is absolutely no way that a judge could not be reached in time. The point isn't about spying against terror suspects; it is about spying against innocent American citizens, a violation of their civil rights.

Bush personally signed the orders for this to happen. He based his legal opinion on the writings of John Yoo, who believes that during war Bush has the exact same powers as a king. He re-authorized the order more than 30 times, by his own admission. He is going to be in big trouble over this one, because there is no justification you can give me for avoiding the constitutional neccessity of contacting a judge, even if it is a big hurry, even if it is 3'oclock in the morning.

And you cannot honestly tell me that you believe this information was all used properly, none of it has been used for improper means. Or maybe you just don't care.

Cycloptichorn

Ticomaya wrote:

So if the government has reason to believe it needs to monitor a particular phone call for national security reasons, it would be idiocy to have to wait to get a FISA warrant in order to monitor that particular call. The more reasonable approach is to monitor the call, and advise the FISA court that the call was monitored, and advise members of the Congressional Intelligence Committees (hopefully ones that can keep their mouths shut).

I think, either you have laws, a constitution, a working legal system etc - or you just say so.

I agree that it sometimes seems to be better to work and act outcide the law and not have have the courts/judges interfering, but of the laws say otherwise: other obey or change them.

Tico
What is next. The internment of all Moslem Americans as we did, much to our national shame, the Japanese Americans during WW2.
Alas. This once was a free and democratic nation. Hopefully, it will be once again.

Note that many of the people spied on in the article apparently had no verifiable ties to terrorism, but merely politically opposed Bush. And you think that is okay?

Cycloptichorn

After the special program started, Congressional leaders from both political parties were brought to Vice President Dick Cheney's office in the White House. The leaders, who included the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House intelligence committees, learned of the N.S.A. operation from Mr. Cheney, Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, who was then the agency's director and is now a full general and the principal deputy director of national intelligence, and George J. Tenet, then the director of the C.I.A., officials said.

And the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court can grant emergency approval for wiretaps within hours, officials say.

Unfortunately, changing the rules alerts the terrorists that the rules have been changed, and they change tactics.

Did you read the article, Cyclops?

I think this issue really points out the hollowness of the Right's position on Civil Rights.

If you don't believe anything is wrong with this, than you don't believe anyone has any right to privacy whatsoever.

You don't believe there is anything wrong with the Government spying on any citizen at any time for any reason; for that is what is occuring here. None of us were informed that this was happening or even might happen.

I don't buy for a second that anti-war activists and peace proponents should be treated like goddamn terrorists! I understand that some of you on the right don't see a difference but it does exist.

This case isn't going to go away. It isn't legal. And Bush is going to get killed politically over it. Why? Because most Americans believe that they have a right to not be spied upon by their government. And secret police, secret taps on the phones, sounds a lot like the Communist State that I and others like me were taught was the opposite of what America stood for.

I just don't get how the Righties on one hand want small government b/c you can't trust government and bueracracies to do a good job, but on the other hand want the same goverment to have unlimited spying power on Americans. It is logically inconsistent and indicates that a citizen's rights just aren't important at all to them.

Cycloptichorn

Since Bush and his stooges are following the path of Germany circa 1933 it would not appear to be out of the realm of possibility.
Torture,
Abrogation of civil rights
Attempt to take over the courts
spying on it's citizens
Incarceration without trial
Considering the constitution a piece of paper.

What do you think the next logical step will be?

You as I understand it are a lawyer. I sometimes wonder where the books you studied law from were printed.