Skip, why do you think a warrant is required before the police can enter your house?

-spence

Please Define "Suspected Terrorists"

What makes one fall into this category.

Wiretapping
 

Almost 300 million legal residents of this country and this spying on suspected terrorist occurred 30 times, 30 times. Oh my Gosh.....

Did you see the presidents news conferance today? I think he does a fine job in expaining the whole ordeal. I think the majority of americans will be on his side when they realize whats going on and why its being done, and who its targeting.. Then again you guys think Bush lies about everything so you wont believe it anyway:doh: Kinda funny to that the intel comittee knew all about this spying ordeal...maybe even some liberals knew about this. :uhoh:

Well, I believe the President has authorized the program 30 time...not 30 individual wiretaps...

-spence

[QUOTE=Swimmer]Almost 300 million legal residents of this country and this spying on suspected terrorist occurred 30 times, 30 times. Oh my Gosh.....[/QUOTE


Oh but those nice terrosists have had thier privacy vilolated. we cant do that to them its so not right. :doh:

Typical anti Bush crowd looking for anything to take him down. this is just thier latest try.

The Constitution
 

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
We the people of the Unitied States-legal resident only.....

insure domestic tranquility....ah whats this

promote general welfare.....well-being of our residents

Does anyone here realize how elastic the constitution is?

Both sides of the argument in this post is all here in the preamble.

Hey what about all those fisherman that spy on us to try and find the good spots? I had to buy a new boat to get away from them!!!!!
Are they part of the government conspiracy too?

And how about all them spot burners? Do you think we can get the feds on top o them too?

How about the credit card companies selling you buying habits or our amazon selling the customer activity on their website.

How about the company selling traffic information based on cellphone activity?

We live in an increasingly publicly visible society it's part of the way of life. You can't hide, you can't and be a normal part of society.

The president appears to be breaking the law to achieve the same results if he had gone to the special courts which will rubber stamp its approval even after or within the 72 hour spying period.
There always seems to be a conflict with this president.

"The march to war affected the people's confidence. It's hard to make investment. See, if you're a small business owner or a large business owner and you're thinking about investing, you've got to be optimistic when you invest. Except when you're marching to war, it's not a very optimistic thought, is it? In other words, it's the opposite of optimistic when you're thinking you're going to war. War is not conducive to -- for investment.
-- George Bush -- Springfield, Missouri, Feb. 9, 2004

I think thats what he's saying here....but sometimes i need to buy a vowel when reading his speeches.

and the War in Iraq IS Directly linked to the War on Terrorism......in W's own words.

If you dont know that by now you really havent learned anything since 9/11 have you. Lets see here...someone who is known to communicate, fund or support terroist activty might raise a red flag or two to most normal people. Dont ya think?

Like the typical libreal you are its so obvious what you were hoping i would say....Everyone who looks middle eastern is what you wanted me to say right? so you could go ahead and call me a racist right? You people are so predictable its commical. and very out of touch with the reallity of the war on terror and how serious it is. I thank God everyday we have someone in office who understands the reallity of our enemy and how savage they are. we would seriously be %$%$%$%$ed if someone like you, who has no clue who the enemy is was in power.

"and the War in Iraq IS Directly linked to the War on Terrorism......in W's own words."

nah there are no terroists in Iraq nor have there ever been:doh:

Skip;
What defines a terrorist or suspected terrorist?
Where is the line drawn. If I send an anti-Bush email to a buddy am I suddenly flagged and now they can read my library record? Where is the line drawn?
You really think Bush knows an F'ing thing about how savage and the 'reality' of our enemy? Bush knows what his people tell him to know.
So tell me who the Enemy is, if 'someone like TDF or Spence of me' doesn't know???
Maybe because you just typed Iraq and terrorist in the same sentance you're now pegged as a suspected terrorist how does that make you feel?
And typical conservative, can't admit something the Bush administration did wrong......

I would be very curious to have anyone name one US citizen that lost any of their civil liberties as a result of the patriot act. Non US citizens do not have civil liberties from the US constitution.

The ability to defend our country by whatever means necessary is what we have lost

Hmm.. the War in Iraq comes to mind.....

The point I was TRYING to make was that you can't tell. I wasn't trying to label you a racist, I was trying to point out the fact that you just can't tell. So how does the government make the determination that they need to snoop on you. Where do they make the determination someone is a threat...thats what scares me about this situation. can they just go looking and say "Well I thought he might be a terrorist"

And Why is it that everytime someone disagrees w/ you they are labeled a Liberal. I am not a liberal. That seems to be your fallback argument for everything

I believe that people should work hard for everything they get and should not expect handouts. I also believe that if a person truly needs help we should give it to them.....not because of my politics but because its the right thing to do as a human being.

One more thing, in all the threads we've posted in, I have never attacked your character and I would appreciate the same respect and consideration. I don't paricularly care for your politics but I would not use terms like "people like you" or "we would seriously be %$%$%$%$ed if someone like you" in any of my posts.

RI,
I am a conservative and will admit what and when Bush does something wrong, i.e., the borders, spending to name a few.

I think it is more accurate to say that Liberals/Democrats will not admit when he does something right. It is also accurate to say that they Liberals/Democrats will not admit when there party does anything wrong.
We all know that there is not much that they have done right!

First off:
I would admit to it it Bush was right; Immediatly after 9/11 I thought he was doing a pretty OK job; unfortunetly he has continued to duck and run on alot of issues.
As far as the last part; I'm leaving that alone. No flame wars :D

I think most everyone thought he was doing well then. But, like everything else, time has a way of making people forget why we are where we are today.

I was there on 9-11 and I will not forget why and where we are. It is a shame that the feelings of patriotism and pride in country are such a distant memory for so many.

No President is perfect. I think if more people remembered, we wouldn't be worrying about affording non-Americans civil rights providing by OUR consititution.

I think this is the problem...that's not really what this argument is about.

We have a process to ensure that exceptions to civil liberties (i.e. wiretaps, snooping email etc...) are applied lawfully to all people. The laws for non-citizens may be different, but we have no idea who's being watched do we?

Bush is asking the American people to let the policy makers judge who's a suspect and when their civil rights should be infringed in an effort to provide safety.

If history is any guide, then it's clear the Government has a track record of misusing similar authority under many administrations. Nixon illegally spied on Vietnam war protesters, even detaining them at times to silence dissent.

Even if Bush's intentions are good, it's a slippery slope they are well aware of and intentionally skirting. Existing law gives plenty of authority if used properly.

The old "I'm not worried because I'm not doing anything wrong" argument doesn't really cut it. I think Barak Obama said it best:

Others are looking out for you, but are you returning the favor?

-spence

I am sure that there are some zealots that are abusing their power. The Clinton's used the IRS for example. Even Lincoln sent a dissenter to Canada.

In my opinion, the bottom line is that the need to "spy on Terrorists" still remains. If we gain valuable information is it not worth it? If we can prevent another 9-11 is that not worth it?

You said existing law gives plenty of authority is used properly. That is my point. They want to change existing law. The senators that want to change the law have forgotten that they have discussed this with the President on a dozen occassions. This is existing law

As far as Barak Obama's statement is concerned; I don't know of an Arab American family that has been abducted because of their country of origin. (If they were truely Citizens, then they were done a huge wrong.) I will willingly help those those that seek it, not those that demand it. I volunteer to adult reading programs, Big-Brother etc. These people want their lives to be better and are willing to do something on their own. I do not believe in being my brothers keeper. I will volunteer to be their coach, their mentor, their reading teacher, their friend, if they want. I am much less likely to do anything if they demand something.
.

And from what I understand, there is nothing preventing the Govt from spying on terrorists today. Simply that if the suspect is an citizen the agency must report the activity for a warrant within 72 hours.

So why skip the oversight?

-spence

Just to keep things straight, the Patriot Act gave the President the authority to authorize "emergency" wiretaps without a court order. what you guys really should be arguing about is what constitues and "emergency" and do these wiretaps meet that definition.

You're right Mike but, the problem lies in one's definition of emergency.

The President and the Attorney General both indicated that the calls that are being "tapped" are international calls. The calls are initiated either in a country on the OFAC list or going to those countries.

I thought that it gave them the right to do the tap without the court order....but they still had to file for a court order within 72 hours of doing it.

I could be mistaken but that was my understanding.

You are right about trying to define an "Emergency" it opens up a lot of grey area

I've never heard anyone say the Patriot Act gives this power.

The Administration's case is that the Congressional War Powers vote after 9/11 provided the justification, which is a legal slippery slope and the Congressional Dems strongly refute.

-spence

The two sources at the beginning of this thread cited a NY Times article by a reporter who has written a book. The reporter admitted to holding the article for one year to be printed at the time his book is released. That is IMO, questionable and self serving.

This same article was referred to by Senators as part of the reason they were voting against the Patriot Act.

If you can't trust the source how can you trust those who refer to it? These Senators complain about loosing civil liberties. Who has lost them? What, if anything, have they lost? I don't mind standing in a longer line at the airport. I think the increased screening is worth the wait.

Ultimately, the question is do we feel safer as a result of having the Patriot Act?

So when i go to the airport and they search my luggage and frisk me in public without my permission arent my civil rights being violated? I meen they never called and went to court to get a warrant for that right? Oh wait maybe they do that becuase its in the best interest of our safety and natianal security. Imagine that, someone trying to protect me, how dare they do that! :rollem:

Apples and Oranges Skippy;
In the airport it is Posted what you can and can't do and it is Policy as to what is going to happen; dont like it you dont have to travel; at least you KNOW the policy and KNOW you are being frisked searched... what they were doing is the same thing, except they searched your luggage and frisked you without you knowing.....

There was a good point ranged.. out of 4000 warrants asked for 4 (four) were denied; so why did they bother to do it the WRONG way against the LAW?

You guys seem to be mixing a lot of issues...this isn't that complicated.

-spence

Your right its not...When will you get it:hidin: :hihi:

Oh and TDF sould feel special. He just just joined a very exclusive club with the likes of Nebe and Spence. Its called the Skip N got pissed,lost his cool and dropped some nasty words on me club. :hihi: anyone else wanna join?:hidin:

I got a feeling after awhile its not going to be so exclusive.


But at least it has some quality membership..:hihi:

[QUOTE But at least it has some quality membership..:hihi:[/QUOTE]

Well thats very debatable on the "quality" of the memebership :hihi:

But hey i love a good debate like you guys do but once in awhile i just lose mt cool! No hard feelings i hope to anyone, I'll try and be more civil in the future. Key word being "try" :tooth:

Losing your cool is just the beginning and before you know it you'll be strapping bombs around your waist saying, "IS ANYONE GOING TO LISTEN TO ME OR ELSE":hihi:

Then you need to read more. :)

Dad,
Yes that's right.

Source? Trust me, I've read plenty :exp:

-spence

Christ, I thought you were on the road. It was nice and quiet till you, obviously, got home.:doh:

I only drop " F bombs" and maybe a bitch slap or two when needed :tooth:

Dead on the right answer Spence, the law.