George Bush protecting your civil liberties by breaking them

Holmes, every electronic communication is monitored, period, and run through computer analysis, and if warranted specific people's communications are monitored by more than computer analysis.Don't fall for the smokescreen.

I know we've had our disagreements over things in the past but this: is beautiful.

If that is true then it is a clear violation of the Constitution.

And....? You just realizing the government doesn't follow the Constitution in many areas? You think the Dept of Education is part of the federal charter in the Constitution? Gun laws?

Not true.First of all, we aren't in a war. The Congress did not declare war. We have troops in Iraq, but the US Citizens that the Bush Admin was secretly and illegally monitoring were not involved with Iraq.They refuse to release a list of who the 500+ people were. There is no oversight. It's possible (I would argue highly likely) that John Kerry was one of the people they spied on. After all, there's no one to stop them.Additionally, under what other President has the executive branch had the ability to strip a US Citizen of not just their rights, but they citizenship? With the Patriot Act, not just Bush, but the Attorney General has the right to strip you, Randman, of your US citizenship - even though you are not a dual-citizen (I assume)That's brand new power. And it's completely unchecked. Just like the imprisonments, the torture, the kidnapping of foreign citizens.This whole "We are at war" because the President says we are at war is circular."I need more power because we are at war, so don't question my powers because we are at war. We are at war because I say we are at war. I have the power to say we are war because I gave myself the power because we are at war."

There is a distinct difference between the NSA doing it and the President signing an order saying that the NSA can do it.Rape is illegal. Rape happens. But if the President signed a Presidential order saying Rape is okay, that's a problem.

If the President of the United States authorizes behavior in violation of his sworn oath to "uphold the Constitution" he should be impeached, tried, convicted and thrown out of office. Once that is done the next step would be to try him for criminal wrongdoing to see if he should also be sent to jail.The rest of your post is your usual attempt to change the subject and so as usual, should simply be ignored.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Why wouldn't it be? All the DE can do is offer conditions for funding. The states don't have to accept. I thought free markets, the freedom to spend as you see fit, were what you people were all about. The second amendment says "well-regulated militias." Not "anybody can have all the guns they like." Not only does the Constitution allow the Federal government to regulate an armed populace, it specifies that they must.The Constitution is a neat document, Rand. Maybe you'd like to read it sometime?

I'm pretty sure there's a relevant existing topic. Look for it.Now that I have this message up, I'll go look for it also. Stand by for edit.AdminnemooseusAdded by edit:The 409 message A discussion of Gun Control for schrafinator, started by Jar, and now freshly closed by Adminnemooseus (300+ messages you know).The earlier and still open gun control, started by Schrafinator.This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-18-2005 04:28 PM

---

Well that's pretty clearly not true. What's the first example you have from its inception?But as I have already stated, that does not make a difference. The founding fathers did warn us such things eventually would be tried and that they should be fought.So here it is, shall we fight it or let it happen? Okay, so you are in agreement that he is not a strict constitutionalist and is hypocritical when claiming such things. Its well known that they have. I'm not that naive. The point is that it gets stopped when it is found. Torture also gets used, should it not be stopped when found? Politicians have always attempted to get around the laws to defeat their opponents in some way. That should be stopped right?We agreed that this kind of thing was wrong in the soviet union and Iraq, right? That it needed to be stopped? Or like someone upset that a president would violate their powers. I realize the technical possibility is there. That it is going on is not necessarily proven. But if so, is this not something we should be concerned about and fighting? Where I currently live they have already given away their rights to law enforcement. There is absolutely no concept of freedom of communication here. I am fretting because it is not possible, I am fretting over unabashed abuse of power.Where are your principles as a conservative? Govt out of people's lives? Where is your outrage?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Strange.I took jar as meaning what he said (i.e. "does"). I'm wondering how you are reading "doesn't" into that.

Randman your views are evidently way different then the vast majority of people that have spoken on this subject so far. Members of Congress on both sides are demanding answers and what was the legal justification. Not just blogs, but newspaper editorials across the country are critical. I have linked to a number of them on my blog. Bruce's Ideas, Thoughts and Observations. Careful the liberal viewpoints may permanently scar the psyche of conservatives.This president has decided that he is above the law. Do he and his handlers not understand that being president does not give one unlimited powers? Is there be a time and place where american citizens need to be surveilled? Sure there are. We have mechanisms for that. We have courts, we have search warrants and we have the police and the FBI. To have the NSA or CIA spying on US citizens in the US is wrong and illegal. He must be called to account. The administration needs to be shown that THEY are not above the law. It is not OK to break laws and and to deny civil liberties in the name of protecting America from terrorists. If we have our civil liberties destroyed and removed than those that want to destroy our way of life have won. President Bush has given the terrorists an overwhelming victory. He accuses his critics of waving a white flag and giving up. President Bush has become as effective as a fifth coulumn in the US. He has ineptly played into their hands and is actively helping to destroy the freedoms, liberties and way of life they so hate about the United States.

quote:

---

Amendment IV

​

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.

---

there's a couple of stipulations here, regarding a reasonable expectation of privacy.for instance, if you're broadcasting something over the radio, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. it's going out over the air, and you know you're telling multiple people information. what people don't realize is that cell phones don't have a much higher expectation. it's still broadcasting, but people may not realize. "wire" taps on cellphones do not actually break the fourth amendment. and it's questionable (iirc not unconstitutional) to tap portable phones.the standard is the same as doing something in your house with the blinds open. if a normal person walking down the street can accidentally happen upon it, then the police do not a need a warrant to "accidentally" happen upon it either. it's the plain-sight rule. so the kind of phone matters. taping coversations between landlines without a warrant is unconstitutional (unless one is a payphone).also, email is NOT private for a very similar reason. open up an email and look at it's properties for a bit. how many servers did it go through? on any one of maybe a dozen computers informations could have leaked or been seen by an administrator or any number of other things.now, don't get me wrong. i'm not defending bush here. this is just background info. i'm still not sure what part of the constitution gives him the right to commission this kind of thing. it's not a specific search, it's overbroad collection of data on the american people. the above are all in instances of reasonable suspicion or even probable cause -- not a quest to find people who are guilty without any foreknowledge. it compromises the privacy and security of the american people, and 99% of them are pretty much gauranteed to not be who the government is looking for.[edit: jar gave me some links in chat that indicate the rulings over privacy on cellphones and cordless phones is currently under question]This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 12-19-2005 01:33 AM

---

אָרַח

And what about the rumour of a trapdoor in Echelon that lets you spy on US. So far we have fought alongside the U.S. in two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan and now, Iraq.
Thanks to financial and documentary assistance, your CIA brought down one of our most popular governments, helped set up a merchant bank to wash dirty money and 'disappeared' one of the principals, an ex-CIA agent, when the bank collapsed, and jailed a communications specialist when he blew the whistle of the cutting of Australia out of the intelligence loop. Even your intel bases in Australia seem to be sparing with sharing their information. Still, we remain friends so I guess we must be a patient people.

Well your Kiwi Cousins are concerned enough that some are calling for a suspension of the output from Waihopai.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion