Political DiscussionA place to hold political debates and general discussion. Please remember to always respect the opinions of other members and above all else, be civil.
As if it were not a given that warrantless taps were in contradiction to the 4th Amendment, this judge just made it part of her ruling. So, Bush, please cease and desist.
Once you taste that power, you're going to keep exploiting it. And he's going to get mad again when someone leaks the security secrets to the media.
Ah, but if he was ordered to stop by a Federal Court, and he doesn't, he and everyone who obeys him will be arrested. Everyone knows that this has been deemed illegal so if the chief of the NSA complies with Bush's requests he is breaking the law so he's going to jail along with Bush.
I would love to see this happen. I cannot tell you how happy it would make me for them to make an example out of the Bushies.
I wish we our leaders had the right to do this. But since they don't it blows me away that they would try. If this wasn't revoked it would have really shown us that our constitution is simply a napkin.
Ah, but if he was ordered to stop by a Federal Court, and he doesn't, he and everyone who obeys him will be arrested. Everyone knows that this has been deemed illegal so if the chief of the NSA complies with Bush's requests he is breaking the law so he's going to jail along with Bush.
I would love to see this happen. I cannot tell you how happy it would make me for them to make an example out of the Bushies.
An appeal was filed so a stay was issued. Meaning the program continues until the appeal is completed. Companies do this all the time when they lose in court.
Yes, I know. It's too bad the judge cannot issue a ruling and wave off a stay if it's appealed. I do hope that the court of appeals agrees with the decision.
yeah.. lets stop listening into suspected terrorist phone calls coming INTO the US....
I'm sorry but National Security comes before you and me
I'm not against listening to phonecalls from people on Bin Laden's speeddial....
But every time the gov't says "Security" I think "Terrorism". At this point I don't believe our gov't has our best interests in mind, I believe that it's expanding it's power to phenominal proportions, and not for the good of the common person.
Therefore, I'm against anything the gov't does. Sure, they say they have our best interests at heart, but it's just more control, on the way to some psychotic, socialist, 1984, V for Vendetta society. And I don't want to support them at all. That power is soon to be wielded against us, mark my words.....
yeah.. lets stop listening into suspected terrorist phone calls coming INTO the US....
I'm sorry but National Security comes before you and me
Exactly. The safety of you and I is not worth the security of the nation.
Nation= pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to The Republic for which it stands, one Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justicefor all.
Nation=We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Nation=We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, 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.
Security=Keep out of jepardy.
Seems to me Justice is listed in the Pledge, the Declaration, and the Constitution. We can't change what justice is because a few thousand of us die. How many people drive drunk and kill people? Cops cant sit outside bars. Yet this visible attack is worth degrading our nation.
Seems to me Justice is listed in the Pledge, the Declaration, and the Constitution. We can't change what justice is because a few thousand of us die. How many people drive drunk and kill people? Cops cant sit outside bars. Yet this visible attack is worth degrading our nation.
Has a drunk driver ever killed 3,000+ people at once? Has a drunk driver ever blown a hole in a US battleship? Have drunk drivers ever called for the elimination of all who are of a different religion then them selves?
Maybe I'm wrong, but national security doesn't come from our government. It can only come from the people. If everyone carried guns like in the wild west days, nobody could have hijacked an airliner.
The gov't doesn't care about you or me, and wouldn't have a problem sacrificing our lives if it made them a few more bucks or got them reelected. They don't care about the good of the nation. They only care about power. And that's not the government I want.
yeah.. lets stop listening into suspected terrorist phone calls coming INTO the US....
I'm sorry but National Security comes before you and me
They aren't just listening in on terrorists, that's the problem. Our government is set up with certain safeguards to ensure that the people run the government, and not the other way around.
We have checks and balances just so that one person (or group) doesn't get power-hungry and take away our liberties in the name of security and then use the information gathered to increase their power over us. That is the perfect recipe for a monarchy or an absolutist government.
There is a reason our forefathers put an amendment in the Constitution that requires the government to get a warrant. You want to listen in on terrorists, great, but if you are going to be tapping into US citizen calls you need a warrant. That is because they are tapping calls that are originating from inside the US. If they have bin Laden's phone tapped, they can tape/monitor US citizens because they are not directly trying to do it to an American citizen (I do believe they'd still have to notify FISA and get a warrant, but it could be after the fact).
Has a drunk driver ever killed 3,000+ people at once? Has a drunk driver ever blown a hole in a US battleship? Have drunk drivers ever called for the elimination of all who are of a different religion then them selves?
It's pretty weak and crappy analogy.
I am not making the argument that terrorists are like drunk drivers. I am making the argument that destroying our rights for a few deaths doesn't make sense. Good job on not attacking the main body of the argument.
You quote things like "Justice for All" "Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" and "Establish Justice"
Wouldn't flattening Mecca be "Justice for All"? Islamic extremists wouldn't think twice if they were asked to level a US city.
"The pursuit of Happiness", I'd be PLENTY happy seeing these animals get "Justice for all".
But we aren't like that. We won't drop down to their level. Rather than take out cities(which I personally think should be a threat. MAD worked pretty well to keep the Russian in check during the Cold War. I'm sure it could work now) we do things the stealthy semi diplomatic way.
