Gore & Barr Blast Bush on Surveillance

Kind of surprised at the comments that I've read here. That Gore is complaining about the mining of data streams to known terrorist phone numbers without a warrant is hypocritical. The Clinton/Gore administration did this repeatedly, I forget trhe name of the project,as well as Bush, Reagan, Carter, without any cries of indignation.

The internment of the Japanese nationals during WWll, was reviewed by SCOTUS, and found to be Constitutional and is still cosidered good case law. Seems like this is just another, if Bush does it it is bad, but that the same thing has been done repeatedly throughout our history with no cries of foul, does not matter.

Oh yeah, if FISA just rubber stamps all the requests for wiretaps why even bother? Sorry, if I'm calling known terrorists I expect someone to be listening in. They are not eavesdropping on every citizen's calls.
 
Oh yeah, if FISA just rubber stamps all the requests for wiretaps why even bother?
Click to expand...
Agreed. Absolutely. In fact, since most Drug and Fugitive Warrants are basically rubber stamped, we really should do away with those also. Get the informant info; kick doors and ass...simple as that.

Come to think of it, what about child killers? We catch 'em dead to rights and then pay for a long court battle when we all know they're guilty. Why burden the Courts with these guys anyway? We could have specially selected Police Units simply mete out Justice on the spot. We could call them "Liberty Squads", in case someone gets the sick notion of comparing them to Death Squads.

Oh, and how about the cop killers? Once the Beltway Sniper killed a Federal Agent, all bets were off. We knew they were using a .223 and we knew who recently purchased those guns. Seems to me a broadbased tapping and surveillance of locals with .223's should not have been an inconvenience for anyone with "nothing to hide". Surely such "tools" will avert future tragedies like this.

Then again, it may be that FISA only rubber stamps individual or group requests; it may be that this was a widespread data mining op of thousands of calls to an from the Sandbox; it just may be that untold US Servicemen, in theatre, were caught up in such mining operation, speaking to family and loved ones.....no one knows, just yet. But, if it was a data mining op, guess who makes the vast majority of calls from Iraq to the US on street bought cell phones? Perhaps FISA would have found that abusive, disgusting and unConstitutional. But then, we ARE at WAR.
Rich
 
I for one, was surprised to find out that this was a new phenomena

I always assumed big brother was already listening:confused:
 
When will we all stop worrying about which party it was that did whatever? I don't care if it was Clinton, Reagan, Bush, Lincoln, or Jefferson. Who go off half-cocked. Follow the Constitution OR CHANGE IT!

Unfortunately, the Constitution has been relegated to nothing more than an enabling instrument used to justify whatever the actions of ANY branch of the government. I was saddened by the Alito hearings watching everybody bow down at the alter of case law. Now the Executive and Judiciary are making laws.

Congress "authorized" Pres. Bush to declare war on Iraq. What a bunch of pansies. I assume they did it so they could badmouth the action as solely his decision if need be. Congress alone holds the power to send us to war (Article 1, Sec. 8). Who gave them authorization to delegate it power to anyone else? The mistaken opinions or actions of previous Chief Executives?

IMHO, we will continue to slide downhill until you and I find out what rights we used to enjoy, and work to throw out ANYBODY from ANY party who is willing to take them away from us.
 
Who gave them authorization to delegate it power to anyone else? The mistaken opinions or actions of previous Chief Executives?
Click to expand...

The people of this country that practically guarantee them their nearly perfect incumbency rate. They really do only have the power that we've given them and it's no surprise that a lack of voting and a lack of caring has allowed people like Kennedy and Stevens to remain in office.
 
The internment of the Japanese nationals during WWll, was reviewed by SCOTUS, and found to be Constitutional and is still cosidered good case law.
Click to expand...

They were American nationals, fellow citizens who had the misfurtune of having yellow skin and Japanese parents or grandparents.

I don't give a flip what those black-robed Statists deem "constitutional" (remember that at one point they deemed ownership of people and then segregation constitutional), some things are plain wrong no matter how many people support it "because it's war."
 
Bob Barr has credibility with me because he is consistent in his professed beliefs.

Al Gore has no credibility with me because he is inconsistent in his professed beliefs. Al Gore is now concerned with surveillence of citizens. So how does his current position square with his past actions. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/1/17/141106.shtml How does his new found constitutional moorings match his support of mandatory installation of the Clipper chip in all telecommunication equipment? How does it square with his pushing ahead on the project even after the NSA bowed out because governmental abuse could not be ruled out. How does his current position square with his expressed willingness to share encription keys with China, Syria, and Pakistan.

I tend to watch what politicians do vs what they say. This is of particular import when dealing with Gore. While it is gratifying to have someone like Gore mouth constitutional concerns, it is far more important to judge his newly found belief based on his actions. And his actions are consistent with a totalitarian.:rolleyes:
 
C'mon...

Al Gore INVENTED the internet (:barf: 0...It'd be easier for him to surveil Emails, web cookies, yes?


:rolleyes:
 
Wiretaps,4th,2nd,Terrorist,Cars

Rich:

Maybe guns kill people,but so do autos,and not 30 or 40 or 3000 at one time like Terrorist do and your points are well taken. We could outlaw Cars and save 50000 lives a year. We could do away with guns but I don't want to protect my family with a Bow,Sword or Spear. We all do some things for the good of Country and for our fellow man . I gladly say wiretap to preserve our freedom from Terror on the home front. What is FREEDOM worth to you and me? To me a lot. I've been to other countries and I don't think any can compare with this one. I don't like getting on an elevator with guys with Machine Guns and thats what you see in other countries. We all are special and thats what makes us the greatest Country in the history of the World.We can disagree without fear of retribution.:)
 
If the Constitution and Bill of Rights can be violated at whim by the executive branch because they say they can do so and for national security.... its getting to be a nation with apathetic citizens. Our founding fathers fought the British for independence because of some of the things that were done. They had forsaken personal safety to secure their rights. Here we are handing them away on a silver platter for personal safety. The people we are fighting do not beleive in the concept of individual rights. We are fighting them to ensure people have individual rights. Does that mean we should roll in the mud to ensure our safety? If anything that should make us enjoy our rights and liberties more and fight all the harder to secure them against a foriegn enemy or one of the branches of our government. If the founding fathers were here today and those who fought to secure these liberties were asked if we should give them up in time of war I am pretty sure we would get a resounding no.
 
Founding Fathers

The Founding Fathers could never have imagined a nuclear blast or an Airplane full of jet fuel. So their pure intentions are noted and admired but may not be applicable 100 % of the time in our modern world of disease and nuclear suit case bombs. Time changes all things sooner or later. I don't want to see a 9/11 with a nuclear outcome. I don't want to see thousands die from poison gas or disease.I want to see us persevier.:(
 
Wow, that sounds a lot like the stuff usually heard from the anti-gun crowd.

"The Founding Fathers couldn't have envisioned machine guns and rapid-fire assault weapons that can kill dozens with a few pulls of the trigger..."

As for me, I'd rather have my principles shot out from underneath me than put a bullet into them myself.

It looks like both the Left and the Right are equally willing to surrender their freedoms once they're sufficiently scared. That would all be well and good, if it wasn't for the fact that they not only beg to have their freedoms curtailed, but they're adamant about surrendering my freedoms in the bargain.
 
What is FREEDOM worth to you and me? To me a lot.
Click to expand...
Then why would you voluntarily give it up to some future (present?) Executive Branch gone wild?

Again, no one is arguing that wiretaps shouldn't be part of the War on Whatever; no one is even arguing that a Warrant must first be issued to obtain same. FISA allows for warrants to be issued up to 72 hours AFTER the tap is put in place....seems to me that hobbles no executive branch and provides you with some minimal check and balance regarding the Freedoms you (and I) hold so dear.

The only arguments I've heard against this position run:
"I'm frightened."
"Who cares; they only use it for terrorists."
"Don't you know we're at War?"

None of those arguments are substantive; they intentionally appeal to emotion because no argument based on reason will hold up.
Rich
 
The Founding Fathers could never have imagined a nuclear blast or an Airplane full of jet fuel. So their pure intentions are noted and admired but may not be applicable 100 % of the time in our modern world of disease and nuclear suit case bombs. Time changes all things sooner or later. I don't want to see a 9/11 with a nuclear outcome. I don't want to see thousands die from poison gas or disease.I want to see us persevier.
Click to expand...

Thats why they made a process to amend the constitution.

Rich in a previous post said that we support the second amendment here and any argument against the other amendments weakens our arguments for the second amendment. Our founding fathers had to include the Bill of Rights to get the Constitution ratified. Those 10 amendments were put in there as rights the people/individual should have and the government should not violate.

If Mr. Bush feels that the Fourth Amendment is not for our present time he should put it before Congress to be amended and then sent out to the states and people for a vote....

Otherwise he should follow the Fourth Amendment and go to the FISA courts for a warrant. Is Mr. Bush telling us that all the "improvements" in the intellegence field and money we have spent is a facade and is it still broken? We have to resort to shortcuts to get what we need. That should raise a red flag when a branch of the government starts resorting to shortcuts. What happens if a trial comes up and the evidence is based on these wiretaps and the judge declares it tainted and a terrorist walks.

The more government pushes for weaker rights we should pull harder to make sure our rights are maintained.

On the First 10 amendments as a Second Amendment supporter I beleive that we have to fully support those 10 amendments. If we say that the other 9 amendments can be violated at the whim of a branch of government we have opened the Second Amendment for the same violations as Rich has pointed out.
 
What I don't understand, is why nobody was as upset as they are now, when Bill and Hillary Clinton used the IRS and FBI to financially destroy U.S. citizens such as Billy Dale, the White House Travel Office Manager so they could hand the office over to their friend.

As I understand, the phone calls being monitored by the NSA that many say is "domestic wiretapping without warrant" are those coming into the United States from known Al Queda operatives, or suspected Al Queda associates calling into the U.S.

Compare that with Bill and Hillary Clinton's "Security Chief" (who had previously been employed by in Hot Springs as a Bar Bouncer) illegally ordering over 400 FBI files of American citizens, who had the audacity to be Republicans, to be delivered to the White House so those files could be looked over for the sole pupose of political sniping and slander.

The IRS was illegaly used to harrass Billy Dale (who was found not guilty of all charges in less than an hour by the jury that heard the bogus charges) in order to hand the White House Travel office booking business over to their friends, the Tomlison's which they ultimately succeeded in doing, since they put Mr. Dale in Bankruptcy, defending himself against the United States on those trumped up charges.

I didn't see any complaints on that in the mainstream media such as is being offered now.

What the media is doing, is misrepresenting the call monitoring as "Domestic" wiretapping, when the fact is, they are tapping incoming calls from an enemy bent on trying to kill everyone in the United States.

Personally, I think if somebody within the U.S. is entertaining phone calls from Al Queda, the President, whether a Republican or Democrat, is bound by his Oath of Office, and his position as Commander in Chief, to do all within his power to find out how to prevent an attack.

But then again, I am prejudiced against those who want to kill me and my family, and not very "tolerent" of their "rights" do do so.
 
What I don't understand, is why nobody was as upset as they are now, when Bill and Hillary Clinton used the IRS and FBI to financially destroy U.S. citizens such as Billy Dale, the White House Travel Office Manager so they could hand the office over to their friend.
Click to expand...
I do. It is called "Selective Depravity" and is generally a symptom of intense ideological identification. It is a sad afflliction but unhappily quite common in internet fora.
 
I don't trust this administration one bit. They have lied before and will do it again. "Culture of corruption" is a great way to describe the Bush administration.
This issue is not about wire tapping Al-Queda members in the US. We can easily get a warrent for them, and we can do it retroactively for those who we suspect. The problem lies in the fact that their is no oversight on the spying that Bush condones. I am sure that he is using it spy on political opponents. If you don't think they would stoop that low, just look at Joe Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame. Outing a CIA agent doesn't do much for national security. This isn't about security, its about making sure the Republicans win.
 
Good questions Rich.

Points made in other of your posts, this discussion, well taken too. worth thinking about.

That bit about, If you have nothing to hide ....., raised by some, has always bothered me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top