LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   LucasForums Poll (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=607)
-   -   NSA wiretaps? (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=164896)

matt-- 05-15-2006 02:09 AM

NSA wiretaps?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Washington Post
A majority of Americans initially support a controversial National Security Agency program to collect information on telephone calls made in the United States in an effort to identify and investigate potential terrorist threats, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The new survey found that 63 percent of Americans said they found the NSA program to be an acceptable way to investigate terrorism, including 44 percent who strongly endorsed the effort. Another 35 percent said the program was unacceptable, which included 24 percent who strongly objected to it.

A slightly larger majority--66 percent--said they would not be bothered if NSA collected records of personal calls they had made, the poll found.

Underlying those views is the belief that the need to investigate terrorism outweighs privacy concerns. According to the poll, 65 percent of those interviewed said it was more important to investigate potential terrorist threats "even if it intrudes on privacy." Three in 10--31 percent--said it was more important for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats.

So - do you care?

link to article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...200375_pf.html

Samnmax221 05-15-2006 02:17 AM

I support it as long is it is carefully watched (Something will hve to be done about). No one should have to die in a terrorist attack because the intelligence community was unable to monitor suspicuis communications. As for those who say the 4th ammendment protects them from wire-tapping, well thats for the Supreme Court to decide. If you don't like it take an active part in the governing of this country vote, voice your opinion, and the masses will decide.

Dagobahn Eagle 05-15-2006 08:49 AM

Quid custodiet ipsos custodes:rolleyes:?

Darth Manus 05-15-2006 09:08 AM

There's always the temptation to abuse such a system. It's happened before, and it will happen again.

ChAiNz.2da 05-15-2006 09:09 AM

I strongly oppose it, namely because "they" (our current right-wing nutjob ) have already proven it won't be carefully monitored...

It's already been shown by reports that our President chooses to only listen to the Intelligence reports that support his agenda, unlike the several month pre-warning the CIA had already given pre-911.. *shrug*

Once again this is a desperate act of a desperate government body who because they can't get support of their constituents, decide they need to undermine the very basis our government was founded on...

Yeah, I DO vote, I didn't vote for this president (either time), and I'm against terrorism as any normal guy.. but the fact is the government already has this power, it's just that at the moment they have to get 'permission' to do it.. which BTW doesn't even need to be filed for until "after the fact"...

The problem I have with this wiretapping is that it goes unregulated, unpoliced.. and is basically the Bush administration giving the middle finger to the people because he's too incompetent of a "leader" to garner even 40% popularity of the nation. Instead he needs new laws that give him almost a tyranical, monolistic "power of attorney" over the country becuase of his lack of the people's confidence...

Sure it's only 'certain' calls.. for now, but there's nothing in the law binding it to this.. if they want to listen to your private calls or what-not.. there's nothing written to stop it.. what's next? Every single day we're introduced to a new way to lose a little more freedom, and one of these days we're going to fall for it hook-line-and-sinker.. you better keep your eyes open guys & gals..

I mean Hell's Bells.. Clinton get's a blowjob and the Nation is in an uproar.. but then we have some idiot, warmonging, "gotta finish my daddy's work" Captain Clueless, basically making the world hate us, declaring war on the wrong f*cking country... and now is making more enemies across the board... doesn't anyone see something wrong with this?

Don't get me wrong, I love my Country, I hate the Bush administration and no, I seriously doubt Democrats have a better or sound plan either.. but right now we need to prevent some other nutjob like this to ever be in charge of the country again...

so I indeed agree with Samnmax221.. get off your ass and vote, get involved, write letters, make calls.. do a little more than just complain on a forum ;) hehehe (yeah that includes me too).. :xp:

The Source 05-15-2006 04:27 PM

When I was about sixteen, friends and I use to gather at the local donut shop and talk about the NSA (and other intellegance programs), they have been using a wire tapping technique for decades. NSA has been recording U.S. citizens for years. The only difference is that it is out in the open. There are several underground intellegance programs, which operate without the President's knowledge. It was policy in the easy days of the cold war to design these programs to monitor all phone calls, faxes, etc...

After September 11th, the NSA became to fore runner in fighting terrorists. What people don't know is that other departments in the government have designed nano-technology, which will allow them to ease drop without wire tapping. Even if the American public votes against the policy, the wire tapping policy will still go forward.

I am not sure if anyone realizes this, but the government tracks certain book purchases or rentals. If you take out certain books from the library, it is national security's policy to add you name to a list of susspected criminals or terrorists. They have also been doing this for years.

I do not want them listening into my phone calls, emails, or anything of the sorts. However, they have been doing this for decades, and nothing horrible has come from it. All they want to do is get the American public's oky, so it will not look like they have been illeagally doing it for years.

Samnmax221 05-15-2006 05:00 PM

You have to be careful these days not to say anything that could be misinterpreted as a threat

popcorn2008 05-15-2006 05:23 PM

Opposed to... it's our right to have privacy.

Det. Bart Lasiter 05-15-2006 05:48 PM

The third option.

Jeff 05-15-2006 07:26 PM

I'm opposed to it. I think that it is a breach of privacy. If we know that we are being listened to, we would have to watch everything we say, even if it was jokingly. I'd rather not have to do that.

The Source 05-16-2006 12:20 AM

You do know that they can sweep this matter under the rug, and go back to doing this covertly. That way they don't have to seek the American Citizen's oky to run buisness as usual.

matt-- 05-16-2006 01:31 AM

So, because they possibly could be getting away with it if it hadn't come to light, we the people should let them get away with it?

You know, I could possibly get away with murder, but I wouldn't use that as a defense in court.

The Source 05-16-2006 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt--
So, because they possibly could be getting away with it if it hadn't come to light, we the people should let them get away with it?

You know, I could possibly get away with murder, but I wouldn't use that as a defense in court.

Actually, that is not the intention I was trying to make. What I was looking at is that they could go back to carrying out wire-tapping covertly. Regardless about how I or you may feel, they could completely ignore the American public's wishes. I personally don't condone their agenda, and I don't like how the NSA does buisness. However, at the end of the day, they could very well ignore what was made public, and go ahead with wire-tapping without our knowledge again.

Remember, I mentioned that they have been doing this for years. NRO, NSA, and CIA has been wire-tapping Americans without our knowledge.

Congress does this weird thing, which they can fund anything in the world by adding a clause hidden in a non related bill. For example: Lets just say I want funding for a top secret air craft, Steath Bomber, I would add clause into a civil defense bill that send 1.5 billion dollars in incraments to a hidden account. Get it...

Other words, the President can have people vote to see if they will allow the NSA to wire-tap. After the American public says 'No Way Man', the President can still make it happen. He could very well make a clause in a defense bill, that is not named Patriot Act, and slip in a small paragraph about leagalizing wire-tapping. Since the paragraph will be too small to take notice, the Senate will sign the new defense bill into action. After they sign the bill, wire-tapping will become legal. They do this all the time.

matt-- 05-16-2006 05:16 PM

Although it's standard operating procedure to add clauses to unrelated bills for funding purposes, they are certainly more subtle than 1.5 billion dollars to a hidden account. I mean - it wouldn't even be hidden if it were part of a bill.

Also, the President can not give the go ahead for the NSA to wiretap US citizens. The NSA's charter specifically states that they have no business spying on US citizens in domestic affairs.

Furthermore, this scale of wiretapping could very well have to be authorized by the Supreme Court due to the right to privacy enumerated from the Bill of Rights (and upheld by the Supreme Court) and the fourth amendment (illegal search and seizure).

Samnmax221 05-16-2006 05:40 PM

Tacking on has been done for years, it's an everday occurence when introducing bills

Kurgan 05-17-2006 04:24 PM

If they get to spy on us, we the people should get to listen in on government officials' calls.

No? Well then nix it. The "what do you have to hide" people forget the dirty nature of politics. It's called "blackmail" one of the most powerful weapons of coercian used time and again to silence opposition. Privacy and freedom over "security" and spying. I mean really, isn't the point to be watching EVERYONE constantly just in case they might think about committing a crime, in order to catch the 1 in however umpteen million people that might be a potential terrorist?

I pretty much agree with ChAiNz.2da. I don't have a huge hatred of the Bush administration, but I definately think they've set some bad precedents, made some horrible decisions, and I don't think our current president has been a good one for the most part (I voted against him twice, and never for the democrats whose candidates were pathetic or business as usual, just FYI I'm an independant).

ZemmurkTrooper 05-17-2006 08:08 PM

OK, 1.I think its perfectly fine if its used properly, 2. The NSA is using it only for potential terrorists suspects, and 3. What you hear in the press is almost never true, its always blown out of proportion. My father roomed with and is friends with the #2 guy at the CIA (soon to be #1 if im not mistaken since the #1 and #3 guy resigned), and its always interesting to hear what is really happening.

TK-8252 05-17-2006 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZemmurkTrooper
2. The NSA is using it only for potential terrorists suspects

You know this how?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZemmurkTrooper
3. What you hear in the press is almost never true, its always blown out of proportion.

If you mean Fox News, then I'll agree with you there.

The Source 05-17-2006 08:30 PM

Think about this one... If you were to measure the entire United States, from left to right and top to bottom, we live on only two percent. Theoretically, the government is probally using a small percentage for military development and research. We have nuclear sheltters embeded into mountain ranges, which are hidden throughout the middle of the United States.

Oky, what does this have to do with the subject? Well, the money that goes to fund these bases comes from somewhere. Mount Weather was an expensive endevour, which the givernment hides millions in other bills. When it comes to wiretapping, the government will also hide the funding to execute a wiretapping program.

This goes beyond George Bush. George didn't create this wiretapping idea. The NSA and CIA haa been doing this for years. If George doesn't deal with the issue, another President will create a leagal wiretapping program, but call it something else.

I for one don't like the idea, and I will vote against it. However, there is really not much I can do about it becoming leagal behind the scenes.

Think about this one... If Mayor Juliane (sp?) becomes President of the United States, no one will question his initiative to make wire tapping leagal. Why? He has created hiself into a Republican hero. When September 11th occured, his actions create him into a 'Lets Kick Some But" persona. People will believe and do anything this man says. Wire tapping could endup being elected by the United States People in the near future. All it takes is the right person to have the right agenda, and then it all becomes reality. George Bush is not a good communicator, but someone like Julianie (ap?) has the influence that will be needed to pass a wiretapping program. However, the question remains, does he agree with a wire tapping program? Who knows?

TK-8252 05-17-2006 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacLeodCorp
The NSA and CIA haa been doing this for years.

People have been commiting crimes since the beginning of time.

Does that make it acceptable?

Negative...

The Source 05-18-2006 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TK-8252
People have been commiting crimes since the beginning of time.

Does that make it acceptable?

Negative...

You are right it is not acceptable.

popcorn2008 05-19-2006 05:57 PM

It's sad to see people actually believe this is okay. A goverment shouldnt have to resort to spying on citizens. You give them this right and what do they want next?

You have a right to not have your words spied on 24/7. And there have been instances when the CIA investigates innocent people! So no it isnt just for terrorist suspects. It's for suspected people as well.

An entire Anti-Bush group was under federal investigation in California before, simply because the CIA thought they posed a threat to democracy. We have a right to our opinion as said in the constitution. Even the goverment must listen to the law of the land.

Kurgan 05-19-2006 08:11 PM

Let's see.. have probable cause, obtain a warrant from a judge, then do your reasonable searches and the person has a right to an attorney...

This seems more like "well, spy on everybody, you never know who might be a suspect!" Which is what I'd expect a spy agency to do anyway, but it's ripe for abuse, what a bad precedent to set.

Spy on 300+ million people in order to catch a handfull of potential terrorists, and hey, nail all the people who disagree with you or you have something personal against in the bargain! :P

PoiuyWired 05-20-2006 12:47 AM

Think now, WHAT will the collected information go?

Thing is, it can be anywhere, from the stinkin IRS to your local police station. (I assume there is at least some kind of security procedure so the data would not be flying around amok so those mushy talk with my secretary would not end up anywhere near my wife)

Well its not about what to hide and what not to hide, its about what they can do without a warrant. Basically this is a step backwards for civil rights. For some reason Bush is making the country less civil.

And no, lets not start on His stupid SexEd policy...

The Source 05-21-2006 03:08 PM

Lets see:

All you need is a Social Security card, and then you can trace anything about a person. Anyone can track: How much you make, where you work, where you live, what you buy, where you shop, what tyep of health insurance you have, what type of illnessness you have had, what credit cards you have, what loans you have, what degrees you have, how many children you have, etc... All from a simple number, so they can keep track on where, when, and what you are doing.

Wiretapping will bring us one more step closer to communism, and we all know how that ended up. In the very close future, we will have a new system, which will allow the government to follow everything you do, say, or read. Unlike its predicessors, this new system can be used by an employer, health agency, school, etc at no cost at all. All it will require is a thumb print, and a small implant of a nanite below the skin.

NStar type of systems are also a form of control. When you turn NStar on, someone is tracking your whereabouts. They know where you go, where you are, and how long you are traveling.

You see... We already have all these systems in place, and there is no end in tracking a U.S. Citizen's life. Everyday each individual is caught on camera about a hunred plus times. Even though you may not walk into a bank, store, or antything of that nature, there are cameras everywhere. When you stop at a traffic light, or if you are on the highway, you will find a camera at every inch of your journey. A lot of people are not aware that the state of Massachusettes has several cameras on the highway.

When you are online, your I.P. address can track your screen name to a specific service provider, and in turn, they can pin point who you are. If you are using a creditcard, there are endless possibilities to what they can find out.

Wiretapping is a horrible idea, and I also will vote against it. Even if it does not pass, there are still a millions tracking devices that we use day by day, and each one of them is sold to a buyer.

The Doctor 05-21-2006 06:29 PM

Don't care. I'm Canadian :p

But I wouldn't mind if the Canadian government wanted to do it. It's not like I call people and declare Jihad or anything...

Commander Obi-Wan 05-21-2006 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Doctor
Don't care. I'm Canadian :p

But I wouldn't mind if the Canadian government wanted to do it. It's not like I call people and declare Jihad or anything...

You took the words right out of my mouth.....no really.

jawathehutt 05-24-2006 01:08 AM

DROP A BOMB ON BUSH
RUSS FIENGOLD08 STOP THE SPYING

DAMAGTRON151 05-30-2006 10:41 PM

Option #3
 
Where it asked "What does option #1 have to hide?" you never answered the question. What does option #1 have to hide?

DAMAGTRON151 05-30-2006 10:42 PM

Huh. Who knows. That's why I'm asking.

Samnmax221 05-30-2006 10:45 PM

ever hear of a edit button

Kirtan_Loor 06-01-2006 11:27 PM

why are the wiretaps such a big deal right now, i mean, the gov't has been tapping into our private conversations for years, so why the big debate now?

TK-8252 06-03-2006 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chase Windu
just the general population these days is just too damn sensitive to every little damn thng no matter how small and insignifigant(sp?) it is.

The government illegally spying on the private phone calls of possibly millions of innocent Americans, and creating massive databases of every single phone call in the United States - including mine and yours - is neither small nor insignificant.

Kirtan_Loor 06-03-2006 04:20 PM

the gov't has been doing this for about 40 years now. i can't believe that people are so ignorant. TK, you would be shocked if you knew all of the illegal activities that the government was doing, like adding ingredients in our foods to make us addicted and causing us to eat more. why do you think diet pills are so popular these days? the more fat people, the more pills, the more money that comes in. the gov't is greedy and they put the almighty dollar in front of everything else. if you hate it, move to canada.

TK-8252 06-03-2006 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
the gov't has been doing this for about 40 years now.

That makes it alright? Okay. Your logic is superior. Something illegal has been going on for a long time, so it's not a problem. People have been killing and raping for ever. Does that make it alright? By your standards I guess so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
i can't believe that people are so ignorant.

The ones who are ignorant are the ones who say that because the government does something illegally all the time it's not worthy of outrage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
TK, you would be shocked if you knew all of the illegal activities that the government was doing

Right... because I'm so damn ignorant. Even though I'm watching CNN or MSNBC (note not Faux News) almost any time the TV is on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
the gov't is greedy and they put the almighty dollar in front of everything else.

You say that as if I didn't figure that out already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
if you hate it, move to canada.

:rolleyes:

matt-- 06-04-2006 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirtan_Loor
[...]like adding ingredients in our foods to make us addicted and causing us to eat more. why do you think diet pills are so popular these days? the more fat people, the more pills, the more money that comes in. [...]

I'd like to see this substantiated. The government doesn't tend to get involved where the results are quite easily noticable or where the racket is monumental. In this case, both of these conditions are met - the physiological effects of addiction are quite observable, and with some rudimentary analysis, the source can be traced. This would be monumental due to the nature of our nation's food supply and the way food is distributed.

It is much more profitable for government agencies to import already illegal and already addictive drugs. The CIA is commonly accused of this to fund some of their more creative endeavors.

Samnmax221 06-04-2006 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt--
It is much more profitable for government agencies to import already illegal and already addictive drugs. The CIA is commonly accused of this to fund some of their more creative endeavors.

You need to stop hanging out with Branch Davidians

urluckyday 06-04-2006 01:20 PM

How long has the government tapped anyway? Probably since the technology was available....like Chase Windu said...it's probably just because people like to complain that it has turned into such a big deal...it just makes the complainers feel important and get attention...

TK-8252 06-04-2006 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by legowar
How long has the government tapped anyway? Probably since the technology was available....like Chase Windu said...it's probably just because people like to complain that it has turned into such a big deal...it just makes the complainers feel important and get attention...

Or maybe because it is the government breaking the law to invade our privacy. You know, Nixon did these types of things. And he was impeached.

Kirtan_Loor 06-05-2006 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt--
I'd like to see this substantiated. The government doesn't tend to get involved where the results are quite easily noticable or where the racket is monumental. In this case, both of these conditions are met - the physiological effects of addiction are quite observable, and with some rudimentary analysis, the source can be traced. This would be monumental due to the nature of our nation's food supply and the way food is distributed.

It is much more profitable for government agencies to import already illegal and already addictive drugs. The CIA is commonly accused of this to fund some of their more creative endeavors.

you should read the book "Natural Cures 'They' Don't Want You To Know About" by Kevin Trudeau


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.