im split on this one,something tells me our gov will take advantage of this down the road.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071218/pl_nm/...u9leqt1OD0E1vAI

I hope so. Heaven forbid they hear me making dinner plans while they look for terrorist.

Well my thoughts on this are easy [for a change]. I've been watching the 'debate' over this for years. The issue is not phone spying can't be done - the main fight is the government going about doing it illegally when they clearly have an easy process to follow to do so legally. It's another Bush admin activity where they stomp all over the Constitution in their jackboots as if they have the privilege to do so disregarding the fact that they are elected officials of the people. Where does it stop? The evil trends of governments are allowed to go on a rampage after they petition their fear-mongering goals. There is NO need to do this without warrants obtained first - 'free' people need to keep their government's on a leash - I'm not saying it can't be a long leash, but we can't let those we elect establish a pattern of using underhanded manouevres to do what they want without accountability - remember what they say about 'absolute power corrupts...'
I've listed the following links about the recent 'progression downhill' from last May until now. Showing how those being watchdogs are playing a critical role in safeguarding the Constitution.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7050302323.html
http://scholarsandrogues.wordpress.com/200...et-it-for-them/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/washingt...p;partner=MYWAY

Wow, that is scary.. Interception of telecommunications without a warrant!! This means that any communication you have has a chance to be intercepted. I'm not up to date on all the facts on this bill. But I know in Canada, we need a warrant. If you have enough solid information, a warrant is easy to get. Why are these communication compainies doing the spying.. that should be done by intelligence units.

Watch what you say, big brother is listening!!

Must be nice being Canadian and not a target of international terrorist conspiracies hell bent on the destruction of your country and people. Yes, I know there are terrorist in Canada, but you have to admit that Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, and others, are not screaming for the destruction of Canada.



Warrants are often too little too late when trying to root out terrorist cells within ones borders. These actions are consistant when a country is at war. Similar things where done by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and as well as during WWI and WWII. The US government does not have an unlimited capacity to record and investigate every single person electronic/phone messaging. They are focused on known or suspected terrorist activities/people.



Am I wholy confortable about this, no. I am certainly concerned about its use. But, I realize we are at war with an enemy that is in hiding. The US has not had a attack on our soil since 9/11, but there have been over 200 plots stopped partly because of the efforts to monitor messages.



When a nuclear bomb goes off in New York, the last thing anyone will care about is that the goverment was monitoring messages without a warrant. In fact, the public will demand that they should have done more to stop the plot. And you know I'm right.



Let's say that Hellfighter was calling his drug runner in Florida arranging the next shipment of heroin. The US goverment, picks up on this. However, they cannot make an arrest of anyone, because the evidence would not have been obtained properly. Now, of course, they would be on too Hellfighter and his supplier and may begin to follow him and get further warrant's, ect., and then make an arrest based on the new evidence. Hellfighter would argue that it is unfair that the goverment knew about his drug dealing. But Hellfighter should not being doing illegal activities anyway. So I could care less.



Regardless, I feel it is important that the telecommincations companies be freely able to work with the goverment during times of war without penalties of "civil rights" lawsuits. If not, how are we ever going to monitor terrorists? How are we going to stop the next 9/11?

I remember when Echelon first came to light in the early 90's, the Europeans started complaining that the US NSA was sharing their intercepts with US companies, thereby giving those US companies an unfair advantage in their industrial espionage. There were many allegations that US companies had stolen proprietary information from European companies and were beating them to patent application with the foreign company's inventions. That was pre-2001.

The laws on the books at that time made it illegal for US intelligence to gather signal intelligence on its citizens. Allegedly, they worked around this minor handicap by letting five other countries access the data streams and those other country's personnel were the "official" spies. Each country would intercept communications from another country, thereby enabling them all to skirt their domestic spying laws.

There was a widely publicized claim that Echelon could record any conversation, anywhere in the world, in real time. Quite the claim. Obviously, they may have been able to record those conversations, but they clearly didn't have the resources to properly analyze the data and 9/11 stands as evidence of that ... unless you are a conspiracy theorist.

Today, we know that all of our email and web traffic is being captured by the Defense Department's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program. This first came to light when AT&T technician, Mark Klein, turned whistleblower and revealed details of their operation in hubs across the country. Read about it here.

I'm certainly not personally threatened that the US government can read, record and store every email I send, as I have nothing to hide. But, what about those pre-2001 arguments?

What happens if the government decides to help one of their favored companies? For example, what if AT&T donates heavily to the Clinton campaign and then, once in office, she rewards their support by giving them access to all Verizon and Sprint company communications? Worse yet, what if she decided to give our gaming strats to DeV??? Or, what happens if in 50 years from now our government decides to ban guns and takes away our few remaining liberties?

It strikes me as ludicrous that anyone would feel truly comfortable giving any government unfettered access to any and all communication.

Polls show that a majority of Americans feel that big business has too much influence on government. Well, this bill illustrates that when it comes to the government/big business nexus, it truly is a two way street. This bill just formalizes the arrangement.

Warrants are often too little too late when trying to root out terrorist cells within ones borders.
When a nuclear bomb goes off in New York, the last thing anyone will care about is that the goverment was monitoring messages
********************************************************************************
***********
Where is your evidence for this?
The FISA court is secret. The government could go there at any time and get a warrant to wiretap and none of the records are made public. It is my understanding that in the history of the court they have only turned down a request for a warrant a very few times.
The nly reason to avoid the court is that you want to spy on people that you have no evidence against, which would be unconstituional. But who cares about the constitution anymore right?
Also if a nuclear bomb goes off in New York what ws the point of all the spying? It didn't work very well did it?



This post has been edited by Midnight Rambler: 12/18/07 1:39pm

So they can listen to any conversation to determine if the person is involved with criminal activity. There are a great deal more ways to go around it then to let them have access to all private communication. That's why warrants were needed in the first place.

There are also exigent circumstances that is used in Canada for emergency situations. My understanding of this bill is that no private citizen can now bring about a law suit against a private telecommunication company for intercepting their coommunication, even if there is no illegal offences occurring.

This sure takes away a great deal of privacy and rights for the legal, law abiding citizens.

Terrorism is huge in Canada as well. If you think Canada has not been a target, I can a sure you we have. But there are many ways to fight terrorism without taking away the rights of the decent, law abiding citizens, which there are more of then terrorists or drug dealers.

IMO, terrorists should have automatic death penalty and drug dealers should have death penalty on second offence. Maybe it won't look so appealing to be involved with criminal activity.

Acts of terrorism have been happening for a long time, 911 made it out right visible that it's still active. Todays communication via television, radio, internet, etc makes it more real for the average citizen. What about Pearl Harbour.... that in itself was an act of terrorism in my opinion.



Using exigent circumstances, one could obtain records in a heart beat without a warrant. It's done on a daily bases, for the best interest and safety of public interest.

JMO

First, No offense to my Canadian friends!!! I love and cherish y'all! Eh!

Pearl Harbor was an act of war. 911 was an act of war.
The difference is that the enemy of 911 was among us.

One can't obtain a warrant without sufficient cause. But sufficient cause was obviously not there to stop 911.

Again, we KNOW the enemy is trying to destroy us. maybe with one of the missing nukes from the Soviet empire.
US Attorney: Judge we need a warrant to wiretap "The Healthy Muslim Fund" of NewYork.
Judge: On what grounds.
US Attorney: Israel intelligence thinks that a member of that group may have knowledge of a nuuclear bomb.
Judge: Do you have a written statement or any other corrabarating evidence?
US Attorney: No
Judge: Get lost.
Kaboooooom!

Can't argue against your fantasies Capt.

Let's say Hellfighter used as an example as a drug lord is highly unlikely since he doesn't even touch pot and is lacto-vegetarian. Let's say that analogy would be as humourous as me commenting with rationale about Captain Rocket in the act of pimping out one or more of his closest female loved ones....

and mr.Rocket, let's also say what you don't mind at all your bimbo-headed buddy Bush doing is what all those list of bad guys you mention did without fear of people speaking up - decisions made without fear of consequences- your mom, brother, sister disappears and no one is accountable- what would you say then Mr.Rocket- you know they're innocent but you have bush's henchmen telling you by executive privileges you can't know where they are-they don't have a lawyer- who their accusers are, nor what is being done to them- I think your thinking you yourself are immune from of all of this... but when it comes the day you are accused by someone unknown of being 'american Taliban Rocket' and get whisked away for waterboarding - what will you do without those protections that are supposed to safeguard you.....?

So what you're saying is you want the tearing up of the constitution in favour of goose-stepping Napoleon's YOU elected. I fear you have no idea what freedom is really about and why protections are in place to guarantee mad-minds don't gradually chip away at its foundations to the point where suddenly the corrupted government has its own goons coming for those last remnants of freedom believers in the middle of the night.

"Here in the USA we...."
Repeatedly you keep making this a national issue as if foreigners miss some well-guarded point only US neo-cons are privvy to.
So while you think Canadians may be offended by the un-logic you use, I myself feel some pity that you don't see how you weaken your arguments resorting to that 'crutch' to lean on as if it has some credence. Sorry- but it impresses me not at all.
You need to study Canadian headlines too to understand we indeed are in harm's way of terrorists-somehow you gloss over the thwarted Toronto attack I mentioned in detail to you not too long ago.
And repeatedly I remind you 70% of Americans disagree with Bush's anti-terrorist policies. Many Americans disagree with this big-brother policy so please wise up and understand this spin you like to put on these policies as one condoned by the majority of Americans falls on its face. Point in case is fellow Americans differing from your opinions in this very thread!

Your Congress and senators, and watchdog groups are in place to make sure lunatics don't undermine freedom's credibility as seen by the rest of the world. If the USA can't be seen as the cornerstone of upholding freedom in the world then you'll see the valued alliances shy away- and here's another history lesson for you- Pearl Harbour happened because the USA's isolationist fevour prior to Dec 41-though valid- proved being alone with a maverick attitude to neighbours is a dangerous self-destructing policy.

You say 9-11 is comparble to Pearl Harbour- do you know your history- Bin Laden and his goons were waging war with the West long before sep.11th - thus it was no declaration of a war. How many years before were the same buildings bombed?

You learn well from Bush and cronies, Mr.Rocket in conjuring up hypothetical disasters as a pretext for taking pre-emptive drastic actions where none is needed. Your examples are pure speculations... your intent is fear-mongering- your desire is to get everyone besides yourself to run around like headless chickens ; perhaps just to console yourself that you are incapable of being sound of mind like the majority.

If you want to really understand how governments reap terror on its citizens by acting out secretive covert activities then start studying dictatorships and how their goons operate and how the rest of societies foundations are brought in line to support them.. ie, the media and communications.

And the thing about judge saying 'get lost'.... wow- If a judge lives in the city where some worthwhile proof shows a bomb will vapourise him and all its citizens - do you honestly he's going to utter those words.


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 12/18/07 9:49pm

Pearl Harbour was terrorism in my opinion.. many civilian victims. This was a plan put in place with people working on the inside providing the enemy with vital information as to what was where, providing pictures and photographs. Maybe the informants didn't set the bombs off personally, but there information provided the means and ends to the destruction. (internal cells)

I don't expect all to agree with my opinion, but I base mine on the terrorism training I had while being part of a specialty unit after 911. Most information is received through informants. In order to get a warrant you do not need infomants names or written statements. That in itself would put the informant in an vulnerable position. You just have to state that the informant has provided reliable information in the past, unknown reliability or why you believe it's true. There are other ways to lock up a person of interest... especially with this information. GPS is a great asset to many areas of policing.

If you really knew what goes on already, many people would be paranoid without having the new legislation.

IMO, it's all about power to Bush and wanting to leave a mark before his departure.

So am I, because on the one hand, hell no I dont want them listening in on my phone conversations! Because otoh, if your not doing anything wrong,they wont find anything, so what have you got to be scared of anyway?

But no, I dont like it...

im split because for once i agree with snot but at the same time ,in the back of my mind im thinking exactly (with out posting) what david posted.the bill seems to broad,do we really hae a say any more?

It's statements like this that make me wonder what planet the left is living on.....really hoping I'm misunderstanding....

But guessing not after reading this from Hellfighter:

"You learn well from Bush and cronies, Mr.Rocket in conjuring up hypothetical disasters as a pretext for taking pre-emptive drastic actions where none is needed. Your examples are pure speculations... your intent is fear-mongering- your desire is to get everyone besides yourself to run around like headless chickens ; perhaps just to console yourself that you are incapable of being sound of mind like the majority."

If you think it's pure fear mongering that there can and will be an attack on the US I think you are the one that is incapable of sound mind. Those towel heads didn't come over here and bake us cookies. And our ports and entries to this country are laughably controled. It's not a matter of if but when one of these catastrophic events takes place. So maybe its not a nuke. Maybe they just blow up the Rose Bowl with 85,000 people in it. Or some wonderful biological agent released in downtown NY. When it does you and your cronies will be the first one's moaning about how Bush was asleep at the wheel and he should have been personally monitoring the mail, phone calls, and diary entries of Osama, Muhammad, Akbar, and all their slurpee selling friends. I'm sick of hearing everyone whine about their "freedom". Fact is we haven't been attacked since 911. And like it or not we ARE AT WAR. We forget that we might have to sacrifice a bit durring times of conflict. So if they have to listen to Mike Moore's, The Pope's, and yes even your phone calls to prevent even one person from dying then damn right they should do it. Waterboard the whole lot of them daily if it saves lives. I guess that makes me a neo con, ditto headed, second class, no brain having, thoughtless, peabrain but I'm going to sleep well tonight knowing that we're trying to stop these bastards from killing people here and around the world. I haven't forgoten that on the planet I live on two buildings that employed 10's of thousands of people were hit by two planes, another hit the pentagon, and yet another crashed in a field in PA. All piloted by a network of nut jobs not from this country. It was not hypothetical and we are not going to keep it from happening again by talking about our feelings, closing our eyes, or negotiating with these people. Action and diligence is going to keep it from happening and is why we are still without another attack today. Poo Poo the methods all you want but they have been effective and I hope they keep doing all they have to do to keep producing the results they have since that day.