Government spying
 

Question - Does the Government's spying on possible terrorists REALLY bother you??? or NOT !!

I, for one, do NOT have a problem with it.

I truly believe that locating and stopping a terrorist attack BEFORE it happens, is quite important.

I do trust the Pres on this.
Am I wrong here??

If the government suspected you were a terrorist, would it bother you if they came into your home and searched it without a search warrant?
If you had nothing to hide, it shouldn't bother you, right?

where do you draw the line?

on-ramp
Actually, it would not bother me. (unless they tore up my house !!! )

In the times that we are in ( the threats from terrorism )

That is just the way it is.

And for awhile, we just may have to accept it.

Especially, if you look like , behave like , communicate with , travel to , or call anyone or anything that might associate you with a terrorist organization.

If it looks like a duck...............

We have monitored international calls for many decades and it does not seem to have imperiled our democracy.

brilliant!

Thank you.

You're welcome
:)

It does not bother me one bit that the Govt has been monitoring the radiation levels around Moslem church's and communities for years.

It was done in public and lets see, almost every terrorist in the last 20 years was between the ages of 17 and 45, male and Moslem. If thats not a profile then we need to rethink our stance on protecting our country, its citizens and our way of life, all of which they want to end.

Tim McVey was not Muslim. The crazy guy who bombed the '96 Olympics was not Muslim. Most of the terrorism in this country today is Anti-Abortion right to lifers, Environmental Wackos and PETA.

Now all of that being said, there is no fundamental right to security of any kind in the Constitution of the United States (Physical, monetary, etc). There are direct rights to:

Do I have anything to hide? Well, THATS NONE OF YOUR G0DAMM BUSINESS!

But seriously. I have nothing to hide, but it's still NONE OF YOUR G0DAMM BUSINESS!

I think most anyone would agree that unreasonable search and seizure are prohibited. I think most logical people would also agree that monitoring suspected terrorists would not fall into this category.

as long as they don't happen to think you're the terrorist...

I imagine that one would be happy to get that cleared up. I am monitored daily...and it is painless...but necessary for national security.

I'm very happy for you. You must be very proud.

Some might not view being "monitored daily" as painless (or acceptable) though...

I am just as happy for you. Face it. You are monitored daily too. Every time you go into a store, they are taping you on video cameras to prevent shrinkage. There are cameras on police cars, at red lights, and on unattended radar setups. ATMs and most parking lots have them...as do airports and hotel lobbies. Most freeways have cameras now so traffic can be monitored and the flow can be adjusted. Are these causing you pain?

The only difference is that there is a sign posted at the entry to a military base which reminds you that by entering...you consent to monitoring and search.

Boyz Boyz Boyz.....The facts of life simply are that with the killing capacity of weapons in this age Security trumps all...this has been a fact of life since 1945.....

Now sure your Privacy has been invaded and your Civil Rights abridged a bit...but now is not the time to worry about that...because the moral climate of the nation is still high enough to think that it is deplorable to abuse someones rights....now in 20 or 30 years the moral climate might slip a bit and it will be perfectily justifable to give those laws a new twist of meaning....and thats when you better start to worry.

Quote:

Now sure your Privacy has been invaded and your Civil Rights abridged a bit...but now is not the time to worry about that...because the moral climate of the nation is still high enough to think that it is deplorable to abuse someones rights....now in 20 or 30 years the moral climate might slip a bit and it will be perfectily justifable to give those laws a new twist of meaning....and thats when you better start to worry.

I agree and disagree with tabs. The warrantless searches didn't hurt anyone and were obviously needed. There needs to be a serious debate on this though. And, unfortunately, what kind of advice was the president getting that resulted in not obtaining the warrants?

I think the president was justified with the searches but what I don't understand is why he didn't go to FISA after the fact and just get the warrants? It's unfortunate now that the debate will focus on this instead of the dealing with the real issue. I don't think the president is to blame but I would fire Cheny, personal counsel, and the attorney general. This would show that he accepts accountability and willing to step up to the plate to do what needs to be done.

It bothers me because if the person is a suspected terrorist, there shouldn't be a problem getting a warrant? What's the big deal about getting the warrant?

Is there something the government has to hide by not getting one?

the government has nothing to hide. we're here to help...

LOL the "nanny" mentality......

I hoping the president got bad advice on this one...I'm assuming he did. As if the Saudi's aren't already a problem Iraq can't come on line soon enough.