TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Some NSA News (hope they're not tapping me right now...)
Pages (5): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco Because it worked so well prior to 9-11?

The intelligence agencies did their job just fine as far as 9-11 goes. There were plenty of warning of an attack, which this administration ignored!

quote:

Originally posted by Sunflower ...Is the increase in security worth losing another inch of your privacy and freedom? I'm truly interested in your response...

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN ...i dont wish anyone to die from future terror attacks (in any country), but where do you draw the line on how far youre willing to oppress your people in order to protect them?

I won't draw it here, that's for sure.

Is this method of gathering intel resulting in a loss of some "privacy" for all Americans? Yes. An extremely MINUTE one, for sure...almost imperceptable. And certainly the impact on the average American will not likely ever be felt or be a problem.

Does the trade-off of better intel and the net result of preventing more attacks easily off-set the minute losses in our "privacy"? HELL YES it does!

I have weighed this carefully enough. It's not a rash decision. The world is not the same place it was before the communication age, and now we need progressive laws that keep pace with progressive technology. To turn a blind eye in the name of protecting antiquated intel gathering restrictions would be foolish and pointless, especially considering the ramifications that protecting this idealism could entail.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The intelligence agencies did their job just fine as far as 9-11 goes. There were plenty of warning of an attack, which this administration ignored!

blah, blah, blah.....you want to talk about what Clinton's administration ignored too? This isn't a Bush failure, so much as it was an over-all intel failure that started long before 9-11.

I understand where you're coming from. I just fear that allowing this to be tolerated (plus they tried to keep it secret) will result in americans allowing more privacy to be taken away. At what point would you draw the line? Do you think that by that time you would draw the line that you would be able to stop the momentum of taking privacy away for security reasons?

Yes, I absolutely am certain of it; It's called "The Vote". Any Politician or party that ever tries to take too much control can and will get voted out of office.

Besides, Bush isn't a Dictator. A large number of Democrats have supported him on these Security issues as well. They voted for them in fact.

Yes, of course they can get voted out. Like I said earlier, these changes will probably occur very slowly over time. Probably small enough changes so that you wouldn't notice it unless you looked back several years.

quote:

Besides, Bush isn't a Dictator. A large number of Democrats have supported him on these Security issues as well. They voted for them in fact.

yea, I'm just speaking from a general american's view.


At what point would you say to yourself "Woah I don't think I'm comfortable with that"

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z ^^ True. (<--EDIT: That was in reference to Groundhogboy's post preceding donnybrasco's) I hate arguments of the form "Well, it's the way it is/has been for a while, so we should accept it [edit 2]-> or what's the big deal?" Common practice doesn't justify an act.

It was a statement, not a fact.
Otherwise I probably would have provided some insight...
(just a thought)

I thought the States were in a War Against Terrorism� btw?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The intelligence agencies did their job just fine as far as 9-11 goes. There were plenty of warning of an attack, which this administration ignored!

Yea! Because Clinton's government did sooooo much on that front.
Bush is in office how many months and 9/11 happens; yea, must have been Bush's fault.
That arguement is so old and cliche....

The States were being attacked for YEARS before 9-11; wake up.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Yeah, I love it when you silly Bush apologists defend any and everything Bush says and does, damn the consequences and contradictions:

i guess you can call me a FDR apologist too. (that term is getting played btw) if any president did the same, i would defend it. same can't be said for you only because it would be your party's president and i think you would lack the moral courage to be so indignant if that were the case.
it's a matter of ideology, not demagoguery. it seems demagoguery is the only thing you are good at. keep it up.

quote:

Well putting the questionable problems of this Adminstration's actions aside for a moment, let's consider the possible legal ramifications of what these phone companies have done: And one doesn't even need to be a liberal to wonder such a basic issue as this.

no stupid. what you fail to recognize, being a liberal, is that you and your lost party want us to "connect the dots, without us being able to collect the dots." to quote James Lileks. dangerously thinking that the dots will miraculously show themselves to us and say "hey! i'm right here."

quote:

Well it's a pity that the NSA along with the phone companies actually have to follow the law first and foremost before obtaining such private information, otherwise we become no better than the fucking bastards we are trying to track down and destroy in the first place.

oh please i've told you before. let the the big boys handle the big jobs.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco blah, blah, blah.....you want to talk about what Clinton's administration ignored too? This isn't a Bush failure, so much as it was an over-all intel failure that started long before 9-11.

See the problem is, most of the liberals and libertarians on this board weren't really blown away by Clinton, either. We're more followers of own personal principles than a party stereotype. They've all got their flaws, but I personally feel that the flaws of the current administration are far worse than seen in my lifetime and worse than a lot of other periods in history.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco Is this method of gathering intel resulting in a loss of some "privacy" for all Americans? Yes. An extremely MINUTE one, for sure...almost imperceptable. And certainly the impact on the average American will not likely ever be felt or a problem.

How do you know how imperceptable and MINUTE they are?? The administration blocks EVERY investigation lately by not giving the Justice Department clearance. I mean, that's why the probe into the wiretapping got shut down. You blindly follow someone who you've seen down the most perilous road. What do they have to hide? Do they really distrust the Justice Department to leak info? I mean, they didn't ascend that high easily.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo i guess you can call me a FDR apologist too. (that term is getting played btw) if any president did the same, i would defend it. same can't be said for you only because it would be your party's president and i think you would lack the moral courage to be so indignant if that were the case. it's a matter of ideology, not demagoguery. it seems demagoguery is the only thing you are good at. keep it up.

FDR was one of the worst presidents at preserving civil liberties and the spirit of democracy. However, a great president at fighting a war (something I'm afraid I give Bush no credit at all) and implementing Keynesian theory with some fortuitious success.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy How do you know how imperceptable and MINUTE they are?? The administration blocks EVERY investigation lately by not giving the Justice Department clearance. I mean, that's why the probe into the wiretapping got shut down. You blindly follow someone who you've seen down the most perilous road. What do they have to hide? Do they really distrust the Justice Department to leak info? I mean, they didn't ascend that high easily.

I have personally been involved with some pretty heavy-duty legal issues via our Justice System, and no, I don't trust the Justice System to be able to keep things under wraps! I've seen lawyers leak things to each other, all to benefit some pretty shady clientele!

It's not an Intel Community, it's a Justice System. People in the Intel Community get security clearances for a reason. Once information is out of their area of expertise and protection, leaks are EASILY possible.

But this aside theory, I'm willing to bet that;

A.) The government isn't listening in on any calls that aren't national security related, because they have neither the time nor man-power to bother with anything else in this new age of war on terrorism...not to mention all the out-cry that there would be if they tried to convict someone of something other than terrorism using wire-tapping.

B.) They need to keep what they know to themselves for the sake of national security.

C.) The U.S. Government ultimately has MY best interests as a U.S. Citizen at heart.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunflower At what point would you say to yourself "Woah I don't think I'm comfortable with that"

I'd have to say when they start using wire-taps to lock us up for all the minute things that everyone on here is so fearful of.

But until that day happens, I'm not going to worry about it, because I seriously doubt it will EVER come, and in the meantime I'll feel more at ease knowing that the government is more than likely, getting better at catching the real threats to our freedom; Terrorists.

Here is the text of the speech this morning:

quote:

After September the 11th, I vowed to the American people that our government would do everything within the law to protect them against another terrorist attack. As part of this effort, I authorized the National Security Agency to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al-Qaida and related terrorist organizations. In other words, if al-Qaida or their associates are making calls into the United States or out of the United States, we want to know what they're saying. Today there are new claims about other ways we are tracking down al-Qaida to prevent attacks on America. I want to make some important points about what the government is doing and what the government is not doing. First, our international activities strictly target al-Qaida and their known affiliates. Al-Qaida is our enemy, and we want to know their plans. Second, the government does not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval. Third, the intelligence activities I authorized are lawful and have been briefed to appropriate members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat. Fourth, the privacy of ordinary Americans is fiercely protected in all our activities. We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans. Our efforts are focused on links to al-Qaida and their known affiliates. So far we've been very successful in preventing another attack on our soil. As a general matter, every time sensitive intelligence is leaked, it hurts our ability to defeat this enemy. Our most important job is to protect the American people from another attack, and we will do so within the laws of our country. Thank you.

He first said:

quote:

Today there are new claims about other ways we are tracking down al-Qaida to prevent attacks on America. I want to make some important points about what the government is doing and what the government is not doing.

I'm assuming that the 'new claims' he speaks of are the allegation made in the USA Today article that the NSA is compiling a database of phone numbers that millions of americans call domestically. As far as I know, the allegation is compiling numbers, NOT listening to phone calls.


but he goes on to say:

quote:

Second, the government does not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval.

Recall that the allegation was compiling numbers not listening to phone calls. Why not address the allegation? He's obvuously trying to confuse the public that the issue is about listening to phone calls when it's not. That's why he can confidently say

quote:

Second, the government does not listen to domestic phone calls without court approval.

But recall, the issue is gathering data.




He also goes on to say:

quote:

Third, the intelligence activities I authorized are lawful and have been briefed to appropriate members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat.

Pardon me, but what supreme court decision or federal law gives rise to a suspension of our constitutional rights when the executive branch notifies the legislative branch that they are going to infringe on those rights? Can someone cite the case or federal law that creates that exception.

Saying that something is lawful does not make it so. Saying that one briefed congress does not make it lawful either. Can someone really defend this defense?

But there is more:

quote:

We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans.

No one claimed that his NSA is mining the personal lives of anyone. He obfuscates again.


Can any conservative here really defend this speech?

^^^But that's exactly what everyone THINKS is going on. He's addressing the paranoia and the hype, imho.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco But this aside theory, I'm willing to bet that; A.) The government isn't listening in on any calls that aren't national security related, because they have neither the time nor man-power to bother with anything else in this new age of war on terrorism...not to mention all the out-cry that there would be if they tried to convict someone of something other than terrorism using wire-tapping.

How much do you want to bet? From previous postings:

Two years ago, Ashcroft rescinded a 1995 guideline directing that information obtained through a national security letter about a U.S. citizen or resident �shall be destroyed by the FBI and not further disseminated� if it proves �not relevant to the purposes for which it was collected.� Ashcroft�s new order was that �the FBI shall retain� all records it collects and �may disseminate� them freely among federal agencies.

The same order directed the FBI to develop �data mining� technology to probe for hidden links among the people in its growing cache of electronic files. According to an FBI status report, the bureau�s office of intelligence began operating in January 2004 a new Investigative Data Warehouse, based on the same Oracle technology used by the CIA. The CIA is generally forbidden to keep such files on Americans.
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=303532

quote:

C.) The U.S. Government ultimately has MY best interests as a U.S. Citizen at heart.

Wow. Simply wow. You're a democrat right? I thought I remember you saying you were libertarian but that's about as far away from libertarian as I can imagine ... asides from being the government.

1995 versus post 9-11? Do you even have to ask why the rules have changed.

I'm certainly not a Democrat, lol.

So you think that the U.S. Government and all of it's employees (who are, after all, not American citizens themselves, but are in fact mindless minions following every order by the Government to subjugate their fellow Americans), is at LEAST as interested in stopping terrorism as they are in bringing us all to our knees via a grand conspiracy system...which starts with compiling data on phone usage, soon to be followed by wire-tapping, which leads to millions of people ending up as what exactly???

Where is Trancer X and his conspiracy web-site links? He'd be eating this crap up.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco ^^^But that's exactly what everyone THINKS is going on. He's addressing the paranoia and the hype, imho.

hmmm no, he's avoiding the issue. what about the other question that i posed?

What supreme court case or federal statute creates an exception to constitutional rights when the president advises several members of congress that he's suspending some american's rights?


or are you going to avoid the question too? perhaps another bush loyalist can tackle this question.

I am not THAT familiar with Federal Law that I can site you cases, but I don't think he's saying that he's doing this. You're fracturing his speech so much that it's losing it's inter-related meaning to you.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco I am not THAT familiar with Federal Law that I can site you cases, but I don't think he's saying that he's doing this. You're fracturing his speech so much that it's losing it's inter-related meaning to you.

it's called critical analysis around here or critical reasoning or deconstruct, but i won't hold that against you.

in any case, i don't believe such a law exists. given that he repeats it so much, i'm sure many americans believe that such an exception exists.

this is a sad state of affairs when president uses rhetorical machinations to confuse the public and garner support for his arguably illegal acts. the founding fathers must be looking at the US in complete sadness and dismay.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco 1995 versus post 9-11? Do you even have to ask why the rules have changed. I'm certainly not a Democrat, lol. So you think that the U.S. Government and all of it's employees (who are, after all, not American citizens themselves, but are in fact mindless minions following every order by the Government to subjugate their fellow Americans), is at LEAST as interested in stopping terrorism as they are in bringing us all to our knees via a grand conspiracy system...which starts with compiling data on phone usage, soon to be followed by wire-tapping, which leads to millions of people to ending up as what exactly??? Where is Trancer X and his conspiracy web-site links? He'd be eating this crap up.

Sigh ... this is what you posted:

quote:

A.) The government isn't listening in on any calls that aren't national security related, because they have neither the time nor man-power to bother with anything else in this new age of war on terrorism...not to mention all the out-cry that there would be if they tried to convict someone of something other than terrorism using wire-tapping.

This is what I posted:

quote:

Two years ago, Ashcroft rescinded a 1995 guideline directing that information obtained through a national security letter about a U.S. citizen or resident �shall be destroyed by the FBI and not further disseminated� if it proves �not relevant to the purposes for which it was collected.� Ashcroft�s new order was that �the FBI shall retain� all records it collects and �may disseminate� them freely among federal agencies.

Do you not understand what the fuck is going on here? I can only conclude as such since you relied on a red-herring and obfuscation to substantiate your argument as opposed to actually refuting my argument (the year of the legislation ffs ... hey dumbass the bill of rights was passed pre 9/11 ergo we should probably ignore that right??). Here, allow me to put it in words such that you can understand:

Contrary to your argument that the government does NOT listen in on calls unrelated to national security, THEY DO. Contrary to your argument that wouldn't use that data if it were unrrelated to terrorism, THEY DO. Why the fuck else would the attorney general rescind an order to destroy data unrrelated to terrorism and retain the right to freely distribute that data among federal agencies? How fucking daft are you? Donny ... this is really getting tedious. How many times do we have to go through this same procedure where you half-ass address my arguments and I pull you through the ringer? If you have an argument put some goddamn time into it to back it up. Otherwise don't bother replying to any of my posts.

And you're not a democrat? Well christ you certainly surprised me with that statement that you made.

I have not used personal attacks aganist you OC? Why have you stooped to doing it?

I stopped reading your post at "dumb-ass".

So if this is to be a thread of profanity, I'm not going to debate you anymore about this issue. Instead, I will just return your verbal offerings, with one of my own;

FUCK YOU!!

Have a nice day, dumb-ass.

he called you a dumbass, coz you dont respond to the issues raised by other posters. if someone is gonna take the time to read your half-assed replies & respond, at least have the common decency to do the same. this thread just reads like everyone is handing you your arse, and you just wander around ignoring the thrashing that youre getting. its just intellectually dishonest

quote:

Originally posted by occrider FDR was one of the worst presidents at preserving civil liberties and the spirit of democracy. However, a great president at fighting a war (something I'm afraid I give Bush no credit at all)

i agree to an extent, but you shouldn't be afraid. either give credit for whats been done, or no credit at all. let history decide like you've done with FDR.

my random rant:

It's 4 am and I was just thinking, the culture has become so institutionalized, all we can ever do is talk about how we are outraged with our government. Things like the American Revolution, patriotism, etc. are forgotten, they're in the past. Revolutions can't happen today in America, there's nobody who would give up everything they have... Who's gonna take it to the streets, the beer-guzzling men who spend most of their free time watching futbol and baseball instead of actually doing some physical activity? Family Guy and American Idol drones who've been so brainwashed by TV, they think Stephen Colbert is a republican? Who will risk losing their peaceful lifestyle, their moderate-paying job, etc.? Chuck Palahniuk was right, It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything. Even the John Stewart worshipping liberal and libertarian college students may rant about how they hate the administration while they're feeling safe and secure, their tuition being paid by their parents... but all those words are empty if they don't actually lead to any action. Face it, when you need to come up with several thousand dollars to pay for rent / food / tuition / gas, political change and revolution fade out of your mind.

I may be wrong, but i think that the only politically active people who are insane enough to actually do something are those crazy liberal hippies that strip naked for greenpeace rallies. The rest of the crowd shrugs news like breach of Constitution off and goes on with their lives; the more politically inclined simply rant in their blogs about it. It's the radical groups that have enough crazy people that they can bring change. This government has become something of its own, a beast that functions while disregarding feedback from the community that it's supposed to serve. What happened to the government of the people, by the people, for the people? When did the giant corporations take over? When did money become more potent than rational thought? How did we become the United States of Walmart, what happened to personal responsibility and why do we preach one fo the most idiotic concepts in the world - political correctness - while subjecting thousands of people every day to unfair racial profiling and racism?

We have become sheep, the society is soulless. Everything is money, money, money, power. I wanted to say the culture has degraded, but that's not true - there IS no culture. Our so-called culture is watching the latest reality show on TV, watching people at each other's throats for money (seriously what example does such shows set for our kids?), shopping, making unbelievably mindnumbing sequels to and remakes of movies, doing more shopping because we are bombarded by ads reminding us to do shopping so that we don't become coldhearted un-Americans if we don't buy gifts for our loved ones when the companies say we should give them gifts...

That's as cohesive as my thoughts get at 4am, so please excuse me if my 2 cents are not in mint condition.

quote:

Originally posted by whiskers my random rant: It's 4 am and I was just thinking, the culture has become so institutionalized, all we can ever do is talk about how we are outraged with our government. Things like the American Revolution, patriotism, etc. are forgotten, they're in the past. Revolutions can't happen today in America, there's nobody who would give up everything they have... Who's gonna take it to the streets, the beer-guzzling men who spend most of their free time watching futbol and baseball instead of actually doing some physical activity? Family Guy and American Idol drones who've been so brainwashed by TV, they think Stephen Colbert is a republican? Who will risk losing their peaceful lifestyle, their moderate-paying job, etc.? Chuck Palahniuk was right, It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything. Even the John Stewart worshipping liberal and libertarian college students may rant about how they hate the administration while they're feeling safe and secure, their tuition being paid by their parents... but all those words are empty if they don't actually lead to any action. Face it, when you need to come up with several thousand dollars to pay for rent / food / tuition / gas, political change and revolution fade out of your mind. I may be wrong, but i think that the only politically active people who are insane enough to actually do something are those crazy liberal hippies that strip naked for greenpeace rallies. The rest of the crowd shrugs news like breach of Constitution off and goes on with their lives; the more politically inclined simply rant in their blogs about it. It's the radical groups that have enough crazy people that they can bring change. This government has become something of its own, a beast that functions while disregarding feedback from the community that it's supposed to serve. What happened to the government of the people, by the people, for the people? When did the giant corporations take over? When did money become more potent than rational thought? How did we become the United States of Walmart, what happened to personal responsibility and why do we preach one fo the most idiotic concepts in the world - political correctness - while subjecting thousands of people every day to unfair racial profiling and racism? We have become sheep, the society is soulless. Everything is money, money, money, power. I wanted to say the culture has degraded, but that's not true - there IS no culture. Our so-called culture is watching the latest reality show on TV, watching people at each other's throats for money (seriously what example does such shows set for our kids?), shopping, making unbelievably mindnumbing sequels to and remakes of movies, doing more shopping because we are bombarded by ads reminding us to do shopping so that we don't become coldhearted un-Americans if we don't buy gifts for our loved ones when the companies say we should give them gifts... That's as cohesive as my thoughts get at 4am, so please excuse me if my 2 cents are not in mint condition.

Wow that's pretty much what I was thinking minus the last paragraph.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.