If the terrorists have you in such dire fear for your safety that they are changing your actions, making you give up rights, making you do things that you shouldn't, making you terrified...

They've won.

Relevance?

Where did you gather those conlusions. If you are not a little more worried since 9/11 then you are complacent. I am quite comfortable, relaxed, and know that there are a lot of things going on in the world outside our borders by very dedicated individuals who are making sure that we never have a repeat.;) My actions have not changed and my rights have not been taken away. On the contrary you have been sold a bill of goods that have made you fear and become terrified that you have lost something you have not. Answer me this, any of you, specifically what has happened DIRECTLY to you where you have lost a right? Anything. Anybody.

Your ignorance about the world around you outside your current life.

Incorrect.

But what is the relevance of the prior terrorist investigations? Were they too busy to get a FISA warrant, too?

I have no idea and neither do you. I know that they were conducted and actively chased, and in many cases captured. The dicotomy here is that people whine because of 9/11 and then they whine because actions were taken to prevent another 9/11, you can't have it both ways.

So HM, specifically what has happened DIRECTLY to you where you have lost a right? Anything.

I need legal standing to discuss a political issue?

*cough*he'sahypocrit*cough*

And they did it with warrants. Great! Let's go back to that.

No, lets not deviate. HM, specifically what has happened DIRECTLY to you where you have lost a right? Anything. Come on, your rights are so under attack, describe your personal loss.

That's silly. It's like asking you "what terrorism has specifically happened to you, that you're willing to give up these rights?"

9/11. Direct loss.

Same for you SPEX, specifically what has happened DIRECTLY to you where you have lost a right? Anything. Come on, your rights are so under attack, describe your personal loss. Anything??? I really want to know how you have been personally affected. Come on, I am open to hear your stories.

You died?

You are so funny!:rotflol:

How can I know? They're doing it in SECRET! That's the point. No justification, no probable cause, no court approval, nothing. For all I know, they've gotten all my records about everyfuckingthing I've done through my entire life. After all, I am impotent....er...important.

Why don't you ask the lawyer in the northwest US who was arrested for the Madrid bombings.:banghead:

Come on fellas, nothing. No personal loss of any kind? :eek:

Well I would say that you are guessing, that in some way you are just "terrified" that something has happened to you, but you really don't know if something has or not. But because you heard that the government was evesdropping on calls that originated from outside the US into the US, on suspected terrorist activity that now you are worried. Hmmmmmm.....:rolleyes:

So you basically have nothing and are just "terrified" as well that something has happened and you really just don't know it. Ok. :rolleyes:

:violin:

:violin:


:violin:



:violin:




:violin:

Whether it happens to me is irrellevant. It is happening. It has been admitted.

It is most rellevent because it is not happening you. It is happening to others who are under suspicion . What is rellevent is that you are not and have not been affected. Have you? But you fear it. The big bad brother is coming after you and your terrorist friends right??? I doubt it. The point is you are not and have not been affected by any of this. You are drinking way to much of the electric kool aid. Go back to water.;) Your fears are unfounded.

I never said they were after me. I said they are breaking the law.

And I say you can't prove that, nor can anyone else.

They admitted it.

Original source citation please.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14393611/

Warrantless wiretaps are illegal inside the US. They admitted using warrantless wiretaps inside the US. There are emergency workarounds in the form of the FISA court. They did not follow that law.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/br...21271655.shtml

Warrantless/subpoenaless searches are illegal. They have an end-run around this in the form of "national security letters" which are supposed to be used for emergencies. But they broke the law even in their workaround.

Hey, TheMercenary--

I have to leave for a while, but please don't go away. You and I disagree completely on this subject, and I want to talk with you about it here in this forum. I'd love to hear your side of the story, your reasoning. Because I do not understand how an otherwise reasonable sounding person can be convinced of some of the postitions you've stated here. But tomorrow for me. Y'all keep on tawkin amongst yourselves, m'kay? But don't drive him off.

Ok now we are finally at the meat of the matter. The ACLU got one judge to stop the wiretaps. This does not make them illegal because it would need to go to the Supreme Court for that final ruling. Only the ACLU, through one judge, said so. Do you follow the appeals of the 9th Circuit Court out on the Left Coast much? Do you know how many of those rulings are overturned?

Your "they" is the ACLU???

So Muller appears on Capitol Hill under fire from the Dems. Ok, no problem there. Mistakes in the issuing of letters by the FBI for information were made. Nothing to do with wire taps there sparky.

The difference is that you are willing to let a few, say 9 or 10, terrorists slip through the cracks because you feel your rights are being violated, even though we have pretty much proven that none of your personal rights have been violated, while I am willing to let the Federal Government snoop around the people they suspect of wrong doing at the chance that a few people may be inconvenienced, and capture the 9 or 10 terrorists.

Nobody will be driving me off skippy.

Oppppssss... I guess they are back in business after all! :D

US DOJ: Surveillance program now court-approved
NSA wiretapping program to be replaced by a FISA program that requires court approval



By Grant Gross, IDG News Service

January 17, 2007


A controversial surveillance program to wiretap telephone and Internet communications in and out of the U.S. will now fall under the jurisdiction of a U.S. court, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said Wednesday.



A judge with the secret U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) on Jan. 10 authorized the U.S. government to wiretap phone or Internet communications involving suspected members of al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations, the DOJ said. The FISA-approved surveillance would replace the Terrorist Surveillance Program at the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), authorized by U.S. President George Bush in 2002 to create wiretaps without court-issued warrants.

The FISA ruling will allow the surveillance program to essentially continue as it has, only with court approval, a senior DOJ official said. Under the NSA program, U.S. agents were allowed to wiretap Internet and telephone communications into and out of the U.S. in which one participant was suspected to be linked to al Qaeda.

Civil liberties groups had protested the NSA program, saying its lack of court oversight violated the U.S. Constitution. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a lawsuit against AT&T for allegedly participating in the NSA program, and in August, a U.S. district judge in Michigan ruled the NSA program was illegal.

Bush is "committed to using all lawful tools to protect our nation from the terrorist threat," U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrote in a Wednesday letter to members of the U.S. Congress. "Although ... the Terrorist Surveillance Program fully complies with the law, the orders the government has obtained will allow the necessary speed and agility while providing substantial advantages," Gonzales wrote.

Bush will not reauthorize the old NSA program when it expires sometime in the next 45 days, the senior DOJ official, who requested anonymity, said Wednesday. But the FISA-authorized program will have the same capability as the old program, the official said.

The FISA court will approve wiretap requests for 90 days at a time, the DOJ official said. The court will have authority to review individual wiretap requests, but the DOJ official declined to provide specific information about how the FISA program will work.

Bush administration officials denied that the FISA court acted to provide political and legal cover for the NSA program, but the DOJ official said the FISA ruling will allow Congress to step back and look at the wiretap program without legal questions hanging over it. The FISA ruling "should take some of the political heat off the debate," the DOJ official said.

The EFF didn't have an immediate comment on the FISA decision.

http://www.infoworld.com/archives/em...pproved_1.html

No, warrantless wiretaps are inherently illegal. The judge just confirmed it.
I never said it was, as you could discover by reading the paragraph I wrote immediately after the link. They have not confined their illegal activities to wiretaps.
Nope.
Nope. Nothing of the sort has been proven. It is, however, irrelevant.Suspicion is enough to negate the need for warrants and subpoenas? Why have warrants and subpoenas at all, then?

You need to read the above article. The wiretaps go on. They found away around it. The letters from the FBI are perfectly legal. None of it is irrelevent and you have not been affected. I do suspect that acts have been thwarted, and I may not be able to prove it, I trust that it has.

It's not perfect, but it's better. The court ought to have the obligation, not the authority, to review requests. Hopefully it's sloppy reporting.

And the beat goes on....

Actually, from the article I'm not clear if the judge just hasn't given blanket approval, such as "I approve of you wiretapping anyone you think is a terrorist".

That is how I read it. The difference being that it is for 90 days and the agency just needs to come back and reapply.

The only reason Americans were in danger is because the president had the same grasp and intelligence you are posting. Good Americans know of the so many FBI investigations quashed by the George Jr administration - in AZ, MN, IL, NY, and the international one lead by O'Neill. All were quashed by people who knew no such threat existed. Why does TheMercenary deny this? He had a political objective that also advocates Nazi like "Where are your papers".

Meanwhile Maine, Wyoming, and (forgot the third state) have passed laws in rebellion to what TheMercenary now requires.

Whether you drive or not, you must have these papers. No access to airlines, government offices, etc without these new mandated papers. Is an officer stops you one the street and you don't have your papers, then the office can take you in for an identity check. This is the new laws now being instituted because THEY see enemies everywhere ... just like TheMercenary.

Four separate FBI investigations on the trail of 11 September actors were quashed by the George Jr administration. That's not conspiracy. That's published facts.

And the Chicago agents were not told to stop investigating. They were yelled at, "You will not open an investigation." Both agents waited to retire before they would take interviews on how their investigation was terminated.

Meanwhile TheMercenary calls this a conspiracy theory only because it exposes his political agenda as Nazi like "Where are your papers" mentality. Those threats only exist in his fears.

BTW, did you know that horse you were riding was not real? Just asking because of your love for George Jr.

Wiretapping without judicial review is illegal. And that is what was happening startig when the Attorney General that advocates torture also fears all these mythcal terrrorists. Why is he there? Notice the denials from another that fears - TheMercenary. No wonder he so likes the same things that Dick Cheney advocates including more Executive powers and freedom to kidnap anyone anywhere in the world.

What bullshit. You really need to stop getting your news from PrisonPlanet.com or AntiWar.com. Get off your conspiracy horse and come back to reality. Now show me your papers!

http://www.thethirteenthstep.com/stfu/tinfoil-hat.jpg

I think you are an illegal alien. So since I think that your opinion of what goes on in this country is mute.

Please read what you've written as if it is 1933.

The reason it is different from 1933 is that people are willing to stand up for everybodies' rights, not just their own. The Bush administration got in the fear business after 911 and started to roll back Constitutionaly protected rights. They are being stopped. If you are still scared, get a dog.

Once again, I am not afraid of anything because I know that some really dedicated people are out there doing the good work hunting down the people who want to harm us. I will not support hamstringing their good work.

Oh, and I have 4 dogs.

It appears you need a bigger one.

Bigger is not always better. :shotgun::shocking:

:D :D

So why not eliminate warrants altogether? Or is the NSA the only organization made up entirely of saints, requiring no oversight?

Makes no difference to me, really I don't care. The NSA should not be feared by the American public.

OK, so you just don't see a need for the concept of a warrant. I guess that's as far as this conversation can go.

April's uncle used to work for the NSA in the 80s. Then he flipped out when his wife left him and disappeared. Apparently, the FBI and CIA came here looking for him. Eventually, they found him on the side of a road in Virginia, naked, his car ablaze. He now collects disability and lives in a small apartment near April's mom's house.

What makes you think they want to hurt us? A good versus evil world is just an illusion. If they do anything to hurt us it is probably because we did something very bad to them.

Haven't travelled much have you.
:rolleyes:

If that is your fantasy world of the nice big old world have at it.

What an awesome way to collect disability! That's using yer head.

Naked is good, too, that way when they take you, they won't shoot you thinking you're concealing something.

The car fire seems a bit over the top though.

He will change his tune when the Executive branch flips back to the Democrats. Then it will be like the old days when all you heard about was the horrors of Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I don't see how that fits into a discussion of warrentless searches. I would bet that they had all thier ducks in a row... well at least until that sniper shot and killed the mother holding her baby or the match was lit. :eek:

No, I haven't traveled much but I know, except for rare cases, people won't attack me as long as I repect them and their culture.

Also, how does traveling have any relevance to people coming here and attacking me at my house?

He wanted to kill himself, so he set the car on fire...but he got scared of the flames.