-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
ACLU fires back at Bush and Democrat-Controlled Congress
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Brainonska511
Lifer
The most annoying thing about all this expansion of government powers under the guise of national security is that it was NOT lack of information that allowed 9/11 to happen. It was the interpreting of the intelligence that was lacking. I don't see how all this additional information will help the real problem.
Ridiculous. The 4th amendment doesn't care if we have terrorist attacks or not. It's one of the founding principles of our country. If you want to destroy that, then you are an enemy of the constitution. There's a reason why the president, all of our soldiers, and other government officials swear an oath to defend the constitution, not America. It's to stop bullshit like you're proposing.
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
Every time I hear "post 9-11 mindset, world, etc.", I tend to think the terrorists have won. It has been used to justify all kinds of un-American crap that damages the country far more than the terrorists could possibly have ever done. It seems that the ill effects of the 9-11 attacks are never done. They just keep coming.
We have always been vulnerable to terrorist attack, and always will be. But the "post 9-11" mentality has shown the world that we are little different that some 3rd world dictator i.e. favoring torture, arrest with no charges, indefinite detention, secret watch lists, warrantless domestic spying, claims that special circumstances allow the government to ignore any and all laws and international agreements, pre-emptive war on the flimsyist of excuses, etc..
9-11 presented us with an opportunity to show the world that we really believed in our principles and would stick by them in the face of great adversity. Instead, we chose a path of epic failure and to expose ourselves as hypocritical fools, trembling in the face of a tiny enemy.
We have always been vulnerable to terrorist attack, and always will be. But the "post 9-11" mentality has shown the world that we are little different that some 3rd world dictator i.e. favoring torture, arrest with no charges, indefinite detention, secret watch lists, warrantless domestic spying, claims that special circumstances allow the government to ignore any and all laws and international agreements, pre-emptive war on the flimsyist of excuses, etc..
9-11 presented us with an opportunity to show the world that we really believed in our principles and would stick by them in the face of great adversity. Instead, we chose a path of epic failure and to expose ourselves as hypocritical fools, trembling in the face of a tiny enemy.
I don't quite understand this. How would they lose "important surveillance tools" by not passing this bill? Is there something keeping them from rewriting the bill?
Actually, I do understand this and it is one of the greatest things I detest about Congress. Rather than Congress doing what's right for the people, the powerbrokers play their games and we end up with what's right for the special interests.
thraashman
Lifer
This isn't really inconsistent when you think about it. He did vote to strip the bill of the protections to the telecoms that he opposed. That unfortunately failed. So he voted for the only bill available which updated the law as it needed to be before expiring. There was no other option to vote for.
It's kinda like how I live in Atlanta, and I'm a Falcons fan. But had Michael Vick not gone to jail and had somehow stayed on the Falcons, I'd have still been a Falcons fan and rooted for them even though I hate Vick and would have disagreed heavily with him staying on the team. You get it?
thraashman
Lifer
Well, actually the ACLU fights to uphold the Constitution. It just so happens that Democrats are usually the party in line with the Constitution. So if that's not the case then the ACLU will fight the Dems too.
Really the only time there's a major Constitutional fight that the ACLU doesn't bother with is 2nd Amendment. And that's not a surprise when you think of the fact that the NRA is in existence pretty much strictly for that. There's no need for the ACLU to try to do a job that the NRA is already fanatically doing.
RightIsWrong
Diamond Member
You mean like FISA?
NaughtyGeek
Golden Member
I can't speak for everyone else, but I say not no but hell no.
I'm greatly satisfied to see the ACLU and EFF step up to the plate here as it seems the general population is in such a state of fear they'll gladly trade away everything that made the US different, noble and great. I guess the biggest question will be how long before this makes it to the Supreme Court and what will they have to say on the subject.
I have a great sadness and anger that I spent a good portion of my life upholding my oath to defend The Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic only to see the current guard step down from their own oath. I guess one who is sworn to uphold this oath may be well within their rights to _________(left out for fear of being labeled a terrorist for saying it) anyone who supported this legislation with it being a direct attack on The Constitution by a domestic enemy. I'd love to see that pop up on the 6 o'clock news.
I'm unaware of any legislation proposed that would expand governmental authority over the states dealing with CO2 to greater levels then government power has been previously asserted over other pollutants. So, if there are any bill of rights shredding components they shredded the bill of rights a long time ago. Unless you can think of something I'm missing?
Brainonska511
Lifer
As a side note to my earlier comment, if anyone ever watched the TV show Babylon 5, all this stuff over the past 8 years reminds me greatly of the story arc.
bamacre
Lifer
Let's just get back on topic.
I wonder what the implications are going to be if the ACLU wins their suit, and I wonder what side Obama and McCain will take. Well, I know what side McCain will take, but Obama voted for this (right?), so will he side with the ACLU or the bill he supported?
I wonder what the implications are going to be if the ACLU wins their suit, and I wonder what side Obama and McCain will take. Well, I know what side McCain will take, but Obama voted for this (right?), so will he side with the ACLU or the bill he supported?
I go back to the point of holding *ALL* of those involved responsible. Why should those who directed these wiretaps get immunity? I agree the telco's should have to answer for their actions but where is the outrage for the government getting a pass?
I'll also agree with you on Obama lately being more about getting elected than a 'change' from the norm but if that's what it takes to get his policies instead of McCain I'll ok with it.
The outrage is a two part thing. By keeping the telco suits out of court the government people are covering their own asses as well. So really I am outraged at both the telcos and the government getting off the hook, they just both happen to be doing so through the same vehicle of telecom immunity.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
