NSA Wiretapping Ruled Illegal - Federal judge in Detroit finds U.S. domestic wiretapping program unconstitutional.

[LEDominator]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: daniel49

I think bush has been somewhat effective....no attacks here since 911. why do you think they havent hit us yet? Because they are a religion of peace?/sarcasm

This is a useless talking point. It took them 9 years to attack us after the original WTC attack, not to mention the antrax attacks that went unsolved. BTW the current plot in the UK was taken down with traditional police work and intel. No PATRIOT act provisions, no illegal wiretapping. Interesting, we and the Brits seems to have the tools we need.

But again, these rag tag terrorist are for the most part incompetent - they rely on slipping through the cracks and dumb luck to pull anything off.

buwahahaha. Dude, England has like big brother stuff everywhere. Like Cameras on the streets that record where you go and all kinds of stuff. They don't need a patriot act because they are already there.

btw, for the terrorists being so incompetent, it seems they take quite a bit of time to plan things out. The UK got lucky when some fellow muslims turned those screwballs in. WE'RE the ones who are incompetent.

 

[Deptacon]

I have been on the fence on this issue, as much a sI understand how the use of wiretapes by the NSa, espeically these kind, can help, its pushing the limit a little too far... then again, i have nothing to hide so I wouldnt care if they were tpaing me, but I also don't believe it as right either

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: MadRat
Republican Anti-United States Constitution propoganda:

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=6500

I'm ashamed my own party rejected the findings of a federal judge. She represents justice for the American people and they attack her for it. This is just plain good reason we need to kick every single one of those far right "hippies" from the bigotted parts of the South right out of their current positions in the party and duly out of any government office. I'm tired of these asshats misrepresenting what true republicans want.

"far right "hippies"? now there is an oxymoron.

just face reality and drop your "party alliance"

It's easier to reform it from within.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Extelleron


If it protects people and possibly saves lives, it shouldn't matter what rules it violates or anything. Safety > privacy.

You are more likely to get struck by lightning than get attacked by a terrorist. The politicians, who have the most interest in making you fearful so they can stay in power and expand that power, are the ones who handed terrorists their victory. Because of people like you, frightened little people who hide under their beds at night, the rest of us have diminished rights. Great job bed wetters, ruin the country for the rest of us. Take a country of proud, honorable, and the "home of the brave" and turn it into a government teet suckling mewling kitten country.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv27n3/v27n3-5.pdf

 

[Used Rugs]

Hey I know a far right hippie.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
It's high time some of the numerous lawsuits against the NSA have made their way up to a federal court.

made their way up? it's a federal trial court. the case started there. it didn't go up.


*sigh*

 

[WHAMPOM]

I think it needs to go to a grand jury for indictments. A LAW was passed by Congress requiring warrants to be obtained from a court, period.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
It's high time some of the numerous lawsuits against the NSA have made their way up to a federal court.

made their way up? it's a federal trial court. the case started there. it didn't go up.


*sigh*

My mistake. I meant to say "have been reviewed by a federal court." Is that your only comment on this story?

 

[UptheMiddle]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller


It's a shame that we live in a whimpy society which has to depend on the government for a false sense of security. I know it is cliche and overused, but the founding fathers and the *REAL* patiots that founded this country would be utterly disgusted by the amount of whipped-dog attitude found now.

Founding fathers.....one of the rights that they granted to us was the right to bear arms. Are you going to cry when the EU takes that away? Whipped-dog attitude is bowing to that worthless organization. Best to respect the whole of that document.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: UptheMiddle

Originally posted by: LegendKiller


It's a shame that we live in a whimpy society which has to depend on the government for a false sense of security. I know it is cliche and overused, but the founding fathers and the *REAL* patiots that founded this country would be utterly disgusted by the amount of whipped-dog attitude found now.

Founding fathers.....one of the rights that they granted to us was the right to bear arms. Are you going to cry when the EU takes that away? Whipped-dog attitude is bowing to that worthless organization. Best to respect the whole of that document.

I have no idea where your question is coming from? EU/UN wasn't going to take our arms way anyway, that was nothing but a scare tactic, the EU/UN has no authority here. However, if they tried, they'd be in for a world of hurt.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Deptacon
I have been on the fence on this issue, as much a sI understand how the use of wiretapes by the NSa, espeically these kind, can help, its pushing the limit a little too far... then again, i have nothing to hide so I wouldnt care if they were tpaing me, but I also don't believe it as right either

If it helps, nobody is suggesting that the NSA shouldn't be allowed to eavesdrop, the only objection is how they get the authorization to do so.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: LEDominator

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: daniel49

I think bush has been somewhat effective....no attacks here since 911. why do you think they havent hit us yet? Because they are a religion of peace?/sarcasm

This is a useless talking point. It took them 9 years to attack us after the original WTC attack, not to mention the antrax attacks that went unsolved. BTW the current plot in the UK was taken down with traditional police work and intel. No PATRIOT act provisions, no illegal wiretapping. Interesting, we and the Brits seems to have the tools we need.

But again, these rag tag terrorist are for the most part incompetent - they rely on slipping through the cracks and dumb luck to pull anything off.

buwahahaha. Dude, England has like big brother stuff everywhere. Like Cameras on the streets that record where you go and all kinds of stuff. They don't need a patriot act because they are already there.

btw, for the terrorists being so incompetent, it seems they take quite a bit of time to plan things out. The UK got lucky when some fellow muslims turned those screwballs in. WE'RE the ones who are incompetent.

Todd33 may be off about the level of freedom offered by our friends across the pond, but I think his point is still rather valid. As you suggested, England is perhaps the MOST "big brotherish" first world country...and that level of police power is clearly the model some conservatives here in America would like us to follow. But even with all that police power and all those cameras and that constant suveillance and that total lack of civil liberties we take for granted over here...the ONLY way they caught these idiots was because some moderate in the British Muslim community turned them in.

Personally I think that's the best argument yet against Bush's goal of ever expanding police power and the general shredding of the constituion. Not only is it a fine example of destroying the very thing we are trying to protect, it doesn't even make us any safer. It's not trading liberty for security, it's trading liberty for...nothing.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

It's back on again...
Another judge overturned the original ruling that placed a stay on the program. Looks like it will be up to the SC.

CHICAGO (Reuters) - The government can continue to use its warrantless domestic wiretap program pending the Justice Department's appeal of a federal judge's ruling outlawing the program, an Appeals Court in Cincinnati ruled on Wednesday.

The ruling overturned District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor's decision last week to deny a lengthy stay in the case, which is expected to end up with the Supreme Court.

In August, Taylor ruled that the National Security Agency's five-year-old surveillance program, implemented as part of the government's war on terrorism, violates the civil rights of Americans.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the suit in March on behalf of scholars, attorneys, journalists and non-profit groups that regularly communicate with people in the Middle East.

 

[Genx87]

No surprise, should be interesting what the SC says on the matter.

 

[MadRat]

There is no damn war, there is no presidential jurisdiction. This new ruling will tear the social fabric apart in this country. I hope our leaders have some wisdom and back down.