RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,149688,00.html

Welcome to 1984!!!!
Hey "Big Brother" are you listening.
Our government under this administration is FUBAR.

1984 was 23 years ago. our government had FISA protection for eavesdropping without a warrant on foreign persons in country who were reasonably believed to be spies. that's the whole point of this sort of intelligence. ya know, try to figure out who the spies, terrorists and espionagers are who are planning harm to our country. but then the 80's came and a bunch of stuff got changed. then the 90's came and a bunch of stuff got changed.

now, it seems as if Congress doesn't want our government to have any tools available to be able to target and track spies in country or be able to intercept communications between an American in country and a known agent/terrorist in another country.

so, just how is our government suppose to be able to protect our country if Congress won't allow our government to monitor and track persons known who want to cause harm to our country (i.e. al Qaeda and similar groups).

If a foreign spy, terrorist or similar person of dubious distinction is communicating with someone in our country; yeah, I think that's a matter of national security. Tough luck journalists and ACLU attorneys.

quote:

Bush administration officials say that is an overly broad, even strained reading of the law, which they contend only allows the government to target foreigners for surveillance without a warrant. The law also allows the government to listen in on calls and e-mails that have an American on one end of the communication without a warrant as long as the American is not the intended "target" of the surveillance.

Really ... and of course this administration would never make use of overly broad or strained readings of other laws, so naturally we have no cause for concern.

MOLEY! how else is our government suppose to track spies, terrorists and other persons seeking to harm to our country whether it's old-fashioned espionage or the newer strategy of blowing up large buildings with the intent of producing high volume body counts?

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:
Really ... and of course this administration would never make use of overly broad or strained readings of other laws, so naturally we have no cause for concern.

quote:

Originally posted by GroovyLady:
MOLEY! how else is our government suppose to track spies, terrorists and other persons seeking to harm to our country whether it's old-fashioned espionage or the newer strategy of blowing up large buildings with the intent of producing high volume body counts?

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:
Really ... and of course this administration would never make use of overly broad or strained readings of other laws, so naturally we have no cause for concern.

By using warrants the same way they always have done, your Grooviness. Upon probable cause, not by strip-mining databases, or conducting searches in secret with all participants legally gagged. That is because we can't trust this government, or any government, to limit the definition of "those seeking to harm our country" so it excludes political opponents.

Addressing the controversy over the law, the Justice Department and the White House Tuesday issued a "myth and facts" paper meant to allay the concerns of civil liberties advocates and privacy groups that believe it gives the government broader powers than intended.

A good news organization practicing responsible journalism would have included or linked to this "myth and facts" paper in their article. I withhold my opinion until I have something more than AP "rush to publish" to base it on.

I laugh at people who think they have a reasonable expectation of privacy when communicating over a medium they niether own nor manage.

I also laugh at people who elect reactive politicians. Proactive is the way to go. Probable cause? How about a mushroom cloud?