It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Bush's Plan Bad?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
ive been hearing on the news about this new proposition by president bush. i havent looked into it extensively, but from what i gather he wants to be able to listen in on american phone callls. this seems to be getting peoples panties in a bunch but i dont see why. if u have nothing to hide then u have nothing to worry about.




posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 02:07 PM
link   
In most civilized countries it´s illegal to phonetap people without proof of murder/drug crime. Maybe if in usa had same laws, then that would be the reason to people get pissed off. But after all other crimes this looks same like complaining about hitler´s behavior against french resistance.
-aape



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Because every single individual American has rights afforded to them under the constitution - which every politician and soldier takes an oath to defend. The president's plan clearly violates the fourth amendment, and because I didn't suddenly wake up living under the yoke of King Louis VIII, it's against my damn civil liberties, and any American who had their conversations listened to without a warrant.

I neither bow down to royalty, nor do I buckle and cower for Fascists. Anyone who does is Anti-American, and a traitor to the principles and the foundation by which this nation was founded. The only people who support this measure are Red Coats, suckling at the teat of authority - serfs and peasants better served living under a King, than living under a free society.

In other words, it ain't none of the goverment's damn business.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   
I don't resort to the squeamish paranoia of some Americans when comes to this whole wire tapping business. As long as you aren't a suspected terrorist, or for some strange reason making long distance phone calls to a cave in Afghanistan...

You have nothing to worry about. Some people seem to forget that we Americans are the #1 targets of some really messed up people. If the government being able to catch some of these wack-jobs in an easier fashion keeps me safe. I'm all for it.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Mr. Chicklestick, (great name, BTW)

This is not a new proposition by President Bush. It is something that he authorized during his first term. The only new thing about it is that the media is talking about it.

Some Americans have their panties in a bunch because Congress makes the laws, not the President. Congress did not make this law. It is not a law at all. There is a law about wiretapping for the purposes of national security. That law requires the agency doing the wiretapping to get a search warrant within 72 hours of the initial wiretap.
So a government agency can tap someone, if they think the matter is urgent, and get a warrant up to 3 days later.

The 4th amendment for reference:


What Bush authorized was wiretapping without ever getting a warrant.ever


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Personally, I think George W. Bush broke our laws and should be impeached. I believe that it doesn't matter that I don't make overseas phone calls, or that I don't know any terrorists, or that I'm not likely to be suspected of terrorist activities myself. What matters is what is legal, what is ethical, and what is just.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Yes, tyranny is a bad thing. Glad we cleared that up.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 08:17 PM
link   
This iraqi election,
there should be legislature to fix a certain percentage
of assembly seats for the minority...
or perhaps as "advisors"

"Sunnis" and "Turks" i think

there is a possibility of ethnic cleaning..

no chance of shiites majority acceptg minority rule..

it's a 3-way fight
"Catholic" vs "Prostestant" vs "Church of England"

===
are these correct
sunni 10%
turks 25%
shiites 50%...?

land of no gun control and rpg's



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join