Posted on 12/29/2005 9:01:59 AM PST by Nicholas Conradin
This will be remembered as the year in which mass surveillance became normal, even popular. Revelations about the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping rocked the civil liberties establishment, but the country as a whole didn't seem upset. Instead, the American people, mindful of the possible danger that we face, seem happy enough that Uncle Sam is taking steps to keep up with the challenges created by new technology. Ask yourself: Do you think it's a bad idea for the feds, as U.S. News & World Report mentioned, to monitor Islamic sites inside the United States for any possible suspicious radiation leaks?
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
My civil rights arent hindered so the question is moot.
self ping for later
Do you own firearms?
When the PATRIOT Guards come collecting the guns, a lot of folks are gonna be very confused.
Mass surveillance? Oh, I hardly think Bush cares one iota about my phone calls asking Mr. M to pick up a gallon of milk or the kids asking me to pick the up after practice.
Interesting article.
I always see this as not an "either/or" chioice, but a balance. We "give up" freedom by having laws in the first place, or by empowering police at all. We couldn't have a society at all with total anarchy. It's a question of how much liberty, how much security.
There is the argument that we shouldn't want President Bush to have powers that we wouldn't want a Democrat president (ecch!!!) to have. Then again, when did the law ever stop the Clintons? When will we get the true story of the IRS abuses? That was NOT legal, and yet they apparently did something, and the MSM ignored it.
I hereby give up all rights to privacy I have with respect to nuclear materials in my home, office or car. :)
This is actually a pretty good article and I'd suggest others reading it. Don't be put off by this ridiculous line at the start:
This will be remembered as the year in which mass surveillance became normal, even popular.
"Mass surveillance"? If we've got enough people here on Khalid Sheik Muhamed's buddy list to qualify as mass, we've got way bigger problems than we think.
Owl_Eagle
"You know, I'm going to start thanking
the woman who cleans the restroom in
the building I work in. I'm going to start
thinking of her as a human being"
There can ONLY be Civil-Liberty-Safety when sovereign NATIONAL BANKING exists again.....vested interest money....
.....Safe-Money-First.....is the future
.....True Free-Speech.....is out in the 'PC' future.....
?...Is Free-Speech-Safe?
Isn't it interesting that the liberals are continuing to run around concerned about offending people's senibilities while the grown-ups are debating life and death issues. These people wil never get it.
"My civil rights arent hindered so the question is moot."
Let's phrase that properly:
My civil rights aren't hindered AT THE MOMENT, so I don't care about anyone else's civil rights.
If you don't want Hillary, or someone like her, to have unfettered surveillance capability, then you shouldn't be complacent about this President having it.
The issue is not Democrat or Republican. It's trust of the government. Unfortunately too many people only trust the govt when "their" man is in the office. I don't trust govt period.
Well said.
For the last week or so, I have been thinking a lot about the possibility of the NSA listening to my phone calls or driving by my home or church and testing the level of radiation present. I have come to the conclusion that they should. It will eliminate me as a possible terrorist or my affiliation to them.
Britain will be first country to monitor every car journey (Cameras Everywhere-Database Kept)
So you think its unacceptable for the US govt to monitor comm between an American and a known terrorist? You could read a bit more on history prior to the 8 yrs of Clinton to know that there is many examples of the executive branch allowing for the monitoring of communications.
As one Freeper pointed out to me yesterday, we'll just change the laws once a Democrat is in office. Yeah, right.
"So you think its unacceptable for the US govt to monitor comm between an American and a known terrorist? "
Nope. I think that's just fine. You haven't read much, have you. I used to work for the NSA. What you don't know is amazing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.