Secret Documents: Hubbell Wanted Federal Access to Phones

NewsMax ^ | 8/29/02 | Charles R. Smith

[Looking for Diogenes]

According to Colgate's memo, the secure phones were simply too dangerous for American citizens.

If American citizens could have used them, so could Al Qaeda terrorists. Do we want to give up the ability to wiretap well-funded criminal and terror groups when necessary?

[DWSUWF]

So, algore is a totalitarian wanna-be...

I'm struggling to see how this can be classified as 'news'...

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Just curious why the Leftists were so enamored with the "opportunities" at the time yet condemned our administration for not fully informing terrorists of Constitutional rights? Why does that seem hypocritical?

[Looking for Diogenes]

Smiles and nods....

[greasepaint]

All Freepers need to be familiar with the PGP encryption program.
g.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

It's because our government is more concerned about controlling US than in dealing with our enemies. To our government, WE (the People) are the enemy. It's all very simple. George Orwell and Ayn Rand understood it well.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Do you have a digital signature?

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

It's because our government is more concerned about controlling US than in dealing with our enemies.

How do you define "our government"?

[marktwain]

The Al Queda terrorists are using encryption now. This policy only made sure that American Citizens would have no privacy from government agents.

An excellent analogy that you might find interesting is located at: www.geektimes.com/michael/culture/humor/items/Privacy-related/TransparentTreesAnalogy.html

[thepitts]

If gore wanted to do this in 93 how far can the bush admin. be from doing it now?

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

How do you define "our government"?

I was thinking in terms of the Federal government, for the most part. Next the various State governments. The governments that have been permitted to ignore Constitutional limits for far too long. And, regarding the Federal government, that government that has been permitted to ignore its primary Constitutionally mandated responsibilities for far too long.

[USA21]

bump

[gargoyle]

...No controlling legal authority...

...I've mutated into a full fledged, tin hat, conspiracy theorist...

[Senator Pardek]

This was covered at FR five and a half years ago - The Clipper Chip Scandal

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

How has Congress affected our Constitution?

[Tench_Coxe]

"If American citizens could have used them, so could Al Qaeda terrorists. Do we want to give up the ability to wiretap well-funded criminal and terror groups when necessary?"

I am certain that a similar argument was used to justify the Quartering Act, in which British soldiers were housed in colonist's homes, to cut down on 'illegal' smuggling of tea and other products that did not bear a stamp that the tax was paid.

[Looking for Diogenes]

I am certain that a similar argument was used to justify...

I take it then that you do not approve of wiretaps at all. If you really care strongly about it, it would be possible to get a law passed banning them.

[Looking for Diogenes]

The Al Queda terrorists are using encryption now. This policy only made sure that American Citizens would have no privacy from government agents.

American citizens have many encryption options available, as do the terrorists. Despite which fact, the government can decode those messages if they have a warrant and really, really want to find out what is being communicated.

Tortured analogies aside, do you think the government should give up all wiretaps as a tool of law enforcement?