NSA and YOUR phone calls

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

It's really sad to see when some one has run out of argument and has been reduced to calling others Nazi's, Stalinists etc.

Reminds be of the time when I was young and working in a restaurant in the city and a rat came into the kitchen who had gotten into the strichnyne we placed in the basement. It was so sad to watch it flounder around on the floor all bloated and finally roll over and die. I've never forgotten that scene. Too bad, so sad.

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'. What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story.

But..but.. I thought Bush was a weak leader. Please present your evidence that Bush has used this program to invade your life or anyone elses.

Suppose someone in the US calls a known terrorist in Pakistan who in turn calls another person in Iowa. Are you seriously saying you don't want the NSA to know this and investigate the person in Iowa? You seriously think this kind of intel should be just ignored?

OTOH, lets take your approach that the NSA has no business knowing this intel and as a result they fail to uncover a terrorist cell and 100,000 Americans are killed in a chemical weapon attack. You would be one of the first to start screaming Bush is an idiot and he failed to connect the dots.

So go ahead with your little potshots. I'd rather hear them than to hear that a chemical weapon killed thousands in downtown Los Angeles.

-

[Michele 1]

Quote

But..but.. I thought Bush was a weak leader

And you hit the nail squarely. It never ceases to amaze me that people who are rabid about hating Bush will, on successive days, call him ineffective and weak, and then strong and commandering.

Can't have it both ways.

BTW, I liked your rat story and analogy...bloated, floundering rats are not a pretty sight. Neither are those who flip and flop like the Koranic tuna.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It's really sad to see when some one has run out of argument and has been reduced to calling others Nazi's, Stalinists etc.

Reminds be of the time when I was young and working in a restaurant in the city and a rat came into the kitchen who had gotten into the strichnyne we placed in the basement. It was so sad to watch it flounder around on the floor all bloated and finally roll over and die. I've never forgotten that scene. Too bad, so sad.

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'. What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story.

But..but.. I thought Bush was a weak leader. Please present your evidence that Bush has used this program to invade your life or anyone elses.

Suppose someone in the US calls a known terrorist in Pakistan who in turn calls another person in Iowa. Are you seriously saying you don't want the NSA to know this and investigate the person in Iowa? You seriously think this kind of intel should be just ignored?

OTOH, lets take your approach that the NSA has no business knowing this intel and as a result they fail to uncover a terrorist cell and 100,000 Americans are killed in a chemical weapon attack. You would be one of the first to start screaming Bush is an idiot and he failed to connect the dots.

So go ahead with your little potshots. I'd rather hear them than to hear that a chemical weapon killed thousands in downtown Los Angeles.

-

I'm not taking potshots. Unlike Michele , my purpose here is issue oriented and I'm asking you, how do you know it's different ...this time? How can you be so sure?

I'm fairly certain most of Stalin's supporters didn't see it as any big deal and justified it as serving the security of the state. I dunno, maybe they told rat stories.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

I'm not taking potshots.

Oh, no. You take potshots?? ppzzzzzt... Never.

Quote

Unlike Michele , my purpose here is issue oriented and I'm asking you, how do you know it's different ...this time?

Putting you Angelic demeanor aside for a minute, why didn't you answer my questions, then?

Quote

I fairly certain most of Stalin's supporters didn't see it as any big deal and justified it as serving the security of the state. I dunno, maybe they told rat stories.

Yep, no potshot there.

-

[Michele 1]

Quote

I'm not taking potshots. Unlike Michele , my purpose here is issue oriented

Two things...

1. I may not have been talking about you. Did you consider that? Or has your stalking and ego convinced you that I do nothing other than post to piss you off?
2. Did you not read the thread you're participating in? This is not my first post in this thread...

Good grief. Catch someone in some plagiarism, and you've got a stalker for life. just how much time do you spend following me around these boards? That could be considered rather pathological, m'dear. It's sad, in a floundering rat sort of way.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Wasn't it Joe Stalin who said (about the government spying on the people) "If you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about"?

Of course this is said about many intrusions into our privacy that are seen as valuable to law enforcement. The legislatures and courts can change/reject/affirm the objectionable methods. If you don't think the legislators and courts are doing a proper job of this, our democratic system allows us to be represented by those that would change the laws and appoint judges that could overturn existing judgments. The process of elections to change things may seem a painfully slow and uncertain method, but the Soviet Union under Stalin certainly did not allow such change at any pace. Our history is full of interesting and important cases where what seems to have been established and settled law has been overturned. I think there are some areas regarding privacy where this should happen, and many conservatives think the patriot act is unconstitutional in some areas.

Stalin did much more than spy on his own people. He required that those in charge of 'security' for a building/neighborhood report a minimum number of traitors. Of course the result was innocents being falsely reported to make a quota.

The supreme court has ruled on this issue. I think it is unreasonable to expect a president in charge of protecting the country from using this legal intelligence gathering method.

If there were an attack that could have been prevented with the type of phone # call monitoring now in use, I think the president would have rightly been asked, "Why did you not make use of all available and legal means to find terrorist cells in the US?"

I think it would be an unacceptable answer to say, "We did not do that because many people are uncomfortable with it and think the Supreme Court was wrong to allow such a program. Having access to that kind of info could lead to illegal abuses/corruption, etc. and to avoid those troublesome difficulties, I decided that we should not do it.

That would go over really great, eh?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[Gravitymaster 0]

Are they putting up the barbed wire fences to hold all the political dissidents in your area yet?

-

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

I think it would be an unacceptable answer to say, "We did not do that because many people are uncomfortable with it and think the Supreme Court was wrong to allow such a program. Having access to that kind of info could lead to illegal abuses/corruption, etc. and to avoid those troublesome difficulties, I decided that we should not do it.

That would go over really great, eh?

You know what? You are absolutely correct ..........BUT (you knew there was a but coming, now didn't you
I also think it would be unacceptable to say, "we had the opportunity to speak out while there was still time ...and remained silent."

I'm expressing my doubts and fears as to what the United States of America might become. Are you so perfectly sure there is no threat from our own govt?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'.
He would have not been successful without the support of lots of people who supported him in precisely the manner you support our current govt.

What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story.

What is different now? Stalin killed all political opposition, even potential opposition. We have a supreme court that found it constitutional (no expectation of privacy for this info). We have a legislature that could make it illegal if they wanted to.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'.
He would have not been successful without the support of lots of people who supported him in precisely the manner you support our current govt.

What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story.

What is different now? Stalin killed all political opposition, even potential opposition. We have a supreme court that found it constitutional (no expectation of privacy for this info). We have a legislature that could make it illegal if they wanted to.

We also have a different govt. structure than Stalin did. We have 3 different branches to provide checks and balances.

[champu 1]

Quote

Question: why do they need everyones phone records? How about narrowing it down to possible terrorists?

It seems they are wasting their time and our money. And what about wrong numbers that you might dial?

Zipp0

Simply? In order to decide whether or not something is out of the ordinary, you have to know what the ordinary is. I'm sure, however, the platoons of math PhDs at the NSA have a more detailed answer.

As far as "narrowing it down to possible terrorists," I do suppose we could just gather up the phone records of all the brown people.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

You know what? You are absolutely correct ..........BUT (you knew there was a but coming, now didn't you ), that line of thought would justify just about any govt action.

I don't think so. That line of thought would not justify illegal intrusions of privacy by our government. But the NSA program is not illegal. I understand that you think it should be, but it is not. There are many ways for you to actively pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal.

Quote

I also think it would be unacceptable to say, "we had the opportunity to speak out while there was still time ...and remained silent."

And you are speaking out, and can pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal. I think it is unacceptable to compare Bush to Stalin for using an intelligence gathering method that has been affirmed as constitutional by the highest court in the land. Are all of those justices also to be compared to Stalin? I don't know who was on the court back then and which voted which way, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some liberal heroes included.

Quote

I'm expressing my doubts and fears as to what the United States of America might become. Are you so perfectly sure there is no threat from our own govt?

I'm certainly wary of such a threat. Fortunately or unfortunately, it is very hard for such things to remain a secret for very long, and even when they are not illegal, our free press is so eager for a scandal that it can become headline news for a long time. A free press is something that Stalin and the current Russian government does not have constantly looking for a scandal to keep it in check.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'.
He would have not been successful without the support of lots of people who supported him in precisely the manner you support our current govt.

What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story.

What is different now? Stalin killed all political opposition, even potential opposition. We have a supreme court that found it constitutional (no expectation of privacy for this info). We have a legislature that could make it illegal if they wanted to.

Stalin started his purges using his legal authority as General Secretary of the Party Congress to expel any "unsatisfactory" party members. He solidified his power by ridding the party of all supporters of Trotsky and appointing his own people in their place. Once his power base was established (all completely legally), he went on to greater achievements as one of the most murderous dictators in history.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[Michele 1]

Quote

Are they putting up the barbed wire fences to hold all the political dissidents in your area yet?

Nah. To many of "them" here...wouldn't be safe to incarcerate them locally. Better to send them to the Utah desert, where rumor has it that there are internment camps set up. They were set up prior to the whole Y2K panic, apparently, and weren't used then because the government managed to screw up and nothing actually happened so no martial law could be established and dissidents rounded up then. Of course, 9/11 being government directed, they were thinking that 9/11 would be the event that would allow them to declare martial law, and round them up because they were a threat to national security. Oops. Didn't happen.

However, I hear that Mt St Helens has a rock on the side of it being elevated by pressure from the volcano core, that when it explodes will shower people with a contaminated substance, and give the government the reason to start rounding people up under the guise of quarantine. Oh wait. That was the bird flu.

I'm waiting for the masons, the Illuminati, the Priory of Sion, Tri Lateral Commission, and the Bilderberger/Rockefeller dudes to show up sometime soon. They say their goal is hegemony, but I can't quite figure out which of the teams will win. So I just don't know who will be the Anti-Christ after all.

Oh well.

Ciels-
Michele

PS. The slab in the side of Mt St. Helens is real; all the rest is fanciful and imaginary. Except for the black helicopters, of course. [I]They're real, and looking for dissidents.

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

You know what? You are absolutely correct ..........BUT (you knew there was a but coming, now didn't you ), that line of thought would justify just about any govt action.

I don't think so. That line of thought would not justify illegal intrusions of privacy by our government. But the NSA program is not illegal. I understand that you think it should be, but it is not. There are many ways for you to actively pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal.

Quote

I also think it would be unacceptable to say, "we had the opportunity to speak out while there was still time ...and remained silent."

And you are speaking out, and can pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal. I think it is unacceptable to compare Bush to Stalin for using an intelligence gathering method that has been affirmed as constitutional by the highest court in the land. Are all of those justices also to be compared to Stalin? I don't know who was on the court back then and which voted which way, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some liberal heroes included.

Quote

I'm expressing my doubts and fears as to what the United States of America might become. Are you so perfectly sure there is no threat from our own govt?

I'm certainly wary of such a threat. Fortunately or unfortunately, it is very hard for such things to remain a secret for very long, and even when they are not illegal, our free press is so eager for a scandal that it can become headline news for a long time. A free press is something that Stalin and the current Russian government does not have constantly looking for a scandal to keep it in check.

I hope you are right. Regardng 'free press', Stalin gained much of his initial influence and power as editor of Pravda.

Thank you for your honest and straightforward answer.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Stalin started his purges using his legal authority as General Secretary of the Party Congress to expel any "unsatisfactory" party members. He solidified his power by ridding the party of all supporters of Trotsky and appointing his own people in their place. Once his power base was established (all completely legally), he went on to greater achievements as one of the most murderous dictators in history.

And how does this compare to what Bush has done, or even could do?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Stalin started his purges using his legal authority as General Secretary of the Party Congress to expel any "unsatisfactory" party members. He solidified his power by ridding the party of all supporters of Trotsky and appointing his own people in their place. Once his power base was established (all completely legally), he went on to greater achievements as one of the most murderous dictators in history.

And how does this compare to what Bush has done, or even could do?

It's all perfectly legal, just like Stalin.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

I hope you are right. Regardng 'free press', Stalin gained much of his initial influence and power as editor of Pravda.

Was Pravda considered independent/free?

Quote

Thank you for your honest and straightforward answer.

Your welcome. Let's try to keep it to a serious discussion of issues and such instead of comparisons to a Soviet leader that killed more than the little guy with the bad mustache.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

I hope you are right. Regardng 'free press', Stalin gained much of his initial influence and power as editor of Pravda.

Was Pravda considered independent/free?

Quote

Thank you for your honest and straightforward answer.

Your welcome. Let's try to keep it to a serious discussion of issues and such instead of comparisons to a Soviet leader that killed more than the little guy with the bad mustache.

Actually, the comparison I was making had nothing to do with Bush. The comparison was to the large numbers of people who could not/would not see the potential for abuse. They blindly supported a man who convinced them of a problem, made them fearful of it and directed who to blame for it.

Without such lemmings, no leader could gain such power.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[sundevil777 102]

The difference, I think, is that it didn't take Bush to convince me that the threat is very real indeed.

Our gov't doesn't even want to take credit for all the terrorist plots that have been thwarted.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Actually, the comparison I was making had nothing to do with Bush. The comparison was to the large numbers of people who could not/would not see the potential for abuse. They blindly supported a man who convinced them of a problem, made them fearful of it and directed who to blame for it.

Yep, the Govt. flew those airplanes into the WTC and the Pentagon to instill fear so they could impose a dictatorship. I see the plot clearly now.

-

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

The difference, I think, is that it didn't take Bush to convince me that the threat is very real indeed.

Our gov't doesn't even want to take credit for all the terrorist plots that have been thwarted.

They all use what is available. With Stalin it was the assisination of Moisei Uritsky, Chief of the Petrograd Secret Police and the shooting of Lenin shortly thereafter. Stalin wanted those responsible to be subject to "open and systematic mass terror".

Hitler used Labor riots, Mussolini pretty much worked his way up the facist hierarcjy and used his considerable charisma to build a power base using fear of labor unions and communism to ultimately seize control.

The fact that threats are real doesn't preclude them from being manipulated for power.

My point, however, is not that Bush is Stalin, Hitler or whatever, but that it takes a bunch of mentally myopic, fearful, flagwaving mutherfuckers for any of them to succeed.

Whatever our future, they had them then, we have them now.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[kallend 2,107]

Quote

Quote

But..but.. I thought Bush was a weak leader

And you hit the nail squarely. It never ceases to amaze me that people who are rabid about hating Bush will, on successive days, call him ineffective and weak, and then strong and commandering.

Can't have it both ways.



Ciels-
Michele

You are confused. Despotism and leadership are NOT the same thing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Are they putting up the barbed wire fences to hold all the political dissidents in your area yet?

-

I wish

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Changes nothing. If you aren't calling terrorists, you have nothing to fear. If the govt. is able to stop a terrorist that could kill 100,000 by comparing phone records, I say great.

The hypocracy is with the Dems who insist on background checks for gun ownership but complain about something as simple as cross-referencing phone calls as this huge abridgement of rights. Now they know how law abiding gun owners feel.
-

This is where the problem is. The spying supporters repeat the Bush claim that they're only after the terrrrrrrisssts and that this program is simply cross referencing numbers yadayadayada. What the anti-Bush crowd says is that Bush has been busted giving bogus information numerous times so why should this latest claim be any different? Spying on terrorists is one thing. Spying on American protesters is another thing entirely.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11751418/

So, I ask, why should I trust them when they've repeatedly shown that they abuse that trust?