Print

[pug_ster]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/

It looks like the American Government is spying on peaceful protestors.   It is no different than what the USSR is doing in the Cold War era.  The last time when the Government has done that, it was during the Vietnam War.  Thanks to the Patriot Act, this kind of spying is legal in order to 'protect the country.'

[Arvarden]

The war on terror is a war on our civil liberties.  

Not too far from now I'll have the council tax inspector inspecting my property to see if he/she can squeese extra tax's out of me for having a nice view from my kitchen window and he will also increase my tax if I have made any home improvements.

Needless to say he/she will not step one foot on my property and I will refuse to pay the fine they give me.  I will prolly end up doing some time until I can get the european courts to overturn this stealth tax.  Oh and if I get man rapped while inside I will kill that slime ball that calls himself T.B.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

This post has been edited by Arvarden: Dec 14 2005, 03:15 PM

[pug_ster]

Bush and the white house use their propaganda PR to tout 9/11 as the reason why there are terrorists in our mists.  All they did is to spread fear so that we can give up our civil liberties for price of 'freedom.'  Many Americans swallow that BS and more than happily to accept it.  The worst thing is that when someone complains about it, the FBI will probably investigate them.  This is almost as bad as China going after those underground Christian churches.

This post has been edited by pug_ster: Dec 14 2005, 05:43 PM

[lordvader129]

public records kept on a public meeting...invasion of publicity?

QUOTE

The Fort Lauderdale protest was deemed not to be a credible threat and a column in the database concludes: “US group exercising constitutional rights.” Two-hundred and forty-three other incidents in the database were discounted because they had no connection to the Department of Defense

problem?

QUOTE

yet they all remained in the database.

anyone who works with any kind of database can tell you things like this are always kept as references, so in the future someone asks "whatever came of that ft lauderdale meeting?" they can look it and not have to launch a whole new invesitgation

[Arvarden]

This problem is not exclusive to America, Britain is just as bad as our politicians seem to get there inspiration from US politic's.

This post has been edited by Arvarden: Dec 14 2005, 07:18 PM

[pug_ster]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10488458/

This is the first time that a president has authorized a government agency to violate a specific prohibition to eavesdroping on Americans without warrants.  Even other Republican politicans like McCain and Specter said that this is inappropriate and troubling, and you hear Bush say this:

QUOTE

“I will make this point,” he (Bush) continued. “That whatever I do to protect the American people — and I have an obligation to do so — that we will uphold the law, and decisions made are made understanding we have an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the American people.”

It makes you think that Bush is more like Big Brother.  

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Dec 14 2005, 06:25 PM)

public records kept on a public meeting...invasion of publicity?
problem?
anyone who works with any kind of database can tell you things like this are always kept as references, so in the future someone asks "whatever came of that ft lauderdale meeting?" they can look it and not have to launch a whole new invesitgation

I'm sorry, but Bush's spread of fear is so unbelievable that it seems okay for everybody to get spied on for the price of 'Freedom.'  This kind of crap is probably something that Stalin or Jiang Zemin would do, not in America.

[damam]

While I do not endorse this behavior by the bush admin, I do find it "funny" that this is getting so much press while the Barrett report is getting almost none.  

QUOTE(Arvarden @ Dec 14 2005, 03:13 AM)

The war on terror is a war on our civil liberties.  

Not too far from now I'll have the council tax inspector inspecting my property to see if he/she can squeese extra tax's out of me for having a nice view from my kitchen window and he will also increase my tax if I have made any home improvements.

Needless to say he/she will not step one foot on my property and I will refuse to pay the fine they give me.  I will prolly end up doing some time until I can get the european courts to overturn this stealth tax. . .

That is horrible - Good luck with that.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE

I'm sorry, but Bush's spread of fear is so unbelievable that it seems okay for everybody to get spied on for the price of 'Freedom.' This kind of crap is probably something that Stalin or Jiang Zemin would do, not in America.

you say people are being 'spied" on, but everything listed was public to begin with

now if bush was keeping tabs on what peopel talk about in the privacy of their own homes, or something, then it would be different

oh, and if you want to talk about invasion of privacy, the clinton administration started echelon, which has been described by the very apt quote 'Big Brother Will Know Your Every Move'

like pretty much everything bush does, invasion of privacy for the sake of national security is nothing new

[pug_ster]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Dec 18 2005, 01:28 AM)

you say people are being 'spied" on, but everything listed was public to begin with

now if bush was keeping tabs on what peopel talk about in the privacy of their own homes, or something, then it would be different

oh, and if you want to talk about invasion of privacy, the clinton administration started echelon, which has been described by the very apt quote 'Big Brother Will Know Your Every Move'

like pretty much everything bush does, invasion of privacy for the sake of national security is nothing new

Most of these people in the NSA 'infilitrate' these peace groups posing themselves as peace activists.  It is basically the same as some NARC infilitrate a drug ring by joining them.  At least the NARC would get a warrant/court order to do so.

There's a big difference between Bush is doing with the NSA and Clinton is doing is doing with echelon.  1) echelon mostly does its spying outside the US, not against Americans living in the US.  2) They usually would get a warrant/court order from a judge before spying.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE

1) echelon mostly does its spying outside the US, not against Americans living in the US.

you honestly believe that?

QUOTE

2) They usually would get a warrant/court order from a judge before spying.

see above

This post has been edited by lordvader129: Dec 18 2005, 06:58 PM

[damam]

QUOTE(pug_ster @ Dec 17 2005, 06:46 PM)

There's a big difference between Bush is doing with the NSA and Clinton is doing is doing with . . .  

What clinton did with the IRS, Justice Dept, FBI, and Echelon pales in comparison.  And just think, in a couple years we could go through it all over again.

[puckSR]

The difference:

Law enforcement frequently bends the rules...they know that if they get caught they will be in trouble, so they only bend the rules in extreme cases.  It is still illegal, so they are still technically breaking the law.

PATRIOT ACT:  This actually creates a law that violates civil liberties, and because of its rather vague nature it gives law enforcement a great deal of leeway in breaking the law.  The problem with government or law enforcement or any "protecting" agency is that they will always be more effective if they are given more freedom in their actions.  However, if you give them too much freedom they begin to abuse the power and make mistakes.

The PATRIOT ACT is much worse than what previous administrations did, because it is a law that allows the constitution to be violated.

[lordvader129]

the only difference is now you can read on cnn.com when liberties are violated, as opposed to not knowing about it all

like i said, its been going on for 229 years, the only difference is now you can read about it in the newspaper


but i suppose ignorance is bliss

This post has been edited by lordvader129: Dec 18 2005, 08:17 PM

[puckSR]

No....let me explain

it is illegal for you to drive faster than the posted speed limit
some people drive faster than the posted speed limit

You may have a good excuse to be driving faster than the posted speed limit, and if you can justify your reason in court, then you will be absolved.  You may have had a medical emergency.  This does not, however, mean that anyone with a medical emergency is allowed to speed.  There is no law that specifically states that you may speed, the courts do allow exceptions though.  If the law stated that an emergency situation allows you to violate all traffic laws, and you are allowed to decide what constitutes an emergency, then many people would be driving recklessly on the roads.  

The point is...there is a clear difference between making exceptions, and flat out allowing something.  Previously we made exceptions, the Patriot Act flat out allows the violation of civil liberties.

[damam]

I am no supporter of the patriot act and i was extremely proud of my state for officially condemning it.  I am also disappointed that this administration went around the law despite the massive leadway that has been given to them.  There were plenty of judges that would have allowed for it to happen had they only followed the law.  The other secret is that they never needed the patriot act to do any of it in the first place.  FISA already allowed for it (you can thank carter for that).

However, atleast this administration can say it was done to save the lives of americans.  What Clinton did was purely for political stronge arming.