Bush Admits to Ordering NSA to Illegally Spy on Americans

Post by **ucrzymofo87** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:32 am

What is the alternative to not catching people calling Al Qaeda operatives in foreign countries? If the NSA had not been spying on Faris, then the Brooklyn bridge may not be standing today. Unfortunately, we will probably need another 9/11 for people to finally understand the nature of the enemy we face, oh well.

Post by **Sortep** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:06 am

ucrzymofo87 wrote:What is the alternative to not catching people calling Al Qaeda operatives in foreign countries? If the NSA had not been spying on Faris, then the Brooklyn bridge may not be standing today. Unfortunately, we will probably need another 9/11 for people to finally understand the nature of the enemy we face, oh well.

nature of the enemy... thats debateable... what isn't debateable are my freedoms and rights... the "war on terror" can be waged cleanly without diminishing my rights as an american citizen... rather than attacking our own citizens, we should be refining the process in which we identify and go after the enemy... not only will this benefit those of us who actually enjoy our rights... it will help us in the "war on terror" as it effectively seperates the .03% of the islamic community who are terrorists from the 90% who simply disagree with our actions... less innocents affected = less terrorists created

Post by **evilester_me** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:47 am

Sortep wrote:
nature of the enemy... thats debateable... what isn't debateable are my freedoms and rights... the "war on terror" can be waged cleanly without diminishing my rights as an american citizen... rather than attacking our own citizens, we should be refining the process in which we identify and go after the enemy... not only will this benefit those of us who actually enjoy our rights... it will help us in the "war on terror" as it effectively seperates the .03% of the islamic community who are terrorists from the 90% who simply disagree with our actions... less innocents affected = less terrorists created

I fully agree with you, and was just to type it myself but you already did it for me.

Post by **Killfile** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:14 pm

AGAIN - FISA allows the NSA to spy on people like Faris and then get a warrent AFTER THE FACT. That is more than enough of a stretch as is. What possible good does removing the need for a warrent at all do?

Are you reading the news at ALL? Warrentless searches CAN NOT be justified against American Citizens. Why? Because there exists NO permutation of events wherein removing the need for a warrent allows more expedient searches/wiretaps of people who are under reasonable suspician.

When you can apply for and be granted the warrent AFTER THE FACT that entire line of reasoning goes out the window.

Post by **evilester_me** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:16 am

I think you lose ucrzymofo87

Post by **newbified** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:00 am

Next we'll have police entering our houses without warrants, and if they find anything illegal upon their search, they could simply file for warrants based on what they find.

I don't see how this wouldn't fit under an illegal search and seizure. They used warrantless wiretaps to spy on American citizens who were having a foreign phone call.

The fact that it was given a warrant after the fact disgusts me. They started an action which they knew full well requires a warrant to complete, and instead of following the legal route, they instead listened to phone conversations illegally and then went back to get the warrant after they had amassed evidence based on this illegal wire tap.

Post by **Eldo** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 1:42 pm

newbified wrote:Next we'll have police entering our houses without warrants, and if they find anything illegal upon their search, they could simply file for warrants based on what they find.

Actually, new Australian anti-terrorism laws says that the police can arrest a terrorist suspect and search their place without the need for a warrant, detaining up to 48 hours or more. But who gives a shit about Australia, it wasn't even considered a target until, well, Australia just came and made themselves one.

Post by **newbified** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 1:58 pm

Now I don't know much about Australian politics/laws or anything so I can't say how legal/illegal that legislation is.

I simply know the US Constitution, the very document the United States was founded on, grants the countries citizens protection from unlawful searches and seizures.

If Australia has similar laws, then I wouldn't agree to that, especially since as far as I know Australia has never been targeted by a foreign terrorist organization. But like I said, I'm not sure.

I just think it's ridiculous people were spied on by the order of the President himself, and were stripped of their own civil rights in his mad pursuit for terrorists. You have to wonder at which point the President might be crossing the lines into paranoia.