waitingtables

No that isn't the issue. It is that the government can wiretap domestic calls. That means citizens, not foreigners. And my calls aren't private if they want to listen, that is the whole point here. It is illegal and unconstitutional.

ZX3

The government has always had the power to wiretap domestic calls. A warrant was needed. That has never changed, even under the Patriot Act.

The issue is whether the government can:

1. Wiretap calls originating outside the USA, to the USA, without a warrant.
2. And issues regarding modern technology: A phone call within Afghanistan might be routed through the USA first. Does that call require a warrant? Well, it does, under the FISA law which Bush has been trying to change and to which the Democrats are objecting.

waitingtables

I'm referring to warrentless wiretaps.

ZX3

warrantless wiretaps have always been completely legal- providing the communication occurs outside USA juristiction.
The problem is that the laws have not kept pace with technology.

waitingtables

I'm speaking of warrentless domestic wiretaps, jeesh. It is illegal and unconstituinal.

Grace

But we are top Dog. If the truth makes people hate us, how is that our fault?
You could say its the same thing, but I wouldnt, not even close.





LOL, yea, we just attacked Iraq just cause we could?????

LOL, Never heard of the "food for oil" program hu??? Seriously you need to find out what your talking about before you run off on these wild assuptions, Cause I never said anything EVEN REMOTLY close to that.

forester814

Of course.
We didn't have UN approval to act, but we went in anyway.
Because we could.

Because, as you put it, we are "top dog."
And you believe might makes right.
Therefore, our being "#1" means it's OK to do whatever we want.

And this is why the world hates us.
They hate your arrogance, and what it has wrought.
And because I share a country with you, they hate me too.
Thanks a lot.

Of course I've heard of it.
I'm just surprised that anyone calling themselves a Christian would support it.

I'm just speculating here, but I really don't think Jesus was a fan of starving people into doing his bidding.

But clearly, you are.

Luke 9:13-17 appears to back up my position.
What can you quote from your book to back up your position?

I find irony in a non-Christian leading a more Christ-like life than a self-proclaimed Christian.

sgtdmski

ILLEGAL- Hmmm against the law. Wait a minute, the Congress of the United States has passed the law given the President the right to do just such a thing. Hmmm. Its a law passed by Congress. Guess what by definition it is legal. Strike One!!!!

Unconstitutional - against the constitution. The 4th Amendment states that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". But wait a minute, although the meaning may be clear and simple to those of us, we all know that the Constitution says what the Justices of the Supreme Court say it says. How do we know this??? Quite easily, no where in the Constitution is the Word Abortion, yet it is a Constitutionally protected right established under Privacy, again a word that is not in the Constitution. But where did these rights come from, why of course from the pnuembras.

So you see we lay folks cannot truly know what the Constitution actually says, instead we have to wait until the nine members of the Court tell us. And they have told us in many a cases that civil liberties are trumped by National Security. Remember the Court ruled the detainment of Japanese Americans during WWII as Constitutional.

So it would not seem that since National Security trumps civil liberties the law is also contitutional. Hmmm Strike Two.

ANy more arguments?

dmk

__________________
Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles
-Russell Kirk-

waitingtables

Bush was allowing illegal wiretapping because he had no approval from Congress, so I don't know where you're getting that from. Maybe Congress folded later on, but he ok'd it and was allowing it to be done BEFORE that.

pensacola_niceman

Not to worry. I doubt very seriously that the government would be the least bit interested in your phone calls. Your husband calling you to pick up some sour cream and a six-pack of Bud is hardly of any concern to national security.