NSA Database
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by kretinus
So would have something as simple as a stronger ****pit door, something safety experts had been asking for for years, yet Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush refused to listen, catering instead to the airline industry who didn't want to spend the money.
And then when Bush finally was backed into a corner over the issue after 9/11, the doors were mandated, only at tax payer expense.
And again, the issue isn't whether or not any of us have something to hide, the issue is the government intruding into our lives without warrant or suspicion, unless you want to argue we're all under suspicion, military or civilian.
You are indeed entitled to your opinion, but please do not be so arrogant (and arrogance is exactly what it is) as to pretend that just because you have no problems with the government you serve and what it does that other decent law abiding citizens shouldn't either. Some of us hold our freedoms a bit more dear that to sell them down the river for some imagined sense of security.
And then when Bush finally was backed into a corner over the issue after 9/11, the doors were mandated, only at tax payer expense.
And again, the issue isn't whether or not any of us have something to hide, the issue is the government intruding into our lives without warrant or suspicion, unless you want to argue we're all under suspicion, military or civilian.
You are indeed entitled to your opinion, but please do not be so arrogant (and arrogance is exactly what it is) as to pretend that just because you have no problems with the government you serve and what it does that other decent law abiding citizens shouldn't either. Some of us hold our freedoms a bit more dear that to sell them down the river for some imagined sense of security.
Keep whining on a web page about something you don't agree with. You can call my confidence in our elected represenatives to do what they feel they need to arrogance all you want but guess what, it doesn't matter. Do you really believe the government is logging every call you make? THAT IS ARROGANCE! The government isn't intruding in our lives, to believe so would earn you a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.
"Those "patriots" who support this gross abuse of government power should be ashamed. The NSA is logging every call that is made and building a database of behaviors and patterns." -VADER716
I feel no shame, those of you who whine about something you percieve to be a problem without offering a solution should be the ones who feel shame...Oh, by the way, it was President Clinton that authorized the search for key words using a computer program in Washington to monitor ALL e-mail traffic...in 1996. I don't remember impeachment hearings happening over that...they did happen over something else though Hmmmmm
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by kretinus
That would be incorrect. Airline safety experts have been calling for stronger ****pit security since Reagn was in office because hijackers were becoming more erratic and it was becoming obvious that they were willing to take lives regardless of negotiations.
**** Cheney refused to even meet with those experts. And ****pit security goes directly to the reason 9/11 was possible. If they weren't able to get into the ****pit, they couldn't turn the plane into a missile, it's really that simple.
I find it rather pathetic that Bush almost immediately after 9/11 finally decided it would be prudent to install the doors at tax payer expense, not airline expense, you know the people who should be paying for it?
If you disgaree with me that's fine, but the fact that it's not just a small minority who have a problem with it (35% are strongly opposed to it and of the 65% who "don't have a problem with it" not all are "strongly in favor of it") says that there are a large number of people (including conservative republicans) who think it's going to far.
**** Cheney refused to even meet with those experts. And ****pit security goes directly to the reason 9/11 was possible. If they weren't able to get into the ****pit, they couldn't turn the plane into a missile, it's really that simple.
I find it rather pathetic that Bush almost immediately after 9/11 finally decided it would be prudent to install the doors at tax payer expense, not airline expense, you know the people who should be paying for it?
If you disgaree with me that's fine, but the fact that it's not just a small minority who have a problem with it (35% are strongly opposed to it and of the 65% who "don't have a problem with it" not all are "strongly in favor of it") says that there are a large number of people (including conservative republicans) who think it's going to far.
Secondly, that poll is from Newsweek magazine, a decidedly left leaning publication...and still 65% favor the NSA survaillance.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
If you want to speak of government intrusions, may I suggest doing a search on ECHELON. The Clinton administration approved of ALL the NSA is doing now plus also recording and listening to private citizens phone calls...
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Why is it whenever Bush is criticised, his supporters immediately start whining that ***** did it to?
Amazing that for all the hatred expressed towards Clinton, Bush supporters are using his behavior as a defense to Bushs. It even funnier than the dems thinking all they have to do is slam Bush to get elected.
Amazing that for all the hatred expressed towards Clinton, Bush supporters are using his behavior as a defense to Bushs. It even funnier than the dems thinking all they have to do is slam Bush to get elected.
Last edited by kretinus; May 14, 2006 at 06:32 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
I'll offer one more post and I'm done with this thread.
Here's a solution: STOP TRACKING THE CALLS.
People will believe what they want. I'm not going to debate those that can't see reason because they see Bush as the second coming. His days are numbered and then we can argue over this with a Democrat doing it. We'll see how consistent the views are then.
I've said my peace....
Here's a solution: STOP TRACKING THE CALLS.
People will believe what they want. I'm not going to debate those that can't see reason because they see Bush as the second coming. His days are numbered and then we can argue over this with a Democrat doing it. We'll see how consistent the views are then.
I've said my peace....
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Originally Posted by USAFPATRIOT1
The Clinton administration in the 90's authorized the monitoring of ALL e-mail traffic, looking for certain key words. Many people are not familiar with this fact. Cell phone companys have indeed been giving your information out, however, this is not by government request. The NSA wiretapping authorization IS NOT unlawful or intrusive. The only way we will find terrorists is by monitoring a possible terrorist cell's communications. You are insane if you think you can't already be monitored by satellite or the very cell phone you carry-the downside of all technology. If you are not commiting a crime, why should you worry? If you are calling a terrorist or a terrorist affiliate, why shouldn't the government know? The senate ALL democrat and republican...knew about this long ago. Funny, they all approved it. Democratic senators act like they are shocked when they here it in public...however they were briefed and knew. They all knew and they are shameful to act as if it's a violation of our civil rights...what a crock. I can't stand the hypocrisy of the democratic party, playing this like they had no clue...
Come on, we're all interested in your views, but you don't have to lie to us to be interesting.
edit: Guess who's getting impeached? http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/...oll/index.html
Last edited by MnFatz; May 14, 2006 at 10:23 AM.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by MnFatz
This would be serious...if it were actually true.
Come on, we're all interested in your views, but you don't have to lie to us to be interesting.
edit: Guess who's getting impeached? http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/...oll/index.html
Come on, we're all interested in your views, but you don't have to lie to us to be interesting.
edit: Guess who's getting impeached? http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/...oll/index.html
Hey, did you read the link I submitted earlier? probably not...
And you actually believe what CNN has to say? The President will not be impeached, however the Democrats want to impeach him, I doubt that will happen...
KRETINUS
Is that still all you have to submit?
Typical of most forums, liberals like to whine but no solutions to catching terrorists...or solving any other problem for that matter
F150online
Founder
Founder
Joined: Nov 1996
Posts: 3,008
Likes: 0
From: Roswell, GA USA
For those that are against this program, I'm wondering how you would feel if it was used reactively, rather than proactively. This is not intended as a pointed question or intended to call anyone out. For instance, in the days immediately following a terrorist attack, would you think it would be appropriate and reasonable for the government to subpoena Cingular, Bellsouth, etc. for these records so they can attempt to connect the dots and try to figure out who perpetrated the attack after the fact?
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by webmaster
For those that are against this program, I'm wondering how you would feel if it was used reactively, rather than proactively. This is not intended as a pointed question or intended to call anyone out. For instance, in the days immediately following a terrorist attack, would you think it would be appropriate and reasonable for the government to subpoena Cingular, Bellsouth, etc. for these records so they can attempt to connect the dots and try to figure out who perpetrated the attack after the fact?
I do have problems with calling every individual and organization a suspect.