| Welcome to Fusion. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you are registering with a Yahoo e-mail address, or if you are having trouble receiving your validation e-mail, please refer to this topic for assistance. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Wait a minute.... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 3 2006, 06:39 PM (2,263 Views) | |
| Brazy CK | Jan 3 2006, 09:59 PM Post #16 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
I'm not saying I'm not willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of our country, but who is there to control who the government taps? It is too risky, in my opinion. Labels, labels, why do so many people use them? I am not liberal. I am not conservative. I am not Democratic, and I am not Republican. I have my own opinion, and I'd very much appreciate it if you didn't stereotype me to a certain group. |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 3 2006, 10:01 PM Post #17 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
How the hell does tapping the phone lines of SUSPECTED TERRORIST do ANYTHING to Freedom of Speech!? It doesn't hinder it in ANYWAY.
See above, or show me the part of the Bill of Rights that says the government can't moniter public airwaves.
Republic*, not democracy. Anyway, national security trumps this. In WW1 and WW2, people willing went through food rationing, etc etc, because the government needed to do things to fulfill its only basic purpose: National Defense.
Thats a good thing. Hinders their communications. But wait, teh internet!! No, we have operational control of the internet, so we could tap that as well. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Cyrus | Jan 3 2006, 10:10 PM Post #18 |
![]()
|
Isn't tapping into the phone-line like listening to some people talking by putting your ear up against the door? |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 3 2006, 10:12 PM Post #19 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
Caps much? Don't you think that the prospect of the Big Brother listening to everyone's conversations might hinder people's spark to, I don't know, speak against their country without the fear of being deemed a terrorist and getting bombed off the map?
Freedom of speech, suported by my answer above.
There's a difference between sacrificing food rations and sacrificing rights that our country so fabulously plasters around.
And you completely trust that no one in our government will abuse this? I'm not sure whether you're a hardcore patriot or a fool... or both... =/ |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 3 2006, 10:40 PM Post #20 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
Richie, first off, they arn't listening to everyone's conversations. They are only doing it to suspected terrorist. And secondly, lets take right now as an example. Take Bob, the Anti-War-Biberal-Bush-Hater. Every day, he talks bad about our government, our president, our government's policies, etc etc. There are tons of people like Bob. Yet has the US "bombed" Bob yet? Has the government stuck all the Bobs of the country into jail for treason, because of what they say (publicly, even)? No.
You missed the point. In times of War, we need to do what we can help our government defend us.
If the Government DID abuse it, I can garantee you people would be voted out of office the very next election, and the problem fixed. And right now, its a fact that we have operational control of the internet. We have since it was created. And I've yet to see major abuse of it there. Plus, when it comes right down it it, both the public airwaves, and the internet, are the American government's property. If it was private properity, I might be upset about it. Richie, give me an example of government doing all things things your worried they might do, like tap phone conversations for minor things just to screw the little man, or moniter the internet to screw the little man there. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Wind Sword | Jan 3 2006, 10:40 PM Post #21 |
|
SKILLNADEN ÄR DRINKABILITY
![]()
|
First off, I don't think the government will abuse this. What motive do they really have? Shock and horror! The Government is putting away criminals! There is a strong implication this was used to lock away the Lackawanna Six. I happen to live VERY close to Lackawanna. Second off, the freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want and not get persecuted for it. Wire taps work off the assurance that people wiretapped aren't being persecuted for saying stuff, but rather fooled into giving testimony against themselves in other crimes. Your idea that it will be used to supress people who are using propaganda by phone(?) is laughable. Perhaps if we didn't have court systems, the internet, appeal courts, the media, the Supreme Court, an active voting public and Michael Moore, namely a full-out Socialist commune, it would be plausible. Not to mention terrorism and treason are both perfectly defined in the Geneva Convention and the Constitution respectively. Third off, tapping phone lines doesn't do anything unless you say something to someone else. It's not completely prying into someone's privacy. If you are already saying something out load, into a phone, that doesn't hinder any of your rights. It'd be like being overheard talking to a friend. As such, the bathtub analogy explodes, as it would be comparitively giving your partner a video of you in the bathroom. Besides, lets face it. How many emotional, personal conversations happen over the phone? None. You talk to your relatives, arrange dates, hear those annoying Blockbuster recorded messages, yadda yadda yadda. Nothing personal. @Punishment Divine and Richie: The point of the Debate Forum is to debate. Contrary to what it may seem, refusing to argue a point because you claim you COULD counter it, but don't want to waste your time says: a ) You don't have a counter. b ) You don't respect the other guy. |
~~Wind Sword
Touching. Scientology
Smartest post ever made. | |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 4 2006, 03:55 PM Post #22 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
But I'm concerned that this might be just one step closer to doing this. =/
I agree, but, I mean, who the hell decides who deserves to be tapped? Are all Middle Eastern people going to be tapped? All Muslims? =/
Operational control of the internet? Uh. Yes, I suppose illegal pornography websites have been shut down, but the internet does not belong to the United States government in general. ._.;
...What? The phones they are talking about tapping are not public airwaves, the transmitting signals belong to the company distributing them and/or the person(s) buying those signals. The internet does not belong to the United States government. o___o;
Uhh, maybe in your household, but in mine, a lot of personal, private information gets shared via the phone... ._.; @Sentenal: Agreed, however, my post was also an agreement to Omni's, not just a snide comment to Seph.
|
![]() |
|
| (*Jman*) | Jan 4 2006, 04:03 PM Post #23 |
|
Kakatte Koi!
![]()
|
Wind Sword, you left out C) Both of the above :D
Ah, but you see, when using a telephone, you mean to talk to a single person. You are opting to talk to that one person and may say things you would not want other people to overhear and are only saying those things over the telephone because you think that no one can hear you except those in range of your voice and the person you're talking to.
Really? Since when did the government OWN the internet? Does that mean that those websites that end in .co.uk, .fr, ect. are really owned by the United States? o_o And how in god's name would the public found out wire-tapping was being abused? It's not like people are going to go out in public and announce that. |
![]() ![]() Formerly Omni, Rosa, Terra, Serra, Captain Star Falco, Minamimoto | |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 4 2006, 04:05 PM Post #24 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
I assume its either the Military, the FBI, the CIA, or some anti-terrorism organization like that would decide in most cases, or even the President if he wanted to take executive authority.
Actually, it does. Operational control=they do what they want with it. This is actually an issue that not many people know about right now. Did you know that the UN is trying to wrest control of the internet from the US government?
The companies distrubuting signals make use of public infastructure, which belongs to the government.
Its owned it since the US government created it. Websites that have .co.uk or .fr, etc etc, are just the same as ones that are .com, .net, except who has rights to the content. The US doesn't own the content of the internet, they own the infastructure that makes it the internet. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Jan 4 2006, 04:08 PM Post #25 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
These taps are activated by key words, IIRC. People that use these key words could be speaking of things we should know about in case of it being a threat. Honestly, why does it matter so much? It doesn't. Liberals/Democrats just want something to bitch about, as usual. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 4 2006, 04:11 PM Post #26 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
Lucas, it is wrong to question the decisions our government makes? Of course, listen to Big Brother, because if you don't, you are a Commie Nazi Marxist Bastard. =/ @Sentenal: What the bloody hell are you talking about? The United States government did NOT create the internet. T____T They did create the first computer network, which later inspired the creation of the internet (by the Swiss, by the way, Switzerland FTW), but they did not create the internet we use today... =. |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Jan 4 2006, 04:14 PM Post #27 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
Nah. It's ok. But what's the point? Your bitching won't get it changed. XP I personally like it. The government is doing what it takes to preserve our safety. They are sacraficing a tiny part of our right to privacy in order to ensure our right to life is safe. What's more important, your privacy or your life? I'll take the latter plz.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 4 2006, 04:15 PM Post #28 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
But at least I'm not supporting it just because it's sanctioned by the government. =/ |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Jan 4 2006, 04:16 PM Post #29 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
That's not the only reason I agree with it. XP Check the second, larger portion of my post.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 4 2006, 04:18 PM Post #30 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
I'm not saying that's why you supported it, I'm saying that's why I don't necessarily condemn NOT supporting it. =/ |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:16 AM Jul 11
|








[/center]












What's more important, your privacy or your life? I'll take the latter plz.

3:16 AM Jul 11