| 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 (2,261 Views) | |
| Brazy CK | Jan 4 2006, 10:38 PM Post #46 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
Paranoid? ...Maybe. I just have a hard time envisioning any government so pure that they wouldn't take the opportunity to abuse this. =/ |
![]() |
|
| sephiroth667 | Jan 4 2006, 10:42 PM Post #47 |
![]()
Nostalgia
![]()
|
Depends what you would rather have- Terrorists abusing the ability to use the telephone or the government abusing the power to stop them. Even though I am damn near sure very little gov't abusing will go on, the latter sounds nicer anywho |
| |
![]() |
|
| Superbus | Jan 4 2006, 10:49 PM Post #48 |
![]() ![]()
|
"Well, we were worried about something else... but while we're at it, you said something we don't approve of about our government... you know saying those things about the President is against the law... you are under arrest..." That is what people fear. That, and the people actually doing the grunt work... well, stories travel. "Dawg, you should have heard what that woman in Nebraska was talking about! Some dude did DP to her! Man, she's a little slut!" Weather there's a name attached to that or not, people fear having their liberties tapped into like that. ESPECIALLY with the other liberties we've lost all in the name of "Security". |
|
Avatar approved by JAFFAR AND EAICHU!!!!! Please forward all complaints about my avatar and signatures to your nearest brick wall. You won't get anything out of it, but it will pay more attention to you than I will.
| |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 4 2006, 11:06 PM Post #49 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
Freedom of Speech says you can say whatever you want (barring slander and libel), but that doesn't mean that you have right to decide who hears it. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Wind Sword | Jan 5 2006, 04:34 PM Post #50 |
|
SKILLNADEN ÄR DRINKABILITY
![]()
|
What people fear is against the law and unbased. Otherwise Michael Moore would be on death-row. Ohhhhhhh... I just got chills saying that... What liberties have we lost in the name of security? Grunt work is one thing, but keep in mind they don't exactly have a medium to tell the world. Unless they wiretapped some huge celebrity, no one would care. And no celebrities are suspected of being terrorists. Not to mention telling the world about what you overheard would mean telling them you tapped them, and that would raise questions as why to someone was being tapped with no clear connection to terrorism. It would cost them their job, and throw them in jail. Hold the phone! I just recieved some news in my favor, from none other than George Bush himself! Apparently, the wiretaps were only used in phone calls between people in the United States AND OTHER COUNTRIES. So only you have a mistress in Guam, are subscribing to Playboy Germany, or talking to your Cousin Vinny in Italy, your conversations wouldn't matter anyways. That's not to mention, these other countries are definately in the Middle East. Countries that doesn't garauntee the freedom of speech. All you have to do is use the words of the other man in there to, and any freedom of privacy evaporates in the air. That's not to mention Bush said he authorized the wiretaps thirty times. Ummmm... he's not exactly running his own Gestapo here. Bush is the first President to claim inherent self-authority, without Congress, over security matters. Oh what's that you say? President CLINTON said the same thing? He said he held supreme power over national security when Aldrich Ames sold CIA secrets? I don't recall the liberal media caring back then. |
~~Wind Sword
Touching. Scientology
Smartest post ever made. | |
![]() |
|
| Severian | Jan 5 2006, 07:46 PM Post #51 |
![]()
Bucket/Schtolteheim from FEW
![]()
|
Nope, there is. Well, I honestly can't remember if Bill of Rights are contained within the constitution,
Of course, it's likely that one could eventually argue that preventing terrorism is an absolute probable cause that allows us to tap phone lines. Also, it's notable that this is a dated law, before tapping of phone conversations existed. So it is probable that phone convos don't fall under the above law. Anyway, my real problem is worrying we aren't doing enough in more important areas. My memory is hazy, but I remember hearing a while back online about how easy it is to smuggle things via boats and stuff, and talking about how easy it would be to get things into the country illegally without any real surveillance if you could get aid from the boat crew and such. Not sure about how accurate it was, and I'm too lazy to look for pages on boat security. However, I'll give an example of something I'm radically against: racial profiling. No, not because I'm worried about people being racist. The problem is the idea that arabs might be put through more serious searches than others at airports, for instance, is that carries an undertone that we're worried we'll miss certain kinds of weapons on searches we might use on other people. Considering 9/11, we should be putting everyone through the same searches no matter their race, and those searches should be the highest security level we feel we need to apply. Not only using the highest security levels at random. However, I'll admit I'm not even too sure whether racial profiling is used at airports, so it's kind of absurd for me to complain about it; I'm just arguing against rumored techniques. In terms of more security in general, I will always have a certain paranoia that the government will use its power to incriminate people and such because I'm a paranoid bastard. Can you blame me? I've read enough cases from past and present about corruption within liber/conserv movements in terms of money and the like that I'm distrustful of both sides of government at this point. But as of right now, I don't have anything to hide, so I don't care. I don't like the patriot acts that I've read, though, because of non-security related clauses in the Act. |
|
[size=5]"We must also remember that the emotions have a logic of their own, for which the formula is 'I feel sure that this is so.'"[/size] ~JAK Thomson, Rhetorical Prose Thinking of Maud, You Forget Everything Else Red Pandas are so cute it makes me sick. | |
![]() |
|
| Wind Sword | Jan 5 2006, 07:48 PM Post #52 |
|
SKILLNADEN ÄR DRINKABILITY
![]()
|
............. Dude, that's about search warrants. Completely unrelated. |
~~Wind Sword
Touching. Scientology
Smartest post ever made. | |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 5 2006, 07:59 PM Post #53 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
In terms of Securty, we have to trust our government. If we don't trust our government to defend us, and so we don't le them do certain things (because we don't trust them), they won't be able to do whats nessisary. Thats not to say trust them in everything. I for one don't trust the government with spending or money management. Even my own party. Even my president. I don't trust any of them to be responsible with it, because they ALL waste it, republican and democrat. But thats a different topic... |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| Brazy CK | Jan 5 2006, 08:02 PM Post #54 |
![]()
5 warnings=ban
![]()
|
And I agree, we NEED to be able to trust our government, but I don't know if I can do it to the extent of giving them supreme control of our various forms of transmissions. =/ |
![]() |
|
| Severian | Jan 5 2006, 08:50 PM Post #55 |
![]()
Bucket/Schtolteheim from FEW
![]()
|
"There is nothing about privacy in the Constitution". Also, again, I was saying I wasn't sure how the law would be interpreted in modern day, and moreover something I forgot to mention was that there is likely some sort of legislation dealing with phone tapping....well, geez, I guess that'd be the patriot act, probably
((I assume you're responding to my thing about money)) It's not wasting money I'm talking about. It's straight out corruption; I'm talking about where the right and left get their money from - as a conservative, you'd probably be more happy to hear about the left as an example. Well, it's dated, but Covert Cadre was a long book I've heard about, never actually read, with huge amounts of research on various connections between a leftist think-tank and Russia during the Cold War. What makes me suspicious when I hear about cases like this, though, isn't the actual funding that worries me; it's how both sides attack the other for corruption and the like while ignoring their own. I don't know I could trust either side with such a large amount of control over hearing, and (as I said before, I'm crazy paranoid) changing what people say over the phone. But, someone said wire taps only were used 30 times. Makes my paranoia fade quite a lot. |
|
[size=5]"We must also remember that the emotions have a logic of their own, for which the formula is 'I feel sure that this is so.'"[/size] ~JAK Thomson, Rhetorical Prose Thinking of Maud, You Forget Everything Else Red Pandas are so cute it makes me sick. | |
![]() |
|
| Sentenal | Jan 5 2006, 09:14 PM Post #56 |
|
Won the Impossible Debate (twice)
![]()
|
I was mostly refering to alot of people here have a huge distrust in our government to wire tap responsibly, saying we should trust our government. I brought up money, as an area where you shouldn't trust government. More along the lines of spending, bloated budgets, etc etc. |
[/center]Conquered FEFF Awards
| |
![]() |
|
| (*Jman*) | Jan 7 2006, 05:48 PM Post #57 |
|
Kakatte Koi!
![]()
|
Riiiiiiiight. Ok, so what if the gov't makes a new bill that lets them install cameras everywhere in everyone's house? Surely you aren't doing anything illegal, so you shouldn't care what the gov't sees you doing. Let's take a look at teh past of terrorist attacks in teh USA. Taken from Infoplease. 1 in 1920 1 in 1975 1 in 1993 1 in 1995 1 in 2001 Should we really let teh gov't tap phones forever for 5 terrorist attacks in 81 years? There has GOT to be a better way to stop terrorist attacks than that. How? I don't have a clue. But that's what teh CIA is supposed to be doing, not me. |
![]() ![]() Formerly Omni, Rosa, Terra, Serra, Captain Star Falco, Minamimoto | |
![]() |
|
| Bladelord | Jan 7 2006, 08:21 PM Post #58 |
![]() ![]()
|
I'm taking it that noone in your family died on September 11th? People that have actually felt an impact on these terrorist attacks, however few there might be probably aren't sitting at their computers talking about how 5 attacks in 80 years is no big deal. To them it's a really big deal. As for this tactic in negating terrorist attacks.... I would be alright with the phones tapped, but camera's in my house, I don't think so. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Superbus | Jan 7 2006, 09:01 PM Post #59 |
![]() ![]()
|
Bladelord, you're a smart kid, but hear this: I was AT September 11th. And I think the Patriot Act, and all this wiretapping stuff is a crock of shit. |
|
Avatar approved by JAFFAR AND EAICHU!!!!! Please forward all complaints about my avatar and signatures to your nearest brick wall. You won't get anything out of it, but it will pay more attention to you than I will.
| |
![]() |
|
| Wind Sword | Jan 7 2006, 09:48 PM Post #60 |
|
SKILLNADEN ÄR DRINKABILITY
![]()
|
Superbus is right, kind of. But so is Bladelord. I think what Bladelord's trying to get across is that OmniHax makes it out like there's been a small amount of terrorist attacks, which is true. But he forgets to mention that in the last one, 2,000 plus people were murdered, and America dragged into war. And why isn't Pearl Harbor on that list? |
~~Wind Sword
Touching. Scientology
Smartest post ever made. | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:16 AM Jul 11
|











[/center]










. There is nothing about privacy in the Constitution. Otherwise regular wire-taps wouldn't be allowed at all.




3:16 AM Jul 11