The Wiretapping Decision:

Excerpt from news report on CNN

"Attorney General Alberto Gonzales seemed to reflect the fatigue of a politically and legally beleaguered White House when he paused for a sigh as he began a press conference Thursday afternoon to respond to a federal judge's ruling that the Administration's controversial domestic wiretapping program is illegal and should be stopped immediately. He said he was "disappointed" by the decision — and he looked it."

Do you think it was the right decicion???

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Grrrreeeat, just great!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

no its a bad decision! the Govt' needs to be able to listen in on conversations that could lead to potential security problems in the US.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I don't know much about the program - got a link?

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I bet this is going to be a heated topic, but here is my two cents...

I do not think it was the right decision. I can write a book as to why I feel this way. The long story short is that I do not care if it violates my privacy to keep me and my family safe. I have nothing to hide and could care less if they listen to what I have to say on the phone.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

good points....

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by BabyAvocado

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I agree. This administration thinks they can change the rules to suit their needs all the time.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by BabyAvocado

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by BabyAvocado

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by BabyAvocado

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I think, if you don have anything to hide, what is the big deal? Almost on a daily basis, I get my bag checked. I live and work in NYC and travel the subways with a decent sized bag (I am a teacher) So, unless they are going to grade my research papers, go right ahead, listen to my conversations, seach my bags, I don't really care. I have nothing to hide.

If they were doing this more often, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have happened and my DH who worked in Tower II still wouldn't be in counseling and having nightmares as the 5th anniversary approaches!

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Message edited 8/18/2006 10:28:34 AM.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by BabyAvocado

Okay - it's what I thought.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the ruling.

Ever since 9/11 the government has run away with right to privacy and other civil rights violations that everyone is gleefully accepting because they keep it all under the umbrella of "it's to protect our country from more terror attacks like 9/11". And so many of us hear that and immediately accept these violations because of that little clause without realizing that little by little, our government is eating away the very freedoms and way of life we are supposed to NOT be letting the terrorist affect. So in essence we are letting the terrorists win by blindly accepting things like this and letting our government slowly but surely erode our freedoms.

It's become really scary to me. When I walk into Pathmark and have to see a sign that says "We reserve the right to search and inspect any and all packages of our patrons" I'm like . Suddenly Pathmark, a supermarket, has the right to search my purse if they feel like it? Granted, right now that power is not being abused, and even if they've had it all along - NOW they are advertising it. It's only a matter of time, IMO before they start using and abusing it. Scary scary scary.

So I say for this ruling. The court decided in the best interests of the country and the government went about this all the wrong way. What they should have done was fight to make it EASIER to get wire tap warrant.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

Message edited 8/18/2006 10:28:43 AM.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I'm very sorry for everyone who has had negative effects from 9/11, but the loss of our constitutional rights gives ME nightmares and promises to me much more far reaching than 9/11.

AND I don't see how wiretapping w/o a warrant is going to stop terrorism. it's not that difficult to get a warrant.

Message edited 8/18/2006 10:31:07 AM.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

Posted by Lisa

and as far as Pathmark searching packages...its done because of shoplifting....nothing else! so if you are a shoplifter then beware!! I dont see how wiretapping equates to a supermarket checking bags for stolen property!!

Re: The Wiretapping Decision:

I think that if the proper steps were taken to to do this, then ok. Do it but I also think that after 911 the govt' or Bush seem to think they have this all mighty power to do what "they" think is ok. There are rules that need to be followed before you wire eevryone's phone calls.

Re: The Wiretapping Decision: