As long your not engaging in criminal activity what's there to worry about anyway? It's not like there doing this to gain intel on normal citizen's. There looking for sleeper cells, or any other threat that could do harm to the US, or other allied countries. But there is always one question that re...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

Agreed, this is no where near the first time the Gov't has taken initiative to help protect us. Quit blaming Bush....

[ more ]  [ reply ]

What is wrong?? You can trust the government?? ?The government is your friend they will take care of you?; Wait that was the RP Paranoia. Take a look at your paycheck do you still trust them. Juditual review is the watch dog on the government, they can be granted within 24 hours. History has lots...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

I thought the US Constitution had provisions dealing with unreasonable search and seizure. If Supreme Court judges rule that the wiretaps aren't gathering intelligence and the wiretaps go ahead anyway, there's a pretty good argument that the wiretaps are not merely illegal but unconstitutional....

[ more ]  [ reply ]

This issue is a non-partisan issue. If Bill Clinton, Nixon or any other president is eavesdropping on Americans, it is a problem regardless of their political affiliation.

The idea that the NSA is going to glean any significant information from listening to Americans common communications traffi...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

No it isn't legal. The constitution is the highest law of the land. If laws are unconstitutional they are not valid laws....

[ more ]  [ reply ]

If it's agents al-Qaeda like Bush alleges, why has he:

Disregarded Supreme Court judges' rulings?

Not passed the information on to the FBI or CIA?

Conducted to all intents and purposes a private "counter-terrorism" operation without having a legal, law enforcement or intelligence background?

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

So, if you work in the computer industry, you must be liberal, or at least agree that the current fuss about the NYT story really constitutes a threat to your personal liberties?

Also, you prefer to call people names rather than address their logic? ...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

ROFLOL.

Hey, Buddy.

every "Hacker" is a "terrorist" in big brothers eyes.

and i'm not talking just script kiddies.

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

>The President only authorized warrantless surveillance on those with a terrorist connection...

Define terrorist connection. In this case, it means anything that the administration says it means. And since they are doing the monitoring without a warrant, there is no one to verify that it isn't do...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

I'm hearing a lot of people talking.....but I see no links to actual facts in the thread.... just a thought....

[ more ]  [ reply ]

He broke the law. After he broke the law he tries to explain why breaking the law was needed. If this were a traffic ticket he was attempting to argue his way out of with a cop on a road-side in Mississippi at 3am... it would still not be a case for only a *warning*. He did the same thing with 2 nat...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

you're a moron

...

[ more ]  [ reply ]

Why in the hell would I want to join the NSA? to harass innocent Americans so we can find that 1 terrorist out of 379.999 million innocent Americans?

It should be no problem to get the required warrants to secretly monitor someones traffic if there is real reason to believe they are ingaged in su...

[ more ]  [ reply ]