Letters to the Editor
-
re: Shooter isn't an American
Ah yes. The gratuitous insults are a sure sign of incoherence. So are misquotes parading as absolutes. People that use Franklin as a bludgeon invariably get it wrong.
We'd read about how those who will sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither and all that stuff--you know, basic American civics.
Actually the quote is "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
Perhaps you could explain to us how overseas calls to established wiretaps in a foreign country are covered by the Constitution as an essential liberty? Particularly, when calls to domestic wiretaps aren't?Perhaps you could explain how it is that calls crossing our borders are sacrosanct, when doing the same with laptops, cars, and body cavities aren't? No warrant required.
Chickenshits like shooter need a place like the old USSR to feel safe from those scary terrists.
Perhaps you can explain why you need to scare people with this comparison to the USSR? I'd say it's because you have nothing better to offer.
-
re: Better wake up and smell the Zyklon B. --Aycharaych
What was that you were saying about inciting fear in other people? Why, you'd never do something vile like invoke the image of Nazis and gas ovens killing millions to make a political point, would you?
Heh. -
shooter242 and The Whole Freaking Point pass in the night
Is what the telecoms did illegal? Maybe, maybe not, time will tell. Until a court decides though, everything else is an opinion.
-- shooter242
The Whole Freaking Point being, if retroactive telecom immunity passes, there will never be a court decision.
-
Another RW smokescreen
IANAL and all that, but this just seems deceitful to me on three levels:
Perhaps you could explain to us how overseas calls to established wiretaps in a foreign country are covered by the Constitution as an essential liberty? Particularly, when calls to domestic wiretaps aren't?
First there is a big difference between domestic wiretaps, presumably issued on an individual basis for probable cause, and FISC wiretaps, which require a lower standard of proof.
Second because the bill in question even further lowers the FISC standards by allowing basket warrants, etc, that could cause many US persons to be caught up in what looks like a dragnet.
Third and most perniciously, there is ample evidence that the administration has already been breaking the law for over six years. It's apparent that they intend to go beyond the law, no matter what is enacted. So the more latitude granted by the law, the farther "out there" beyond the law the administration will be emboldened to go.
Until there is thorough accountability for the last six years, I am ready to say, enough.