Mrs Rabbit: "Cleary you understand the need to intercept... international phone calls and/or e-mails > of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists. "
Therein lies the problem. Bush at first claimed he was only listening in on the kinds of calls you describe. It wasn't long before it was revealed he was actually listening on domestic calls on people people not suspected of anything. Me, I wouldn't have a problem with legistlation being introduced that would allow intercepting calls to Syria, Saudi et. al. countries on a watch list but NO ONE should be allowed to blatently violate the Consitution like that with impunity. The proof was conclusive. That's tyranny. That's exactly the kind of power Richard talks about preventing. On Jun 29, 5:16 am, "Mrs. Rabbit" <[email protected]> wrote: > I didn't say without cause nor warrant, did I? Clearly you understand > the need of cooperation between the telecommunications companies and > the government to intercept international phone calls and/or e-mails > of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists. Like I said, > keep your nose clean and you shouldn't have any worries. It should > help you rest better at night, really! > > BTW, have you met Jack? He's new here too! You two seem to have alot > in common! ;) > > On Jun 29, 1:24 am, Frederick The Moderate > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap > > every political adversary and their families and friends, without > > cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need > > protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of > > power and neither did the Founding Fathers. > > > On Jun 28, 9:21 pm, "Mrs. Rabbit" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I am not opposed to wire tapping, period. I have nothing to hide and > > > if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains > > > or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then > > > so be it. If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose > > > it? > > > > On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Mrs. Rabbit, > > > > > Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I > > > > take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think > > > > about it a bit more. > > > > > On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, "Mrs. Rabbit" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred! > > > > > > So I take it you oppose wiretapping? What are you afraid of? If you > > > > > are doing the right thing, then what does it matter? As many phones > > > > > calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen > > > > > to them all anyways. It's the people who are sending up red flags, > > > > > people of interest, whom they seek and monitor. > > > > > > BTW, which branch of the military were you in? > > > > > > On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > So what do all those "Constitutionalists" Republicans and > > > > > > Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard? > > > > > > Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the > > > > > > GOP > > > > > > agenda?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
