Mushroom Man

Thought this was interesting.
Obama claimed he was against warrantless wiretapping during election time, yet now is starting to push toward lax wiretapping laws. More change we can BELIEVE in!

article pre-election:
Obama: No warrantless wiretaps if you elect me | News Blog - CNET News

current video:

Honestly, I don't see a huge problem with this. I understand how people feel it is a violation of privacy, but it seems this is more to do with catching terrorists than anything. I can't even imagine something I have ever said on the phone or typed online that could harm me if someone was snooping around my lines.

opinions?

__________________

sterbo

I disagree.
I see it as a huge problem. This is supposed to be a nation of laws in which the people are protected by rights established under our Constitution.
People can spin it any way they want but the safeguards created vis a vie the establishment of proof resulting in a Warrant is tried and true and no amount of double speak is going to make me believe that one governmental agency, acting on it's own, is for our own good and protection.
It's nothing but subterfuge in the ongoing slide towards a inevitable time some years from now whereby the governmental net will be fully cast and 'we the people' will have lost some of our most basic rights.

The old 'It's to protect you/us from the "terrorists" is a great ploy and all too many of us have fallen for it, hook line and sinker.
Don't get me wrong. We certainly need to maintain due diligence but that's not what this is all about.

Mark my words. We will all live to rue the day we abrogated our rights under the specter of yet another BoogieMan hiding under our proverbial beds...

__________________

Hashishi

Disregarding that whatever you say isn't illegal or admissable in court (which is in itself by no means a given), that's one more person in the world to know about the sort of kinky shit you may or may not be into.

How do you feel about it now?

__________________

LowRider

someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama vote for the immunity bill for all the phone companies that didn't check warrants?

Forgot to add, how hard would it to be to pass a bill that said if your a terrorist or a suspecting terrorist we can wiretap you. that bill i would go for but this bill seems to give them free rain like when Bush was in

Mushroom Man

I meant that on a personal level. Like I said earlier, I understand that some find it an extreme violation of personal space and privacy. I agree that it is as well and can completely understand where they are coming from, but on personal level it's not something I would care about. I keep revealing information about myself written down or between my loved ones, my phone conversations are always simple and to the point.

If someone wants to sit around listening to my phone calls or have them recorded they can be my guest. Of course my opinion would be different if I was a drug dealer or ran a business that could get me into trouble legally, or if I had 'secrets' I would tell someone over the phone. But in reality I do not. I guess once everything you say goes straight to an archive that can be viewed by anyone/anywhere is where I'll start to get uncomfortable.

troublemaker_42

Like I said, the only CHANGE is the lies told and the faces telling the lies...the more things change, the more they remain the same

__________________
Ted Nugent: "To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness. How unnatural. How cheap. How cowardly. How pathetic."


If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

Negation

Laws are in place to protect us not just from each other, but from the government as well. If this were to go through, that's one less layer of protection we have against an over zealous government. Simply letting the government stampede all over people's rights in the name of "protecting you against terrorism!" is a bad thing, and frankly, it scares me that so many people feel that nothing matters more than being protected against the bad guys. If anything is fair game as long as it's cloaked in the name of protection from terrorists and foreign enemies, what's next? Mass censorship? Cameras on sign posts and street lights? Government cameras installed in homes? Random searches of persons, vehicles, and homes for any reason, including no reason? A police state? I don't think we're headed that way, but this is simply one step towards what could be a disaster.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am not supporting terrorism at all, and I feel that terrorism is indeed a major threat that needs to constantly be worked against. However, I also feel very strongly that sacrificing domestic rights in the name of staving off foreign terrorism is a wholly bad notion, and personally, I feel much more terrified by a government who will sacrifice those rights and the people who support the sacrifice of those rights than I do of the terrorists themselves.

Texas Toker

When as a society we give up our liberty a little at a time ....we don't notice it. Then all of a sudden we realize holy crap I have chains on my neck......by then it's too late.

yoman3

Dude, do you ever let people listen to you when you're on the phone if you're talking to a friend about personal shit, or look at your online conversations? Why would you let the government do that? Sure, maybe they won't care THAT much, but it's still freaky as fuck, and there's always the chance that you say something that just might be "bad" to them.

subs1000w

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin

they are going to use "terrorism" to take away all our liberties and freedoms just wait and see

this is just more proof obama is a puppet for the same people the bush2 and clinton was a puppet for and if america doesnt wake up soon this is going to get BAD we need to elect leaders who are not puppets and a few run but the media again controlled by the same people who "try" to control politics only talk about the candadates who they know they can control

im try not to spacificly endorse ron paul but he is the best example of media ignoring him every chance they get, ron paul isnt even a real republican hes a libertarian but he runs as a republican so he can get on the debates smart man, there are other candadates who are not controlled mainly 3rd party but unfortuanitly they dont stand a chance, dennis kucinich seems like a good candadate on the dem side

heres a few examples