NSA eavesdropping unconstitutional?

[Snuff 10]

So if you know that the NSA could legally conduct this kind of surveillance under FISA, why are you so fired up about this court ruling?

 

I like to be safe.

[torridjoe 15]

I said without having to WAIT for a warrant.

 

yes, that's right. But that's not really a purpose of the act.

[Red White and Blue 0]

Not really, no. It's only supposed to be used that way in emergencies. The purpose of FISA had little to nothing to do with timing of the warrant, originally.

 

Whatever. I'd rather talk about the ruling than quibble with you over rhetorical bullsh1t.

 

I like to be safe.

 

Dumbfock: What I'm trying very hard to explain to you is that this ruling does not in any way restrict law enforcement from tapping phone conversations or conducting surveillance. It only requires that surveillance on citizens be subject to oversight by the FISA court. Do you have a reason for getting bent out of shape over this? Or are you just parrotting right-wing talking points?

[Snuff 10]

Whatever. I'd rather talk about the ruling than quibble with you over rhetorical bullsh1t.

 

LOL. You just jumped up a ton on my list of geeks I do not like. You're almost on my "geeks I like" list after that remark.

[torridjoe 15]

Whatever. I'd rather talk about the ruling than quibble with you over rhetorical bullsh1t.

 

Of course you would. Who wants to quibble about having been wrong?

[Snuff 10]

Whatever. I'd rather talk about the ruling than quibble with you over rhetorical bullsh1t.

Dumbfock: What I'm trying very hard to explain to you is that this ruling does not in any way restrict law enforcement from tapping phone conversations or conducting surveillance. It only requires that surveillance on citizens be subject to oversight by the FISA court. Do you have a reason for getting bent out of shape over this? Or are you just parrotting right-wing talking points?

 

I know all of that, I already told you. You think you're the only one that reads the focking news?

I was merely bringing in another talking point to it. You don't think that posting this thread people would not EVER begin to talk about whether or not eavesdropping is right? If so, you're dumber than a focking secretary. Oh wait....

You're back on my list of "focking idiot geeks".

[Red White and Blue 0]

Of course you would. Who wants to quibble about having been wrong?

 

Torrid, of everyone here I seriously can't think of one person who's been more consistently wrong about everything than you.

[Strike 4,095]

Torrid, of everyone here I seriously can't think of one person who's been more consistently wrong about everything than you.

 

come on now. Toro isn't right very often either.

[Red White and Blue 0]

come on now. Toro isn't right very often either.

 

That's true but torrid's predictions are like the kiss of death.

 

He called Jeremy Giambi one of the best hitters in baseball. A year later and Giambi was out of the league.

[Hairy Larry 0]

I am amazed and ashamed that people are actually willing to give up rights and freedoms that men better than ourselves fought and died to protect.

[Snuff 10]

"Securing the border" isn't a solution.

 

 

I found it! I found something that I agree with torrid on!

[Strike 4,095]

That's true but torrid's predictions are like the kiss of death.

 

He called Jeremy Giambi one of the best hitters in baseball. A year later and Giambi was out of the league.

 

I'm just sayin, between those two it would be pretty difficult to figure out which one rode the shorter bus to school.

[Hairy Larry 0]

I like to be safe.

don't worry little lady, when the time comes and a real threat presents itself, men will go to war to protect you and the rights that you are so eager to give up. HTH!

[Snuff 10]

don't worry little lady, when the time comes and a real threat presents itself, men will go to war to protect you and the rights that you are so eager to give up. HTH!

 

Been there done that, but thanks sweetie. Have you served?

[torridjoe 15]

Torrid, of everyone here I seriously can't think of one person who's been more consistently wrong about everything than you.

 

then you're not thinking very hard. I've been consistently correct about quite a number of things.

 

None of which has to do with you being wrong, currently.

[Hairy Larry 0]

unconstitutional is not a crime!

[torridjoe 15]

That's true but torrid's predictions are like the kiss of death.

 

He called Jeremy Giambi one of the best hitters in baseball. A year later and Giambi was out of the league.

 

which makes me wrong how? He's not out because he has no skill; he's out because he's a head case.

[Hairy Larry 0]

you're either with Bush or you're with the terrorists.

GOLD!!

[Red White and Blue 0]

then you're not thinking very hard. I've been consistently correct about quite a number of things.

 

None of which has to do with you being wrong, currently.

 

I said that FISA was designed to allow law enforcement to conduct surveillance without having to wait for a warrant.

 

That is correct.

[GettnHuge 1]

Whatever. I'd rather talk about the ruling than quibble with you over rhetorical bullsh1t.

Dumbfock: What I'm trying very hard to explain to you is that this ruling does not in any way restrict law enforcement from tapping phone conversations or conducting surveillance. I think if a guy has 1000 cell phones we should be forced to prove that all are being used for terrorism and get 1000 warrants. That would be reasonable IMHO

 

 

fixed

[torridjoe 15]

I said that FISA was designed to allow law enforcement to conduct surveillance without having to wait for a warrant.

 

That is correct.

 

That statement is correct. But that's not what you said. You said that's why it was set up, and was a purpose of the law. It's really not.

[Guest Black Label Society]

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

[Red White and Blue 0]

That statement is correct. But that's not what you said. You said that's why it was set up, and was a purpose of the law. It's really not.

 

No I did not. I may have said it was a purpose of the FISA court or that the FISA court was designed to allow law enforcement to conduct surveillance without first getting a warrant. I never said that the court was established only for that purpose.

[GettnHuge 1]

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

 

best one yet

[Guest Black Label Society]

best one yet

 

 

 

thanks

 

 

 

 

 

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

[torridjoe 15]

No I did not. I may have said it was a purpose of the FISA court or that the FISA court was designed to allow law enforcement to conduct surveillance without first getting a warrant. I never said that the court was established only for that purpose.

 

I never indicated that you did. You said it was a purpose, and it really wasn't. It's a feature, intended for emergency situations.

[Guest Black Label Society]

I never indicated that you did. You said it was a purpose, and it really wasn't. It's a feature, intended for emergency situations.

 

 

 

shutup already torrid..try enjoying life for a change

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

[GettnHuge 1]

I never indicated that you did. You said it was a purpose, and it really wasn't. It's a feature, intended for emergency situations.

 

 

how little ye understand

[Guest Black Label Society]

how little ye understand

 

 

 

yeah......YE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

 

 

 

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

[Snoopy1 0]

how little ye understand

 

 

Seriously, I congratulate you; your streak of getting dumber every day will never be broken! You are the Cal Ripken of stupidity!

 

[Guest Black Label Society]

 

 

 

Post Padding (nothing intelligent to offer)

[dcOne 2]

I am amazed and ashamed that people are actually willing to give up rights and freedoms that men better than ourselves fought and died to protect.

 

 

It's not a freedom. You can think it is. If they didn't say they were evesdropping, but were doing it anyway, and you didn't know it, would you still be amazed and ashamed?

Would this argument/topic be taking place right now?

 

 

 

 

I am amazed and ashamed that people are actually willing to give up rights and freedoms that men better than ourselves fought and died to protect.

 

 

So here, in this statement you show concern for those that fought to protect.

 

What about those that instituted the possibility of evesdropping to protect?

 

You are defending those of that past that fought to protect, but criticizing a current method designed to protect.

 

WTF?

[DanXIII 8]

It's not a freedom. You can think it is. If they didn't say they were evesdropping, but were doing it anyway, and you didn't know it, would you still be amazed and ashamed?

Would this argument/topic be taking place right now?

So here, in this statement you show concern for those that fought to protect.

 

What about those that instituted the possibility of evesdropping to protect?

 

You are defending those of that past that fought to protect, but criticizing a current method designed to protect.

 

WTF?

 

The problem that folks have with this issue isn't the "eavesdropping" it's the "ILLEGAL eavesdropping." This point is constantly missed in these discussions it seems.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

OK, this one is REALLY stupid

 

you're either with Bush or you're with the terrorists.

 

 

And this one is very correct in the simplist of terms.

 

I am amazed and ashamed that people are actually willing to give up rights and freedoms that men better than ourselves fought and died to protect.

[ZeroTolerance 582]

You're either with Bush or you're with reasoning.

[Red White and Blue 0]

That statement is correct. But that's not what you said. You said that's why it was set up, and was a purpose of the law. It's really not.

 

No, I didn't say that. I said it was designed to allow for retroactive warrants - it was. I said it was a purpose of FISA. I never said or implied that FISA was established for that specific purpose. This is my last post to you. And you were dead wrong about Jeremy Giambi and years later you still can't admit it (just like you were wrong about Kerry, too).