...but I do not think they have the RIGHT to even LISTEN...* The constitution is supposed to prevent unreasonable search and seizures... who should decide?* Not the police who is doing the searching... but the courts... Bypassing the courts is the problem here...
So if the courts say it's OK for the government to listen in on all your conversations, you would be OK with that?
__________________
No man is free who is not master of himself. --- Epictetus
Enjoy Yourself (It's Later Than You Think). --- Guy Lombardo
Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,203
Re: How Do You Feel About US Domestic Spying
Quote:
Originally Posted by retire@40
So if the courts say it's OK for the government to listen in on all your conversations, you would be OK with that?
Yes!!! First, the police would have to make a case that there is something to listen for... that there is a crime... and then the judge would have to make a decision to say what they could listen for... and a time period... and then they would have to go back to the court if they had not found anything in the time the warrent was issued to try and get another...
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,203
Re: How Do You Feel About US Domestic Spying
Also, let's be clear... the US government was listening to calls from overseas for many years... I was in the UK for about a year and saw pictures of the site that monitors calls... it was HUGH... I was told that they have computers that listen for key words such as bomb, explosion etc. etc.. and the computer would flag it to be looked at by a human..
Of course, you need the rest of the story, not just what hits the papers.
I was going by what the man himself said in his statement to the judge. * *Basically, Allah told him to fight the power, so he planned to do what his god told him to do, laws or no.
BMJ decided to edit out some juicy details, so I'll leave out the link to his statement and just include a bit here:
Allah clearly states the two choices, Him versus everything else. He also clearly states the outcome of choosing anything over Him; his anger and eternal punishment. As a believer of heaven and hell, I have boundless trepidation of spending a split second in hell fire. As a Muslim, I have even greater fear of Allah's displeasure, let alone anger. Some might dismiss this as paranoia and nonsense, since God is most merciful. True, he is most merciful, yet his anger and punishment are most severe to those who disobey him. I chose to meet my obligations and seek his pleasure.
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,085
Re: How Do You Feel About US Domestic Spying
Quote:
Originally Posted by wab
I was going by what the man himself said in his statement to the judge. * *Basically, Allah told him to fight the power, so he planned to do what his god told him to do, laws or no.
BMJ decided to edit out some juicy details, so I'll leave out the link to his statement and just include a bit here:
Allah clearly states the two choices, Him versus everything else. He also clearly states the outcome of choosing anything over Him; his anger and eternal punishment. As a believer of heaven and hell, I have boundless trepidation of spending a split second in hell fire. As a Muslim, I have even greater fear of Allah's displeasure, let alone anger. Some might dismiss this as paranoia and nonsense, since God is most merciful. True, he is most merciful, yet his anger and punishment are most severe to those who disobey him. I chose to meet my obligations and seek his pleasure.
Funny, I have heard essentially the same thing out of themouths of many an Xtian preacer and "true believer", yet I don't see any of them being called into the FBI by the neighbors, dragged off to prison, getting their asses whomped, etc.
__________________
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Funny, I have heard essentially the same thing out of themouths of many an Xtian preacer and "true believer", yet I don't see any of them being called into the FBI by the neighbors, dragged off to prison, getting their asses whomped, etc.
Yeah, I guess the difference is that this particular True Believer conspired to fight against US soldiers and apparently tried to get into Afghanistan to carry out his plans.* Eventually, he decided to call the whole thing off and go home.* * Unfortunately, he broke the law at the conspiracy stage -- one of the few preemptive laws on the book, AFAIK.
Don't care. Listen away. My phone calls would be boring to anyone who listened. There has to be a balance between privacy and security. No more attacks since 911 show good success in preventing who knows how many attacks. Obviously the Government can't say or they will compromise their methods.
Anyone making large donations to Muslim charities and taking trips to the Middle East should be watched.
Sorry CFB.
__________________
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.
Yes!!!* First, the police would have to make a case that there is something to listen for... that there is a crime... and then the judge would have to make a decision to say what they could listen for... and a time period... and then they would have to go back to the court if they had not found anything in the time the warrent was issued to try and get another...
Now, all they have to do is start listening...
Sounds like you are in favor of the checks and balances of government. Me too. So if the courts find that what the NSA and other government agencies have done is constitutional, using the same logic, you would be OK with that too, right?
__________________
No man is free who is not master of himself. --- Epictetus
Enjoy Yourself (It's Later Than You Think). --- Guy Lombardo
Seizing an american citizen and their property and imprisoning them for an extended period without filing charges because they got "more religious", paid off their mortgage and donated to charity is ok?
Now that's a new factor to worry about in the payoff debate.
Glad I don't live in a country that conducts widescale domestic spying.
(At least I think I don't...)
Glad I don't live in a country that conducts widescale domestic spying.
(At least I think I don't...)
That's a good one!
Working with the JMSDF in the early '90s, it wasn't even clear that they'd told their government all of the classified things they were doing-- let alone received permission for it...
__________________ *
Co-author (with my daughter) of “Raising Your Money-Savvy Family For Next Generation Financial Independence.”
Author of the book written on E-R.org: "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement."
I don't spend much time here— please send a PM.
Working with the JMSDF in the early '90s, it wasn't even clear that they'd told their government all of the classified things they were doing-- let alone received permission for it...
Interesting. I don't suppose there are any stories you could share...
I guess I'll have to take solace in reflecting that even if somebody high-up does peg me for a dangerous, anti-government religious fanatic upon review of my mortgage payment records, if their preventive handling of Aum Shinri Kyou is any indication, I have nothing to worry about.
Interesting.* I don't suppose there are any stories you could share...
I think history has moved on since the Cold War really ended.
At the time the Japanese legislature, and probably the country's conscience, was wrestling with either maintaining a strictly defensive military or else supporting the DESERT STORM coalition forces. Since then I think the JMSDF has become much more of an offensive force than they were 15 years ago, and systems that could be construed as more offensive than defensive are probably not so sensitive.
It's all a good thing. U.S. submarines can't pick up every mission... there just aren't enough of them today to support both the battlegroup and the national surveillance priorities.
__________________ *
Co-author (with my daughter) of “Raising Your Money-Savvy Family For Next Generation Financial Independence.”
Author of the book written on E-R.org: "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement."
I don't spend much time here— please send a PM.
At the time the Japanese legislature, and probably the country's conscience, was wrestling with either maintaining a strictly defensive military or else supporting the DESERT STORM coalition forces. Since then I think the JMSDF has become much more of an offensive force than they were 15 years ago, and systems that could be construed as more offensive than defensive are probably not so sensitive.
It's all a good thing. U.S. submarines can't pick up every mission... there just aren't enough of them today to support both the battlegroup and the national surveillance priorities.
The role of the military is still a big issue, though the terms of the debate have shifted somewhat, as highlighted by the presence of Japanese troops in Iraq (albeit in strictly humanitarian roles). I think the Japanese navy has also offered some operational assistance to the US fleet in the Gulf. Non-firing roles, like refueling, maybe even an Aegis?
I agree it is a good thing, actually. I think Japan should have a more mature military stance. I don't really like the way that Japan is effectively hiring American mercenary forces to protect it now. Degrading for both countries.
I think Japan should have a more mature military stance.*
Uhm, that gets some pretty interesting reactions from the Chinese (both PRC & Taiwan) and Korea (South for sure, although presumably North would put aside their reactionary ways long enough to agree too). Maybe even here in Hawaii.
We're gearing up for something like the 30th year of RIMPAC exercises and we still have to design scenarios where the JMSDF and the ROKN are each working with the U.S. as allied (not opposition) forces-- yet not working directly with each other. Neither country will accept a role as an opposition force, even "against" the U.S., no matter how enticingly educational the exchange of tactics might be. Even the Australians have little sense of humor on this subject.
I think that if the balloon ever goes up in the Sea of Japan it'll be PRC exploiting some Japanese event and driving a wedge through everybody's diplomats-- even if the Japanese PM doesn't obligingly play into their hands by paying a visit to a war shrine.
People have not forgotten. When Disney was filming the "Pearl Harbor" attack scenes (in, uh, Pearl Harbor) a few years ago the "big event" was the immolation of an old decommissioned destroyer in West Loch. The thing was so packed with explosives that when it went up, from a range of 10 miles, it made our lanai windows oscillate alarmingly. I'm sure it was noticeable from Barbers Point to Diamond Head. Disney had to announce the explosion in advance to avoid problems with traffic (both Pearl Harbor afloat and H-1) so of course shutterbugs, TV crews, press helicopters, and entire families were thronging the Pearl City peninsula to get a glimpse. Before & after the explosion, WWII planes (painted as Japanese Zeroes) were buzzing the harbor for footage.
Even with all the hype & publicity, when the explosion's fireball went up and people saw the planes buzzing around, the 911 lines were jammed with callers reporting "another Japanese sneak attack". One elderly caller was furious that we'd let it "happen all over again". It took a week for the furor & memories to die down, and this was before 9/11 affected the national psyche!
__________________ *
Co-author (with my daughter) of “Raising Your Money-Savvy Family For Next Generation Financial Independence.”
Author of the book written on E-R.org: "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement."
I don't spend much time here— please send a PM.
I saw my very own Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.
One of the stops on the Hawaiian cruise I took a few years ago was the Arizona/Mighty Mo memorial. We rented a car and drove over to the grounds parked the car and headed for the entrance.
Well we got to the entrance and the line was way out to the parking lot. So then three buses of Japanese tourists pull up and they all push in to the front of the line. Like we didn't have anything better to do than stand in a two hour line.
I then started having thoughts that the fire-bombing of Tokyo just might have been appropriate.
I never made it onto the Arizona, just couldn't take that long line standing out in the sun.
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,203
Re: How Do You Feel About US Domestic Spying
Quote:
Originally Posted by retire@40
Sounds like you are in favor of the checks and balances of government.* Me too.* So if the courts find that what the NSA and other government agencies have done is constitutional, using the same logic, you would be OK with that too, right?
Yes. If the Supreme Court ruled that warrentless monitoring of calls was constitutional, then I would live with it. Would I like it? No. BUT, it would be the law of the land.
Right now, all I know is they are listening in, collecting data, not telling any other part of the government what they are doing, saying they have a right to do so based on the constitution, but will not say why... I do not trust them.
And this is to another poster.... so what, we have not had another terrorist attack on our land for about 5 years. The last one prior to 9/11 occured in '93 or 8 years. Unless someone can say 'We prevented THIS attack because we were listening in on calls'.... then you are using false logic... just because an attack has not happened might be because NO ATTACH HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED.... Now, I do not know if there has been or not, nor do you... but I would much prefer to have my rights protected (and that included YOUR rights) than to give them up with not knowing if there were any real benefits...