Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (153271)	1/1/2006 3:10:15 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793563

Namely, that there are worse things in the world than another 9/11, a 24/7 police state for one: That's the "straw man" argument.

To: Lane3 who wrote (153271)	1/1/2006 3:36:38 PM
From: aladin	Respond to of 793563

Karen, here is a counter-point: When a known terrorist, or an unknown entity in a foreign country under terror watch calls a US resident - what constitutional rights are broken by listening? Answer: none. So what is the President defending? The right to look at who that US resident calls in real time. In this case technically we are now dealing with internal US conversations and the FISA law. The Presidents position: these laws do not account for the new age of disposable cell phones and internet communication. The NYT's position: the FISA law was broken. Since the Congress was informed and Justice did review - the President and his team have a very strong case. They are NOT discussing random listening on US residents apart from the foreign trigger. John

To: Lane3 who wrote (153271)	1/1/2006 3:40:48 PM
From: SirWalterRalegh	Respond to of 793563

By far, our own government is a bigger threat to our freedom than any possible menace posed by Al-Qaida. The biggest threat besides natural disasters e.g. H5N1 is 1,200,000,000 Muslims. They have made it abundantly clear that they want to eliminate, by decapitation, all infidels.