Hey Billie and all y'all, um.... this issue, it seems to me, is not about whether wiretapping is "wrong", or whether anyone has wire-tapped "you".

This issue is about whether private corporations, when asked by the government to violate the law, must refuse, or take the consequences.

The government is essentially saying, they don't have to take the consequences.

And from where I stand, that's an outrage.

When you or I violate the law, we have to take the consequences.

And the "full spectrum" of consequences - criminal, civil, and everything else.

But the government doesn't want their stinkin' corporate minions to be held responsible for their actions.

These Statist bastids want the law to be "whatever the government says it is", and that is wrong. It is absolutely freakin' WRONG, and I don't care if you're a Republican or a Democrat, you gotta admit that it's WRONG.

There is no entity in the United States, that is above the law.

None.

That's the way it should be.

Not even the President himself, is above the law.

So, why should the corps be above the law?

Can someone please explain to me, why corporations should be exempt from following the law?

if no wrong has been done, then why does the congress need to consider providing immunity?

__________________
1.20.09 - the end of an error

"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do." Joseph Stalin

Life is a sexually transmitted disease having a 100% fatality rate

My claim is, that any such law, would be un-Constitutional.

The federal government has no Power to exempt any entity in the United States, from obeying the law.

That is not a legislative Power of the federal government, granted to it under Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution.

What have I been telling you people, huh? HUH???

These Statist bastids are trying to magically create new non-existent government Powers out of thin air!

It's freakin' outrageous.

This is ===> blatant disregard for the United States Constitution, and it's being done by

YOUR elected representatives.

This is absolutely freakin' outrageous!!!

There's nothing, anywhere in the law, that says the government has the Power to exempt anyone. I mean, if there is, someone please point it out to me, 'kay?

And now the government wants to come along and magically change the contract, without asking the People.

What have I been telling you People??? HUH???? Here it is, in black and white. This is undeniable, incontrovertible evidence, am I right?

Hey, People - my contract says I have a Right to Redress. This one, sounds to me, like an appropriate candidate for exactly that.

No way am I gonna lie down for this one. My Senators are gonna hear about this one, for sure. And while I'm at it, I might even give 'em a little "demonstration" of what it all means. I'm pretty good at that kinda thing....

You know, this is kinda scary. This crap is coming faster and faster now. It's like, you know, first they took away our Right to sue HMO's - and I mean, imagine what's gonna happen when the federal government takes over that space..... Jeezus.....

And I mean, I understand that I can't sue the government for simply "doing its job", but this is not its job. This is not a part of the job description for the United States government, that's outlined in the contract.

What do you say, People?

Look at it in that light - forget about the "wiretapping" thing. That isn't even relevant here.

What's relevant here is not the "specific" Power this miscreant government is trying to magically create - it's that they're trying to create any new Powers at all!!!

Screw these Statist idiots. I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Amazing how the lefty liberal loons accuse the right of fear mongering, especially since you all are doing the same thing with our ability to spy on foreign nationals and those that reside in this country that want to destroy us. The difference being, we have been attacked, we have been threatened, we have caught terrorist islamic scum time after time, yes those islamofacist scum are suppose to get a free pass according to you. Only the smallest percentage of you lefty freaks are loosing sleep over this, the rest of America isn't.

Yet, the reality is, not one of you can give an example of our government abusing anyone's rights, and creating a Gestapo type atmosphere in the United States, just your fear mongering, "it could happen" scenario. Pathetic hypocrites, and nothing more, you don't want them gathering information on terrorists, yet you have never offered one single solution to our dilemma in a free society such as the United States.

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

It's all about the Boogieman you Cons
are so afarid of. LOL Before you take my
rights away, secure our Borders!!!
Till then it's mute. You righties keep your
heads in the sand, or up Shrubs butt
either one will keep you safe. Chickenhawks.

Becuase the alternative is to put you and your family at risk. Thats why.

Technically speaking though, they are not spying on you.


Becuase it will help us to know what they are planning in advance so that we can stop them. That isnt obvious to you?


Who decided that they violated the 4th Amendment?


National defense supersedes your right to privacy.


...until it actually happens again. Then people like you will be screaming "why didnt you do something!!11!1!". Uh-huh. No way to win with you people.


So far it has not been proven that they have violated the public's trust.


Correct. It is more important than your right to talk dirty on the phone.



The power is not unchecked. Congress can override the President if they want to. And we elect congress.

The fact that the majority doesnt agree with you does not mean that the power is unchecked.


I knew there was a catch.


And until at least one of them is successful, there is no proof of any wrongdoing.


Incorrect. They are obligated to defend the nation. "Spying" is a means to that end. They only have a "right" to it by proxy.


The premise is incorrect. It has not been proven that what they were asked to do was violating the law.


They dont have to take the consequences because they've done nothing wrong in this case. Correct.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

I'm all for defending what people write.

Show us where the senate voted to shield wire tap collaborators?

Is that just a ratings "teaser" headline? If so then I'm OK with that.

I'm all for wiretaping, I just think you should be clear in what you say - it's not true - it was a vote to end a possible filibuster.

Also, you are now on record that the Democrats in office are not loony. Do you agree that both parties have "loons" at either end?

There are loony people on the far right who are more afraid of wiretaps than the people on the left - those are the ones who typically form posse's and worry about conspiracy theories.

The rest of us live in the middle.

Bush issued an Executive Order telling the NSA to feel free to violate FISA and wiretap without warrants. The administration has admitted to doing as much. They are attempting to give immunity to companies that have helped wiretap without warrants .They are trying to pass a bill that will allow them to do that with impunity in the future.
Please explain why you think that, given these facts, the NSA has strangely enough NOT actually wiretapped without a warrant.

Not knowing which specific individuals have been tapped is irrelevant, and impossible. You do realize how silly you sound asking me to know the inside details of a secret government program, don't you?

It is already easy and confidential to obtain a warrant even after surveillance has begun.
Please explain to me why obtaining FISC warrants are insufficient.

Furthermore, as nonsqtr brought up, we also have a Right to Redress as garunteed by the 1st. The administration is trying to create a bizarre new precedent, granting immunity to an entire industry for crimes they have committed before all the facts about those crimes are in.
Please explain why the telecoms need to be let off the hook for helping to violate the law when they could have chosen not to instead?

Pending means that the case has yet to be decided. It could be ruled guilty or innocent. If justice prevails then heads will roll.

Then it should be easy for you to answer the questions above, shouldn't it?

__________________
DILIGITE JUSTITIAM QUI JUDICATIS TERRAM

i know someone who was spied on. she was an egyptian girl talking to her boyfriend in egypt. i think they told her she was being listened to, or her cell company did, if i remember the account correctly. i believe she now works with the government or something, she is doing something cool but i cant remember what it was...

__________________
Remedial English - Rule #2:

Always check your answers against Google search results.

Listen. No one is saying that terrorists and the like should be put under surveillance. What we are saying is that the government should first obtain a warrant to do it. Its basic checks and balances. Its not hard to do. It prevents abuse of power. It protects the rights of Americans.

Security supersedes one's rights only when necessary, not whenever its convenient. This is not a case where its anything close to necessary. How is the existing system FISA lays out inadequate?

Proven? Maybe not. One heck of a good chance? Yeap! Why is it so essential that these companies are granted immunity if they are blameless?

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "rights."



The Rockefeller-led Senate Intelligence Committee, within a matter of a day or so, quickly passed the White House's desired bill, one which The New York Times, the next day, revealed had been secretly worked on for months by Rockefeller and, through emissaries, Dick Cheney. As Russ Feingold said yesterday, the Rockefeller proposal passed by the Intelligence Committee "simply gives the Administration everything it was demanding, no questions asked."

I suppose we'll have to wait and see then.

__________________
DILIGITE JUSTITIAM QUI JUDICATIS TERRAM