• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Does anyone know if...

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
...FDR had a warrant to intercept and decipher the Japanese Diplomatic codes in the months leading up to WW2?
 

Lefty

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Location
Philadelphia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
The US intellegence gathering system is not what it is today. If you are trying to imply that FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor by intercepting Japanese codes if he didn't need to get a warrant you are speculating beyond belief.

Oh and by the way, the FISA law requiring warrants to listen to international calls was created in the 1970's... Oh and WWII began way before we entered the war.
 

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Lefty said:
The US intellegence gathering system is not what it is today.
Er, what?

Your intent is clear, but thats a funny typo...:lol:

It is a typo, isn't it? :confused:
 

Lefty

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Location
Philadelphia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
AHHHH... I was trying to say how the US intelligence system then, is not what it is today.

Wow... my bad. The bad part about that is I even reread my comments before I posted. LoL. Well I knew what I was trying to say.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Lefty said:
The US intellegence gathering system is not what it is today. If you are trying to imply that FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor by intercepting Japanese codes if he didn't need to get a warrant you are speculating beyond belief.
No...
I'm asking if FDR violated the 4th amendment, just as Bush supposedly has.
Is there a difference between what Bush did and what FDR did?
If so, what?
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
No...
I'm asking if FDR violated the 4th amendment, just as Bush supposedly has.
Is there a difference between what Bush did and what FDR did?
If so, what?
I don't know whether what FDR did violated the 4th amendment; HOWEVER, I do know that the fact that someone else violated the constitution is not a very good defense for Bush.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
aps said:
I don't know whether what FDR did violated the 4th amendment; HOWEVER, I do know that the fact that someone else violated the constitution is not a very good defense for Bush.
-If FDR didnt violate the 4th amendment, then Bush didn't.
-If FDR (and any number of other Presidents) did what Bush did w/o any constitutional concern, then there is clear precedent for the argument that Bush had the power to do what he did.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
-If FDR didnt violate the 4th amendment, then Bush didn't.
-If FDR (and any number of other Presidents) did what Bush did w/o any constitutional concern, then there is clear precedent for the argument that Bush had the power to do what he did.
I see your point. I found an article that addresses the Constitution and the "force" issue you have raised. Here is the site--I thought it was well written.

http://www.newsday.com/news/printed...c26,0,380704.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Lefty said:
The US intellegence gathering system is not what it is today. If you are trying to imply that FDR could have prevented Pearl Harbor by intercepting Japanese codes if he didn't need to get a warrant you are speculating beyond belief.

Oh and by the way, the FISA law requiring warrants to listen to international calls was created in the 1970's... Oh and WWII began way before we entered the war.
Not to mention, the courts and the law do not require a warrant for intercepts of communications concerning foriegn persons or buildings (primarily embassies) at home or abroad, so long as there is no reasonable likelihood of intercepting communication to which a US-Person is party.

Meaning, if the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor today, there is no legal barrier from having the US government intercept communications between the Japanese government and it's military.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
M14 Shooter said:
...FDR had a warrant to intercept and decipher the Japanese Diplomatic codes in the months leading up to WW2?
He was a democrat.........He didn't need it............:roll:
 

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,255
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Navy Pride said:
He was a democrat.........He didn't need it............:roll:
Now, why'd you have to turn this into a partisan debate? I know I've said this before, but not everything is as black and white, or cut and dry, as that. :roll:
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
libertarian_knight said:
Not to mention, the courts and the law do not require a warrant for intercepts of communications concerning foriegn persons or buildings (primarily embassies) at home or abroad, so long as there is no reasonable likelihood of intercepting communication to which a US-Person is party.
Sure about that?
You dont have to be a citizen to be protected by the 4th amendment, you just have to be in the US.
Given that, there's no real difference between what Bush (et al) did and what FDR did.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Stace said:
Now, why'd you have to turn this into a partisan debate? I know I've said this before, but not everything is as black and white, or cut and dry, as that. :roll:
But... its true.

When the Clinton administration took the same position that the Bush administration has now, the Democrats didnt scream for his impeachment.

And neither did the Republicans.
 

Lefty

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Location
Philadelphia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
Sure about that?
You dont have to be a citizen to be protected by the 4th amendment, you just have to be in the US.
Given that, there's no real difference between what Bush (et al) did and what FDR did.
You mean to say that there is no real difference between what Bush actually did, and what you just made up about FDR.

M14 Shooter said:
But... its true.

When the Clinton administration took the same position that the Bush administration has now, the Democrats didnt scream for his impeachment.

And neither did the Republicans.
Clinton violated the 4th Amendment? News to me. In fact it kinda sounds like you made it up. But you know what? Doesn't matter, it still doesn't justify the actions of President Bush. This whole thread is based on "Oh he did it too so it's alright." I mean c'mon... grow up, this isn't 3rd grade. And you realize that your argument is a logical fallacy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Lefty said:
You mean to say that there is no real difference between what Bush actually did, and what you just made up about FDR.
I didn't make up a thing.
We were reading the japanese diplomatic code as fast as the Japanese were.
FDR was eavesdropping on communications between two parties, one inside the US, w/o a warrant.

Clinton violated the 4th Amendment? News to me.
Given your ignorance, illustrated above, that's not a surprise.

Doesn't matter, it still doesn't justify the actions of President Bush.
But it does illustrate the partisan bigotry of the left.
Withough said bigotry, there would be no issue today.
 
Last edited:

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
M14 Shooter said:
Sure about that?
You dont have to be a citizen to be protected by the 4th amendment, you just have to be in the US.
Given that, there's no real difference between what Bush (et al) did and what FDR did.
Actually, I agree with that interpretation, the 4th says "no person" not "no Citizen." However, FISA and the courts treat the law as such that embassies and non us-persons can have their communications intercepted by the government at will, without need for a warrant, in any circumstance.
 

Lefty

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Location
Philadelphia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
M14 Shooter said:
I didn't make up a thing.
We were reading the japanese diplomatic code as fast as the Japanese were.
This isn't a good comparison. It's completely different. You realize this?... no you don't.

M14 Shooter said:
Given the above, that's not a surprise.
Okay, fine, if I'm so ignorant, enlighten me.

M14 Shooter said:
Bit it does illustrate the partisan bigotry of the left.
Well... no. I'm saying that if FDR or Clinton did something wrong, it doesn't make it right for Bush to do it. Just as it would be wrong to say "Oh well Bush did it, so what Clinton did was fine!"

And for the record, I don't believe the claim about Clinton.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
libertarian_knight said:
Actually, I agree with that interpretation, the 4th says "no person" not "no Citizen." However, FISA and the courts treat the law as such that embassies and non us-persons can have their communications intercepted by the government at will, without need for a warrant, in any circumstance.
If thats the case, it sounds to me like the FISA itself violates the Constitution.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Lefty said:
This isn't a good comparison. It's completely different. You realize this?... no you don't.
Explain, in detail, how it is different.

Okay, fine, if I'm so ignorant, enlighten me.
Sigh.
Here's an overview. The actual executive orders are available.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20051222-122610-7772r.htm

"The Department of Justice believes -- and the case law supports -- that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes and that the president may, as he has done, delegate this authority to the attorney general," Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, 1994 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

In1994, President Clinton expanded the use of warrantless searches to entirely domestic situations with no foreign intelligence value whatsoever. In a radio address promoting a crime-fighting bill, Mr. Clinton discussed a new policy to conduct warrantless searches in highly violent public housing projects.


Well... no. I'm saying that if FDR or Clinton did something wrong, it doesn't make it right for Bush to do it. Just as it would be wrong to say "Oh well Bush did it, so what Clinton did was fine!"
So, where was the outrage when Clinton did it?
Why didn't the current crop of partisan hacks demand his impeachment?
 

Lefty

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Location
Philadelphia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I wasn't even 10 yet by 1994, so I don't really know. I am hesitant to give legitimacy to this, but if Clinton violated the law and the constitution then he he just as wrong. Saying "Clinton did it too" is not a justification for anyone's actions. Imagine if cheating husbands started doing that? Yeah well, it's just as ridiculous when applied to this situation.

I'll look your Clinton claim up furthor, but for now I must go.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Lefty said:
I wasn't even 10 yet by 1994, so I don't really know.
I do.

A (D) behind your name protects you; a (R) behind your name makes you a target.

Note that the GOP did not even HINT at impeaching Clinton for it.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Stace said:
Now, why'd you have to turn this into a partisan debate? I know I've said this before, but not everything is as black and white, or cut and dry, as that. :roll:
Stace, here is a flash for you.Everyone in this forum is partisan, including you and I......
 

Stace

Boobie Jubilee
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Messages
7,255
Reaction score
364
Location
Clarksville, TN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Navy Pride said:
Stace, here is a flash for you.Everyone in this forum is partisan, including you and I......
No, really, you think? That does NOT mean that every debate has to become a partisan issue. Believe it or not, it is possible for two people from both sides of the aisle to agree.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
M14 Shooter said:
...FDR had a warrant to intercept and decipher the Japanese Diplomatic codes in the months leading up to WW2?
The Japanese are US Citizens? News to me. Because that's the crux of the law, right, the citizenship.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Stace said:
No, really, you think? That does NOT mean that every debate has to become a partisan issue. Believe it or not, it is possible for two people from both sides of the aisle to agree.

I would say by the nature of the people that frequent this forum that patianship is the order of the day and that includes me...........Most people in the real world don't have the time or want to waste the time on a forum like this.......

I try very hard to find agreement with some of the people here but it is very difficult to do as I am sure it is with me.............

People rarely change their mind on issues.....I have agreed a few time with my liberal friends here on issues especially with aps but they are few and far between.......I guess I try harder with her because she does not insult or call names and she is my friend and I like her.........
 
Top Bottom