• 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.

Is it ok to wire tap phone calls from terrorists into this country?

Is it ok to wire tap phone calls from terrorists into this country?

  • No, it is a violation of their civil rights....

    Votes: 5 45.5%
  • yes, it is important to know what terrorists are saying....

    Votes: 6 54.5%

  • Total voters
    11

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Why am I not surprised that my Liberal and Liberaltarians have not responded?:roll:
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride, I am guessing that the question you asked fails to address whether these wiretaps have been obtained through a court order (or would be obtained through a court order within 72 hours). I think it violates our 4th Amendment rights when wiretapping is conducted without a court order. If a court order is obtained (or will be within the appropriate time frame), then I fully support the wiretapping.

How's that?
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
aps said:
Navy Pride, I am guessing that the question you asked fails to address whether these wiretaps have been obtained through a court order (or would be obtained through a court order within 72 hours). I think it violates our 4th Amendment rights when wiretapping is conducted without a court order. If a court order is obtained (or will be within the appropriate time frame), then I fully support the wiretapping.

How's that?
I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
Okay, then I just voted "no." If Clinton violated the rules, he should suffer any consequences (if any) that Bush does.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
aps said:
Okay, then I just voted "no." If Clinton violated the rules, he should suffer any consequences (if any) that Bush does.
You must know that every president has used this authority in a time of war especially when your dealing with terrorists that want to kill us.we will just have to agree to disagree on this one my friend.........
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
You must know that every president has used this authority in a time of war especially when your dealing with terrorists that want to kill us.we will just have to agree to disagree on this one my friend.........
Hey, if they want to wiretap with court orders all over the place, I support that wholeheartedly.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
aps said:
Hey, if they want to wiretap with court orders all over the place, I support that wholeheartedly.
Hey if it prevents a terrorist attack on this country I say don't worry about the court order.........That is just me though..........
 
T

The Real McCoy

Navy Pride said:
Why am I not surprised that my Liberal and Liberaltarians have not responded?:roll:
I, a libertarian (not a "liberaltarian" but a conservative libertarian) voted yes. It's insane to think that no phone calls should be monitored, particularly in the post 9/11 world.

Now, if the poll had asked if it's ok to wire tap sans a warrant then my answer would be no. From what I understand, the FISA warrants (unlike standard search warrants) are dished out like penny candy and can even be obtained retroactively, 72 hours after the initial tap is placed IIRC.

I wouldn't be so annoyed about this whole incident were it not for Bush publicly stating numerous times the necessity to obtain court issued warrants in order to conduct wire tapping.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Why am I not surprised that my Liberal and Liberaltarians have not responded?:roll:
Wow, you gave us a whole 36 minutes to respond before concluding we were too scared of your *cough* insightful question...

The issue here is how you know that they're terrorists (which, by the way, means that this poll is yet another of the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" variety). A warrant for a wiretap can be obtained quickly with any reasonable suspicion, so if the executive can't get a warrant that means the suspicions are not reasonable. There's a reason that Congress passed a law demanding that the executive get a warrant. There's a reason that a judge is needed to give the warrant to the executive. It's part of the checks and balances of our government. To give the president the power to do this without a warrant is to give the president the power to ignore whatever laws he feels like ignoring in the name of fighting terror. What possible reason is there to always trust the president not to abuse this power?
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kandahar said:
Wow, you gave us a whole 36 minutes to respond before concluding we were too scared of your *cough* insightful question...

The issue here is how you know that they're terrorists (which, by the way, means that this poll is yet another of the "Have you stopped beating your wife?" variety). A warrant for a wiretap can be obtained quickly with any reasonable suspicion, so if the executive can't get a warrant that means the suspicions are not reasonable. There's a reason that Congress passed a law demanding that the executive get a warrant. There's a reason that a judge is needed to give the warrant to the executive. It's part of the checks and balances of our government. To give the president the power to do this without a warrant is to give the president the power to ignore whatever laws he feels like ignoring in the name of fighting terror. What possible reason is there to always trust the president not to abuse this power?
I think the NSA knows if they are terrorists or not.........I guess I have to ask you where was your outrage when Clinton was doing it and we were not even at war?
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I think the NSA knows if they are terrorists or not.
Then that means they have a reason to believe that they're terrorists, which means that they can obtain a warrant easily.

Navy Pride said:
........I guess I have to ask you where was your outrage when Clinton was doing it and we were not even at war?
If I had known about it at the time I would've been angry. Why do you try to turn every topic of discussion into a debate about Clinton?
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Navy Pride said:
I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
I'd like a little more info on Clinton and wiretapping, rather then just saying Clinton did it too, as a end run defense of Bush.

Ames was selling CIA secrets to the KGB since 1985...before Clinton was President.

The FISA amendment regarding home searches was not enacted until 1995, after Clinton 'supposedly' authorized a warrantless search of Ames' house. Therefore, Clinton did not ignore the existing law.

It's established that Clinton went to Congress asking for more strident wiretapping laws, and was shot down in his efforts.

Please prove to me that what Clinton did was illegal before using the republican mantra of deflecting attention away from Bush.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kandahar said:
Then that means they have a reason to believe that they're terrorists, which means that they can obtain a warrant easily.



If I had known about it at the time I would've been angry. Why do you try to turn every topic of discussion into a debate about Clinton?
Because Clinton did the same thing...so did all presidents in time of war.even FDR..........Clinton did it in peacetime..........Where is your outrage against him?
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Hoot said:
I'd like a little more info on Clinton and wiretapping, rather then just saying Clinton did it too, as a end run defense of Bush.

Ames was selling CIA secrets to the KGB since 1985...before Clinton was President.

The FISA amendment regarding home searches was not enacted until 1995, after Clinton 'supposedly' authorized a warrantless search of Ames' house. Therefore, Clinton did not ignore the existing law.

It's established that Clinton went to Congress asking for more strident wiretapping laws, and was shot down in his efforts.

Please prove to me that what Clinton did was illegal before using the republican mantra of deflecting attention away from Bush.
And he was and American citizen, and it was in peacetime.........
 

AndrewC

Active member
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
351
Reaction score
71
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Kandahar said:
Then that means they have a reason to believe that they're terrorists, which means that they can obtain a warrant easily.

I agree with you Kandahar. This was my first thought after hearing the administrations response to allegations of wire tapping.
 

johns

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Navy Pride said:
I am sorry I did not make that clear aps..............No warrent or court order required.......Just like under the Clinton administration did it in the case of Aldrich Ames (not sure of the spelling) spy case when he did illegal phone tapping and and illegal search on Mr. Ames house without a warrant.........Isn't it odd how Al Gore forgot that little fact in his speech yesterday?
You are taking that out of context, are you not. That was with regards to "Physical" searches, which at the time, FISA had no provision for. After the fact, President Clinton supported and signed a physical search provision for FISA. Seems like you take your talking points directly from Rush and Sean
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
johns said:
You are taking that out of context, are you not. That was with regards to "Physical" searches, which at the time, FISA had no provision for. After the fact, President Clinton supported and signed a physical search provision for FISA. Seems like you take your talking points directly from Rush and Sean

You can spin it anyway you want, bottom line Clinton did the same thing Bush did and we were not even at war then....
 

Conflict

Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
745
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Navy Pride said:
Your thoughts please
Of course it is OKAY to tap the phone calls from into this country...


however it becomes a diplomatic issue in terms of surveillance and telemetry to some extent as many forgein telcos and relative networks perhaps may not comply with our protocol and/or standard.

SO I see this question as... is It okay to tap the incoming communications from persons calling us outside of the US. Sure.

To imply that we could possibly wire every international call in such an interactive sense is Naive. If you are only referring to redflags and inter-communicado this question is pointless.
 

Conflict

Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
745
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Navy Pride said:
You can spin it anyway you want, bottom line Clinton did the same thing Bush did and we were not even at war then....
Navy Pride is it just me or are you big on redundant comparisions and short on intellect? Of course, I realize you'll say it's just me... and that of course I just must be a flaming liberal Clinton apologist dare I disagree.

This is pathetic.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Hoot said:
I'd like a little more info on Clinton and wiretapping, rather then just saying Clinton did it too, as a end run defense of Bush.

Ames was selling CIA secrets to the KGB since 1985...before Clinton was President.

The FISA amendment regarding home searches was not enacted until 1995, after Clinton 'supposedly' authorized a warrantless search of Ames' house. Therefore, Clinton did not ignore the existing law.

It's established that Clinton went to Congress asking for more strident wiretapping laws, and was shot down in his efforts.

Please prove to me that what Clinton did was illegal before using the republican mantra of deflecting attention away from Bush.
have fun...
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Here's an idea. Why don't you people stop saying "Clinton did it too" and actually provide some reasons why this kind of activity should be tolerated from any president.
 

M14 Shooter

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kandahar said:
Here's an idea. Why don't you people stop saying "Clinton did it too" and actually provide some reasons why this kind of activity should be tolerated from any president.
I think the point is that the Dems, howling about Bush, didnt say a thing about Clinton doing the exact same thing.

This leads the rational observer to conclude that their complaints are motivated not by actual concern for the constitutiuonally protected rights of the people, but by partisan politics.
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Re: Is it OK to wire tap phone calls from terrorists into this country?

As worded, no qualms what-so-ever.
All Islamic terrorists must be hunted down using any and all methods without restraint.
To suggest otherwise is tantamount to treason..
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kandahar said:
Here's an idea. Why don't you people stop saying "Clinton did it too" and actually provide some reasons why this kind of activity should be tolerated from any president.
If that is for me, I say whatever it takes to make us safe and prevent another terrorist be it Clinton, Bush or whoever...........

We live in a different time then we have in any time in our history.......9/11/01 made it a whole new ballgame.........As soon as some of you on the left realize that the better it will be........
 
Top Bottom