i don't know

[Eagler]

sorry, stll don't see what your afraid of

we have enough left leaning in this country that forget right side, I'd be happy if we just got somewhere close to center...

[Sandman]

No kidding... If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear.

[weazel]

Originally posted by Eagler
sorry, stll don't see what your afraid of

we have enough left leaning in this country that forget right side, I'd be happy if we just got somewhere close to center...

It's just that I value the core principles that make our nation what it is..... the most successful and longest lived democracy in history.

Tampering with the laws and principles that made it such is just asking for trouble IMO.

BTW, thanks for your responses.

Even though I don't agree with the philosophy you subscribe to, it's nice to see you aren't a fair weather republican.... and you stand firm in the eye of the storm.

Right or wrong, (your wrong ) it's that kind of commitment the country must have to continue...and that is something I respect.  (you too Udie)

Further, it was probably VERY vague until some finger pointer got ahold of it AFTER the fact.

Tumor, I've stated in another thread I don't believe Bush knew that the planes would be used in the fashion they were or he would have stopped them if possible.

However he did admit to warnings of less than that *specific* nature, I think he envisioned common terrorism (hijacking in the traditional sense, etc) saw the political capital he would recieve and didn't do his job due to this.

If he had known the end result I have no doubt he would have done the right thing, trying to cover up the extent of their knowledge after the attacks was wrong....and doesn't inspire confidence that he will do the right thing in the future.

[Tumor]

Weazel
  In reference to the news (cbs) stories you posted.  What did the so called "offenders" actually say?  Verbatim?  Not once was the offending statement (verbal or written) printed (or did I miss something).  You know as well as I do that Freedom of Speech in the United States is not free.  

  If you make certain types of statements... you risk prosecution.

ie:  "If you do that again, I'm going to shoot you" <
       "I'm going to shoot you" << Terroristic threat (a real live offense in most states)

  An open threat to the President of the United states, has always brought the scrutiny of the Secret Service, and if warranted the FBI, thats nothing new.  I don't know but I would imagine the laws take it further than just the president, however when a concerned citizen (be they justified or just stupid) bring something to the attention of the authorities, why shouldn't those authorities take a look? It's not like the jump on every single accusation made, in all actuallity most are probably ignored.  The investigating agencies are not mindless robots as there really is a process. Besides that, I don't recall any of these news stories getting into the arrest and prosecution of any of these people.  I'll wager there is much more to the stories you posted than reported.  

  As far as privacy on the Internet, I'm allot more worried about criminals than the FBI, as I have nothing to hide.  However, if you elect to use the internet, you elect to be watched.  By who is anyones guess at any given time BUT, why should the FBI (law enforcement agencies) not develope methods at least as good if not better than the hacker (criminal)?  What would your opinion be if your credit card number was one of those the "Russians" had obtained?

  LASTLY (whew), in reference to the warnings.  Man.. there is just no way any single agency, organization or office could have done anything more about 9/11 than what was done.  The circumstances "at the time" just couldn't support it.  But do this, dig deep and trust me on this... the work is being done to "try" to prevent anything like 9/11 happening again.  However, in my proffesional opinion.. we have yet to see the worst.  I hope I'm wrong.

..oh ya, and I don't think there's been any coverup of the extent of information the White House had.  I do however believe 30 years of SOP bit us in the ass.  Besides, it's not actually the resposibility of the White House to do anything if you think about it.  Personally, I blame the INS first and the FBI second.  The INS for not doing thier job, and the FBI for not taking action of thier own.  I "believe" I read that the some FBI warning message was sent (vague), however THEY are the guys who are employed to do something about it.

[weazel]

Don't get me wrong...I'm happy they busted those amazinhunks.

I just used that as an example to show their capabilities, and the possibility that it could be used against you, I, or anybody else in America.

I have nothing to hide from the government, but the thought of them monitoring my keystrokes or reading my email is upsetting and a violation of my civil rights, I feel this shouldn't be allowed without probable cause or suspicion of criminal or terrorist activity.

"The right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.

To protect that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment."

Justice Louis Brandeis in Olmstead v. U.S. (1928).

Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.

Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.

To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means...would bring terrible retribution...[and] against that pernicious doctrine, this court should resolutely set its face. -- Olmstead v U.S., 277 U.S. 348 (1928), Justice Louis D. Brandeis,  

Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Olmstead v U.S., 277 U.S. 348 (1928), Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Our interests would be much better served by focusing on the real threat to our country, I don't believe the citizens of the U.S. are that threat.

Edit:

I should have mentioned you and Kieran also, thanks for your input. (even though your wrong too )  

At one time Kieran said I was one of the people in Aces High he would most like to meet.

 I doubt that's the case anymore due to our O-Club disagreements and that bothers me, but right or wrong I feel compelled to voice my concerns about the current administration, to do any less would be un-American in my opinion.

I still hope to sit down and have a beer with him someday, and you other tightie righties as well.

[Tumor]

Originally posted by weazel

......... I don't believe the citizens of the U.S. are that threat.

Not yet.

  Anyway, if you rob the agencies of thier ability to eavesdrop, they can't do thier job.  Ever heard of Intelligence Oversight?  It's alive and well and we in the community are reminded of it daily.  And.. it's not just U.S. citizens that it covers, it's U.S. PERSON or PERSONS.. the definition of that is huge.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/EO12334.htm

  Collecting on U.S. persons involves strict rules, its not a haphazard sequence of random events.  You can't have freedom without the ability to defend it, so how can you tell the FBI or any other agency they can't have the ability to do so?    

  At the end of the day, all we can do is hope those who are given the powers to conduct collection activities do so in  legal fashion, and those who have the responsibility to monitor these activities do thier job.  Once the agencies have done something really damaging.. I'll be all for shutting them down (like the IRS).  Until then, I'm not going to worry about it.. in the interest of attempting to prevent another terrorist attack.