NSA anti-spying controversy crap

[DarkMinion]

Has any of these people that are bashing the NSA actually read the Constitution, which in no way guarantees a right to privacy?

[CrAz3D]

Has any of these people that are bashing the NSA actually read the Constitution, which in no way guarantees a right to privacy?

Illegal searches & seizures.
I believe it is an illegal search of their speach/communication.

[iago]

Has any of these people that are bashing the NSA actually read the Constitution, which in no way guarantees a right to privacy?

Illegal searches & seizures.
I believe it is an illegal search of their speach/communication.

Yeah, that's exactly it.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[hismajesty]

That doesn't say privacy...

[iago]

Aren't they defining privacy?  Or do we have differing opinions of what "privacy" means?

[CrAz3D]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

What is an effect?...from what I gather it would be anything someone creates.
I believe that effects/papers would be like their conversations.

[DarkMinion]

That only defines the right to not have your door kicked in without a warrant.  Telephone conversations do not fall within that domain.

[iago]

That only defines the right to not have your door kicked in without a warrant.  Telephone conversations do not fall within that domain.

I think that telephone conversations fully fall under that.  So I guess the amendment is ambiguous? 

[shout]

The main reason theres nothing about telephones in there is they were quite non-existant when that was written. And because, at that time, paper was the main form of communication over distances, this should apply to telephones as well.

[DarkMinion]

It's not now, and wasn't illegal then for them to open your mail, either.  Telephones and mail fall under the same domain, and listening to your phone calls is neither illegal nor unconstitutional.

[CrAz3D]

The government reads mail now just as it has done in the past.

I don't think that is constitutional.  They're searching w/out a warrant.
Too big brother

[Arta]

What possible reason would the framers have for writing an amendment prohibiting unwarranted searches other than to protect privacy?

[Stealth]

The real problem I have with this "controversy" is the following:

- The media are making this out to be something serious. In reality, less than 500 people had their conversations recorded, and less than half of them were even American citizens.

- The media have also spun this to make people think that any Tom, Dick or Harry will have their phone calls listened in on. In reality, the people who were wiretapped were known to have had telephone contact with al-Qaeda operatives overseas. They were not randomly selected.

- The reason why this was covered up was that by nature it's an operation that HAS to be covered up. If your targets know you're watching, it becomes that much more difficult to monitor them effectively. In that regard, the "outing" of this "scandal" does in fact threaten our national security, which disgusts me. The NSA must be allowed to operate to the fullest extent of their abilities, within reason; I think that the circumstances make this monitoring a perfectly reasonable action.

The whole debacle just further proves that the American Angry Left Wing will stop at nothing to smear George W. Bush and those who support him, even if it means violating national security or making things up.

[iago]

- The media are making this out to be something serious. In reality, less than 500 people had their conversations recorded, and less than half of them were even American citizens.

I read in a non-American article somewhere that it has affected over 1,000,000 people, in one way or another.

- The media have also spun this to make people think that any Tom, Dick or Harry will have their phone calls listened in on. In reality, the people who were wiretapped were known to have had telephone contact with al-Qaeda operatives overseas. They were not randomly selected.

I also read a story by an American man who had his mail searched and his phone tapped because he has frequent contact with a friend in New Zealand, and any frequent over-seas correspondance is enough to get a search warrent. 


I hope that the terrorists are smart enough to use encrypted communications.  I'm sure they are, anyway

[PaiD]

somewhere I read that if you used encrypted communications duing a crime you get in more trouble. Not that the terrorist really care.