In Which Bush Further Erodes Our Freedoms

[notasleep87]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/11/washington/11cnd-phone.html?hp&ex=1147406400&en=9ebc2132b83f0bfd&ei=5094&partner=homepage

This article and issue particularly disturbs me because it was done in collaboration with American companies. Granted, many of them being cell phone companies, one shouldn't be surprised if they were monitored. Nonetheless, the

Comments

[facioergosum]

On the one hand, I certainly don't like invasion of privacy in any form. On the other, I realize that the government has, in the past, prevented large scale terrorist attacks the likes of 9-11, though I'm not sure if they did or would have needed intelligence of this sort.

But, if it were necessary to have information about such phone calls in order to trace terrorists and save the country, I'm all for it. I'm even all for them having all the information they do now, as long as they use it only for the express purpose of stopping terrorists.

To quote Stephen Colbert, "People compare the recent changes in this administration to rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic. They say this administration is sinking. I disagree. If anything, this administration is soaring. It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg."

Terminus.

[notasleep87]

I wouldn't. Frankly, I don't trust this administration, or any administration for that matter, to have this much access to my personal life. This much power gives the potential for things to go terribly, terribly wrong, and considering who we're talking about, I'd say that that potential is a real risk. I generally follow the Benjamin Franklin quote stating that "those who would give up their essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Furthermore, the claim that that many Americans are suspected terrorists is absurd in the extreme. Even the 5,000 illegal wiretaps by the NSA were all done on people who were cleared of any suspected terrorist activities.

I want at least one case in which destroying our civil liberties has stopped a terrorist attack. Then I want proof that the information couldn't have been obtained in a legal manner. Then I want an explanation as to why that channel was not used.

As for the Colbert quote, I really don't see what this has to do with anything at all.

[facioergosum]

Eh. The Colbert quote was just funny. And yes...actually, considered objectively, I agree with you.

I just say that, in addition, were it necessary to have such information and use such information to save me from terrorists (not that I can document any instances), I would prefer - in that time of danger - for all the stops to be pulled out, that I would value my own survival and safety above everything else, not giving half a damn whether or not the government had to go through every phone record from here to kingdom come if it meant that I would survive, or more precisely, if it were the only way to ensure my safety/survival.

End.