Bush spies on Americans

Remove all ads!

It is said that the people deserve their rulers.

But surely no one deserves this or this.

I can't get the original link from nyt since it requires registration.

 

I've never held with people complaining about being watched by the government (I assume that this is what this is about). Well, duh! Of course the government is watching people and they have every right to IMO. Better that than terrorists and all sorts roaming free and unwatched.

 

This is doubleplus ungood.

 

Listening to phonecalls is better than putting cameras in people's houses but imagine what kinds of politically helpful information a government can learn by eavesdropping on certain categories of potential suspects in the ranks of the opposition (such as Marting Luther King, for instance).

 

Most unfortunate. But then the Americans in turn are spying on us here in Europe in a similar fashion, so:

 

I actually appreciate it, knowing that I've done nothing wrong.

If the gov't catches one person, this was well worth it. I feel safer now.

 

In US, people tend to think otherwise. That is, the government has no business spying on people at will. If they have a good reason, they can get a court order.

And actually, I think this viewpoint is held by a large amount of conservatives; that is part of Bush's base. So I expect there will be quite a large outcry about this (and justified, in my opinion).

Is refreshing to see such trust in the government

 

"Those Who Would Sacrifice Liberty for Security Deserve Neither." - Benjamin Franklin

 

Blind thrust in a government is really foolish and harmful .

 

To me this is more proof that the terrorists are winning.People are so willing to give up there rights for some false sense of safety it truly baffles me.I am stunned at the amount of people I hear on the talk radio programs that have no promblem with this.They just seem to miss the point that we are losing the rights we are supposed to be fighting for.

 

Every human being has the right to privacy. Unless there is some justifiable reason for spying it should not be done. This is why a court order should be obtained. Sorry to all those of you who feel safer but I've been through witch hunts. No thanks! I'll take my chances.

 

Ok, I agree with you, but what makes you think the Democrats value individual freedom more so than the Republicans - if that is what you areimplying? If anything, I would say the Republicans respect more people's autonomy and self ruling.
As to the whole "spying", I am strongly against cameras, rigged phonecalls - whatever you call it - privacy invasion etc. Except for betrayers and known criminals.

 

I think we need to give authorities more freedom to prevent violent crime -- not just terrorism. I would feel much better with fewer violent criminals around.

This news was neither surprising nor offensive to me.

 

I agree with Barmy. If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide. Some of you people are far too paranoid.

 

So, if you have done nothing wrong, you should be fine with people prying into your personal life? There are aspects of myself that I would wish to keep known only to myself, and that does not mean they are criminal, un-moral or "wrong"; only that they say respect to no one else.

 

Who cares if the government knows that I spent $100 on frilly pink rubber underwear? I can't see how my life would be impacted one bit by them knowing stuff about me. And if it helps catch more criminals and terrorists then that's great, in my opinion.

I'd rather fight for a better economy than fight for the 'right' to some sort of privacy that doesn't amount to much anyway.

 

Well, I care. If you don't mind your own personal privacy, just disclaim it to the public, but some people, like me, will keep refusing leting a bunch of nobodies prying into our lives.

 

I'm amazed that GWB came out and openly admitted to doing this (indeed, he seemed proud of it). My problem is not with the NSA intercepting information; it's with the breakdown of proper process and the subsequent stomping on individual rights that goes with it.

If you're going to spy on people, you'd better have a damn good reason for it. This is why the agency seeking to make interceptions has to go through a court and get a warrant to do it. Agencies with exceptionally intrusive powers usually have exceptionally specific recording, reporting and authorisation requirements. Last time I checked, Bush hadn't been given the authority to override the law or turf the separation of powers on a whim.

Personally, I wouldn't care too much about people looking at my financial or transactional information. If I was being monitored, it would probably be for a decent reason (none I can think of, until the sedition powers in the new anti-terrorism laws come into force, that is). The problem is that someone who's willing to do this is probably willing to use that information. There is always something to leverage against someone.