NSA Wiretapping Ruled Unconstitutional

[Claytron]

[url="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/domesticspying.lawsuit/index.html"]http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/dom...suit/index.html[/url]About time.

[Anpu]

Uuuh you know how they found out about the most recent plot using UK plains which were headed for the US right? We'll see what happens when the case reaches the Supreme Court. Not looking to start a heated debate, it's a double-edged sword to be sure.

[Sonthert]

Again, people, go back to the founding fathers. Last time!:"Those who would trade a little freedom for security will have neither." T. Jefferson.I think it speaks more to te mentality of the people rather than a trade off. When we are willing to give up a little freedom for something, we don't cherish it and people will violate laws and the constitution and nobody will care. You know, people used to banter about the statement "Better dead than red." I would say, better dead than to give up on the constitution. When you start letting them get away with this and that, it means nothing. Yes, wiretapping MAY save lives. I would rather be dead than to give up liberty. Anybody who feels differently can leave. There are any one of one or two hundred countries in the world that have no freedom AND no security. Security is an illusion. Once you accept living life is a dangerous proposition, it falls into perspective. We got ourselves into this mess, we have to accept the consequences sooner or later, with ballon payment.

[Claytron]

It is an it isn't. Yes, one can say 'we need this to find terrorists' - but that's using an ocean to put out a spark. That's the current administration's arguement. There is terrorism and there are ways to investigate it legitimately. Law enforcement has it own set of rules to follow - ignoring those rules leads to alot of bad stuff. They have no right given to them to filter any and all communication for whatever they like without proper permission to do so. One out of every x million people using communication systems might be a potential terrorist - so that's a valid reason to monitor the x-million innocent people's communications why? Constitutionally it's not. Without no protections from the state and it's bodies you stifle ideas and begin working towards totalitarianism. The problem is our executive branch said they did have permission without talking to anyone else. There is a reason we created a checks and balances system. There is a strong arguement that the current administration has been 'gaming' our political system to an unheard of extent - history has yet to decide if that's okay.EDIT: hehehe... Tangiers and I posted at the same time. Obviously I agree. I may not care for America's governing style at this point, but I care alot about the country's founding principles. The constitution is really the glue that holds the ship together. We need it - and many want to shred it for political/financial gain.Nothing is worth that.

[Sonthert]

Well said, sir!