Hatch compares FISA critics to those "who wear tin foil hats..."

[ThoughtCriminal]

Speaking today on the Senate floor in favor of the Foreign Service Intelligence Act legislation, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) compared critics of the bill — which include Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV), Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barbara Boxer (D-CA), among others — to deluded conspiracy theorists. Hatch mocked the what he called “onerous oversight provisions” included in the bill, and said those who raise the specter of unchecked executive wiretapping power “feed the delusions of those who wear tin foil hats around their house and think that 9/11 was an inside job.”

Article and video here

[ThomasJ]

Statement on FISA

by Ron Paul

Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments before the US House of Representatives, June 20, 2008


Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.


The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.


In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.


Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.

[agentw0]

Most left wingers who are against this bill fail to realize the govt. is not listening to average joe citizen. They are using this to listen to terror suspects and cells operating within our borders.

I could care less if someone listens to my phone call's I have nothing to hide. People on the left however do not care about this country and keeping it safe.

I mean why worry about it of you have nothing to hide or are not doing anything illegal. In this day and age of terror and homeland security we need all the advantages we can get.

I remember seeing a quote something about a persons must sacrifice some freedoms for freedom and security. In this case I think that applies here 100%

[mikepro8]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Most left wingers who are against this bill fail to realize the govt. is not listening to average joe citizen. They are using this to listen to terror suspects and cells operating within our borders.

I could care less if someone listens to my phone call's I have nothing to hide. People on the left however do not care about this country and keeping it safe.

I mean why worry about it of you have nothing to hide or are not doing anything illegal. In this day and age of terror and homeland security we need all the advantages we can get.

I remember seeing a quote something about a persons must sacrifice some freedoms for freedom and security. In this case I think that applies here 100%

#1. NO.
#2. The quote you are referring to is from Benjamin Franklin, and I am paraphrasing but "those who give up essential liberty for temporary saftey deserve NEITHER" - so, your comment makes NO sense in this context. Also, according to the quote, if you are okay with giving up essential liberty for safety, YOU deserve neither.

#3. You prove to me that they ARENT listening to "Joe citizen." They have unchecked power and answer to no one. There is no one looking over their shoulder to make sure they are not checking on US citizens.
#4. The fact that you are doing nothing illegal is great for you. If you are pulled over for a traffic violation, would you let the police impound and search your car with no probable cause? If they showed up at your door without a warrant and wanted to search your home, would you let them? I know my answer is NO (and I work for a county government).

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Most left wingers who are against this bill fail to realize the govt. is not listening to average joe citizen.

you just go ahead and keep on believing that if you want to, but it ain't true.

http://www.wired.com/science/discove.../2006/01/70126

One of AT&T's databases, known as "Hawkeye," contains 312 terabytes of data detailing nearly every telephone communication on AT&T's domestic network since 2001, according to the complaint. The suit also alleges that AT&T allowed the NSA to use the company's powerful Daytona database-management software to quickly search this and other communication databases.

just like the FBI only every uses National Security letters against terrorists (not).

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

wake up!

I mean why worry about it of you have nothing to hide or are not doing anything illegal.

brandon mayfield
richard jewel
willie earl green
rich banks

the "you have nothing to worry about if you aren't doing anything illegal" is a fallacy...a very dangerous one at that.

In this day and age of terror and homeland security we need all the advantages we can get.

terror is a minor threat compared to big brother. in this day and age of big brother, we need the bill of rights more than ever.

I remember seeing a quote something about a persons must sacrifice some freedoms for freedom and security.

that is a bunch of BS. sounds like something someone like mussolini, saddam hussein, etc. would say.

i remember seeing another quote...something along the lines of:

"those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

that one came from one of the founders of our country.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Most left wingers who are against this bill fail to realize the govt. is not listening to average joe citizen. They are using this to listen to terror suspects and cells operating within our borders.

I could care less if someone listens to my phone call's I have nothing to hide. People on the left however do not care about this country and keeping it safe.

I mean why worry about it of you have nothing to hide or are not doing anything illegal. In this day and age of terror and homeland security we need all the advantages we can get.

I remember seeing a quote something about a persons must sacrifice some freedoms for freedom and security. In this case I think that applies here 100%

Agent, I must respectfully disagree.

These issues have nothing to do with left or right wing anymore. Don't kid yourself. If it was a Democrat who sponsored this legislation, those same Democrat critics would be supporting this bill, just like the Republicans are today. It's no longer about representing the people, it's about party politics, and hence party POWER.

Your statement, IMHO, makes the same fundamentally flawed assumption as those who wish to pass this law: that government always works to benefit and good of the people.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It sometimes works to the people's ends, but not always.

If history is any guide, it has shown that when governments either exert too much authority or are given too much authority, those governments will at some point abuse that authority to the detriment of its citizens.

Remember the saying, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions". While the authors and supporters of this bill have good intentions, their ignorance of the spirit and meaning of the Bill of Rights in the name of "keeping us safe" is going to cause us to be under constant threat of government surveillance. Just because the government is saying that they're not watching Joe Citizen today doesn't mean they won't watch Joe Citizen tomorrow. Just because one has nothing to hide doesn't mean one should be watched. I have nothing to hide, but I don't want the government, without informed consent or probable cause, to be able to listen to a phone conversation I have with my wife, or anyone else for that matter.

In addition, the federal government already has the right to do everything that's being requested in the FISA bill through other means. If they have probable cause, they should get a warrant; that method allows them to do their jobs without stomping on everyone else's rights. Just because the Executive Branch has become too overbearing and lazy to work with the Judiciary to give them a warrant doesn't mean we should give up our rights to privacy.

To be blunt, I don't want to give the federal government the power to keep me safe. I want to give them the power to keep me FREE. In that freedom and liberty lies our security, NOT the other way around.

[agentw0]

Wow!

Just keep your heads buried in the sand and that is all you will ever see.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Wow!

Just keep your heads buried in the sand and that is all you will ever see.

i have presented evidence that it is you who have your head buried in the sand.

do you have any evidence to refute it?

[Broomhandle]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Most left wingers who are against this bill...

Others have already pointed out how stupid this post was on constitutional and practical grounds. I wanted to point out how we can't even trust the "left" (in this case Obama or the media) to protect privacy. Here is a great description of Obama's flip-flop on FISA and how his syncophants in the media are twisting reality to make him look like a hero. Truly the major parties are the same and this country is doomed.

...not even the nation's most foremost FISA experts really know the full extent to which this bill allows new warrantless spying. Obviously, Jonathan Alter has no idea what he's saying, but nonetheless decrees that this bill -- now that Obama supports it -- restores the Fourth Amendment. Those are the Orwellian lengths to which people like Olbermann and Alter are apparently willing to go in order to offer their blind devotion to Barack Obama.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa.../26/olbermann/

[ThomasJ]

Originally Posted by agentw0

Wow!

Just keep your heads buried in the sand and that is all you will ever see.

Pretty ironic that you're the one saying this.