Here is something that I don't understand or don't get about this whole wiretapping business...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/19/bush/index.html

Now according to the story, Bush is using these wiretaps to keep tabs on people in the United States that are allegedly connected to al Qaeda and other possible terrorist groups right? He goes on to say that we need this information so that we can prevent further attacks in the US (in my opinion, once again we see the administration trying to create fear within the American public opinion so that what they're doing is not questioned). He says that only calls originating from the US and going to other countries and vice versa are being eavesdropped on. Essentially, that could be anyone then that makes calls from the US to another foreign country.

Here's what I don't understand. He says that we need to intercept these calls to prevent attacks in the US. He says that these are from or to al Qaeda members to and or from people in the US. Now here is the question that I have that is really burning in my brain right now:

If these people that are in the US are talking to al Qaeda and these intercepted calls are being used to thwart possible attacks in the US; why aren't we going out there and arresting these people that are in the US? Do you mean to tell me that we can track and record their phone conversations, but we can't put them under arrest? If this was so pressing; why aren't people getting hauled in and jailed? We know that the current administration has no problems with arresting people with no probable cause but according to the same administration we have people plotting attacks against the country and we can only record their conversations? Am I missing something here?

Here is something that I don't understand or don't get about this whole wiretapping business...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/19/bush/index.html

Now according to the story, Bush is using these wiretaps to keep tabs on people in the United States that are allegedly connected to al Qaeda and other possible terrorist groups right? He goes on to say that we need this information so that we can prevent further attacks in the US (in my opinion, once again we see the administration trying to create fear within the American public opinion so that what they're doing is not questioned). He says that only calls originating from the US and going to other countries and vice versa are being eavesdropped on. Essentially, that could be anyone then that makes calls from the US to another foreign country.

Here's what I don't understand. He says that we need to intercept these calls to prevent attacks in the US. He says that these are from or to al Qaeda members to and or from people in the US. Now here is the question that I have that is really burning in my brain right now:

If these people that are in the US are talking to al Qaeda and these intercepted calls are being used to thwart possible attacks in the US; why aren't we going out there and arresting these people that are in the US? Do you mean to tell me that we can track and record their phone conversations, but we can't put them under arrest? If this was so pressing; why aren't people getting hauled in and jailed? We know that the current administration has no problems with arresting people with no probable cause but according to the same administration we have people plotting attacks against the country and we can only record their conversations? Am I missing something here?
as I understand it, they are monitoring international calls to & from known or suspected Al Quida or other terrorist collaborators. In other words, anyone they are worried might have a link.

In addition, sometimes they will leave a known collaborator in place and watch them in the hopes to catch a "bigger fish", so to speak.

Len

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Congress had given Bush authority to spy on suspected terrorists in this country in legislation passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
.
Those stupid Dems didn't read the fine print when they voted for Bush's resolutions. They probably also missed the small print about the Concentration Camps that just might need to be set up to protect us from "those" people.
If Bush can't do whatever he wants, ......what the use of being president.
.
Ps. Isn't it just "shameful" that secret "secrets" like this are disclosed. The investigation of this disclosure should be moved ahead of investigations about CIA leakage.

as I understand it, they are monitoring international calls to & from known or suspected Al Quida or other terrorist collaborators. In other words, anyone they are worried might have a link.

In addition, sometimes they will leave a known collaborator in place and watch them in the hopes to catch a "bigger fish", so to speak.

LenOr there's the more likely---some snoops need official *approval* for fishing expeditions--and find nada

sounds sorta like Iraq & WMD no?

d@m I hate Americ@.

as I understand it, they are monitoring international calls to & from known or suspected Al Quida or other terrorist collaborators. In other words, anyone they are worried might have a link.

In addition, sometimes they will leave a known collaborator in place and watch them in the hopes to catch a "bigger fish", so to speak.

Len

"To save American lives we must be able to act fast and to detect these conversations so we can prevent new attacks," Bush said during a year-end news conference at the White House.

"So, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, I authorized the interception of international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations."

Now depending on who you term as a terrorist organization, it could be wide and varied. Most people will think middle eastern type terrorist groups, but with this broad generalization, what is to stop Bush from listening in on conversations maybe some Irish guy is having with his brother about Sinn Fein. Or maybe there are some Basques hanging out in America that have relations or friends that they want to discuss ETA with. So where does it stop?

Also from the article:

"I've reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September 11 attacks and I intend to do so for so long as the nation faces a continuing threat from an enemy that wants to kill American citizens," Bush said.

As I said before, if these guys pose such a serious and dangerous threat to us, why aren't they hauled in? Why let them roam around free? It wouldn't be that hard for them to disappear and then take out a few targets now would it? I doubt it.

As I said before, if these guys pose such a clear and present danger to Americans, and they are here, then they should be arrested. Leaving them out in the clear seems to me to be quite dangerous. I mean we all might get killed!

Am I missing something here?

Yes, because your description of what is being surveilled is not accurate, but that's not your fault, that is the fault of the administration's continuing efforts to obfuscate.

Calls originating from and terminating in the United States are being surveilled; that is, purely domestic calls. The information gathered from these calls is then being used as the basis for justifying additional intercepts, etc. It's not all international, and the administration has admitted the same.

It is noteworthy that the Patriot Act provided a procedure for obtaining orders that would have accomplished the same thing that the secret surveillance was intended to do. The more interesting question is why weren't the procedures established by dint of the Patriot Act followed?

Why don't you post a source for your allegation? I have only read that the taps are international.

I believe the wiretaps have led to some significant arrests. You can Google it.

I believe the wiretaps have led to some significant arrests. You can Google it.
"The ends justify the means" argument.......where doesthis slippery slope end Steam?

Len

Why don't you post a source for your allegation? I have only read that the taps are international.

From what I've read, the taps go like this:

Call from the US to somewhere outside of the US = tapped (possibly)
Call from outside the US to somewhere inside of the US = tapped (possibly)

I haven't heard this tapping of calls internal us domestic calls only as someone else wrote, but maybe they mis-communicated what they were thinking? Regardless, this is still wiretapping of American citizens without a court order. Land of the free indeed.

I haven't seen anything in the Bush rhetoric the last few days that said anything about significant arrests with information garnered from these wiretaps. I would imagine that if they did arrest "X" amount of people, they would be blaring it all over saying, "See how well this works. See who we caught!" I haven't heard anything of that nature or read anything of that nature.

No. That is not what I said nor the facts of the matter. If this is an illegal process, then I am sure Bush will be impeached for it. Until then it is just scare tactics, yes we can use that term too, from the left. No slippery slope if this is a valid tool to use against terrorists bent on causing harm to Americans.

This goes back to my original question. If this is a crime, what would be the motive for said crime? Is Bush planning on taking over the US government? If so, maybe he should borrow the stolen FBI files Hillarity and Bubba have. I am sure they can do more damage with them than what ever they will get from these taps.

If this is an illegal process, then I am sure Bush will be impeached for it.
It's just about as legal as the wiretapping of the dem0cr@ts offices of yore.

He coulda gotten secret warrants from secret courts quite quickly-they seldom turn down from what I've gathered, but nope.

As to the impeachment-nope never gonna happen with all the yes men/save@$$es in office.

No. That is not what I said nor the facts of the matter. If this is an illegal process, then I am sure Bush will be impeached for it. Until then it is just scare tactics, yes we can use that term too, from the left. No slippery slope if this is a valid tool to use against terrorists bent on causing harm to Americans.

This goes back to my original question. If this is a crime, what would be the motive for said crime? Is Bush planning on taking over the US government? If so, maybe he should borrow the stolen FBI files Hillarity and Bubba have. I am sure they can do more damage with them than what ever they will get from these taps.

Who says that there has to be a motive for a crime to be committed. It could be a case of someone not knowing what the laws are, and or thinking that they are above the law. If Bush did break a law in the case of these wiretaps and spying on American citizens, I (can't believe that I'm going to say this) believe that he did so thinking that he was doing "good". There is indeed a slippery slope, even if this is an effective tool. Because then you start wiretapping people like political opponents, people you don't like, and so on and so forth. Because if you find that it is legal to wiretap American citizens without a court order, that opens up 250 million of us to such things. And that, is the slippery slope. And we don't have any proof yet if this is an effective tool for combatting terrorism in America, as for now we just have the President's "word", which to a lot of people these days is worth about 2 cents or less.

This still does not answer my original question...

If these people that they have been wiretapping were SOOO dangerous that, according to the President, doing this prevented serious attacks from taking place, then why aren't they rounding them up with this evidence?

Who says that there has to be a motive for a crime to be committed. It could be a case of someone not knowing what the laws are, and or thinking that they are above the law. If Bush did break a law in the case of these wiretaps and spying on American citizens, I (can't believe that I'm going to say this) believe that he did so thinking that he was doing "good". There is indeed a slippery slope, even if this is an effective tool. Because then you start wiretapping people like political opponents, people you don't like, and so on and so forth. Because if you find that it is legal to wiretap American citizens without a court order, that opens up 250 million of us to such things. And that, is the slippery slope. And we don't have any proof yet if this is an effective tool for combatting terrorism in America, as for now we just have the President's "word", which to a lot of people these days is worth about 2 cents or less.

This still does not answer my original question...

If these people that they have been wiretapping were SOOO dangerous that, according to the President, doing this prevented serious attacks from taking place, then why aren't they rounding them up with this evidence?


You raised a bunch of valid points Mags and I think I can tie it all together. The Right still seems to be completely pre occupied with Clinton as evidenced by Steams post. So the RNC must be preparing for the 2008 election by using wire taps to record Bill Clintons secret calls to those asian phone sex lines. :p

This still does not answer my original question...

If these people that they have been wiretapping were SOOO dangerous that, according to the President, doing this prevented serious attacks from taking place, then why aren't they rounding them up with this evidence?

Because they hope that these guys will lead them to even bigger guys, as well as bank accounts and safe houses, etc. It's a classic law enforcement technique for racketeering-type cases. Look for them to identify and bring down a huge terrorist network sometime around next October.

as I understand it, they are monitoring international calls to & from known or suspected Al Quida or other terrorist collaborators. In other words, anyone they are worried might have a link.

In addition, sometimes they will leave a known collaborator in place and watch them in the hopes to catch a "bigger fish", so to speak.

Len
more generally...if your name is "Achmed" or similar you better watch what you're saying to your relatives overseas because Big Bro is listening.