Do you agree with Bush tapping all calls comming and going over seas from the USA?

Do you think Bush is right in tapping all phone calls from the USA to over seas?...Do you agree with having all the emails that pass through the USA monitored?...As an American Citizen..How do you feel about your rights under Bush?? How do you feel about Bush calling the constitution .."just a God damned piece of paper!!!"

Do you agree with Bush tapping all calls comming and going over seas from the USA?
I think that Bush is probably the worst president that U.S. has ever seen. Tapping into phone calls is a complete invasion of privacy. And if we can't have privacy, do we really have any rights at all??
Reply:i think it is good that BUSH protects us somehow and if this is the way, then so be it!
Reply:E-mails are monitored, via the ECHELON system. This is well-known about in Europe (where the US has used it to illegally steal trade secrets from European companies and give them to US ones), but seems relatively unknown about in the US.





It is thought it automatically monitors phone calls, as it is alleged that a major BT trunk is routed through the UK site, Menwith Hill near Harrogate.
Reply:the government is NO tapping ALL calls coming in from overseas. That would be completely impossible for any government to perform that task.





Your rights have not been compromised in any way, shape or form. The only reason that your calls would be monitored would be because your were deemed some kind of a threat -- i say 'thank you Mr. President for protecting me and my family'.
Reply:While I disagree with what Bush admitted to doing (i.e. monitoring CERTAIN calls between Americans and foreigners), and believe he may have broken the law, the question is a bit misleading.





First off, the government does not (to my knowledge, please correct me) monitor e-mails within the country. ISP's may, but I doubt anyone would be stupid/crazy enough to risk that.





Second, the quote .."just a God damned piece of paper!!!" originated from Capitol Hill Blue, a VERY unreliable and biased source. If CNN or BBC or any, remotely mainstream media confirms it, fine, but right now, it's the word of a loony.





As for rights under the Bush Admin, yeah, they've been curtailed. That's what we get for picking John Kerry as our alternative. The Dems could've done a better job, they ruined 2004 with their stupid pick.
Reply:Bush doesn't tap ALL calls. The thing is, UNTIL his system PREVENTS terrorism and it's a known fact, people will say he's a loon, and WHEN it's proven he prevented a terrorist attact, no one will give him the credit. Get off the guy's back, you have NO IDEA what it takes to be the President of the only world power!!!!
Reply:Yes -- and, of course, unconstitutional. Remember: the purpose of the Constitution is to protect you from your government, but you must hold politicians accountable, or your rights will go away, never to return.
Reply:I am glad he is willing to take political risk to protect us
Reply:yep
Reply:A trustworthy government should be able to gather data anyway possible. There should be constitutional clauses effecting the use of the data. If the government obtains data and uses it to stop a natural social evolution withen the US that would be wrong. It is possible that that is what they are doing. They have stoped social evolution in the past. It is there job to help along social evolution and make space for it. Not police the world.





P.s. the purpose of the constitution is actually to limit the rights of the government. If bush does not respect it than he is all but a good president. Allowing him to make changes to the supream court could be bad.
Reply:yes
Reply:BUSH HAS FOLLOWED THE LAW.. i suggest you read the foriegn intelligence surveilance act of 1978 and read the part where it says that the president can order taps WITHOUT A warrant.. furthermore. it is not unconstitutional to do so.. the 4th ammendment regards property.. not communications privacy..





to miss dusty.. nowhere in the constitution does it say anything about "right to privacy".. privacy is an implied power that can be taken away if it is benificial to the country as a whole.. such as tapping phone calls of terrorists.. or making sex offenders register..
Reply:if he does nothing then he will be blamed for not doing anything, yet if he does something he is blamed. it is a no win situation with politics


but yes I agree with what he did, but disagree with what he said about The Constitution