President quietly OKs opening of Americans' mail

Good Post

Rocket River

 

What you call equivocation is really just a grayscale view of things rather than black or white.

The last time I checked, I wasn't allowed to collect my own taxes either.

The government can do lots of things that I can't and, since they are in charge of all of our safekeeping, a tedious thing like opening mail is no big deal. Do you really think their intent is to just open mail willy-nilly? Do you know how much mail there is? Of course you do...

I'll bet you a hundred million dollars that I don't have that the federal authorities won't enter my house without permission before they don't enter yours. Okay?

NOTE: I find it ironic that you didn't even attempt to answer MY question. I know it's a hard one but c'mon...

 

Opening mail is no big deal? Why do you use an envelope? Collecting taxes(which technically already belong to the govt. is not the same as opening someone's personal property without a warrant.

I have no idea if their intent is to open mail willy nilly. I can tell you that I don't trust this government's reasoning when it comes to opening mail. They have yet to give me any reason to trust them. The founding fathers of this nation didn't trust govt. and thus built in checks and balances.

It is incredibly naive of you to trust any govt. with unchecked power like that, especially this one.

It baffles me how little some people value their freedoms and rights. Hopefully the majority of us do value those things, and will fight to protect them.

 

I don't understand why, using the same logic, one would not argue that a tedious thing like retroactively applying for a warrant under FISA is no big deal.

And their "intent" is hardly the point. Of course that's not their intent - but it's the things that happen outside of the "intent" that matter, and which are safeguarded via the warrant process!

When did this country forget that one of the objectives of the consitution was to safeguard the citizens from the government? It seems like every couple of years everyone forgets why that's important and some fear-mongering douchebags exploit it thanks to people like you.

 

1. I use an envelope so that not everybody can see its contents. The government might open mail of targeted people suspected of wishing to do harm to the US. Since I am in no way in that group... What, me worry?

2. Where is the unchecked power? One more power added (for justifiable reason) does not make the power unchecked. As I pointed up, the government has LOTS of power much of which is more potent that this.

3. I don't doubt that you love liberty, yet you doubt that I do. Do you see where YOU have a problem? You're myopic about things being done your way. You're intrinsically untrusting of the government. I'm not. If something like this came around in a time of peace, I'd be squawking too but there seems a good reason for this...

 

I think it should have been done, but I'm not interested in using something like that to harass a government which is trying to assess the level of terrorist infiltration into the American population.

My point about the intent is the sheer volume of opening mail that they have no reasonable purpose in checking. This is the same argument I made against worrying about the electronic surveillance. There's so much about that they can only attend to things that are really suspicious. Much of the complaint here is couched as the feds opening your or my mail. If you're a terrorist or a sympathizer... I HOPE THEY DO. (I don't think you are)

Thanks to people like me. This was done without your or my say. It has nothing to do with me. It really has more to do with you because THEY KNEW that the **** would hit the fan when it came to light. Is that bravery perhaps rather than evilness? Could that be leadership rather than criminality? Frankly I'm more wont to ascribe it as the former while you and FB and others go with the latter. Time will tell.

 

1. You don't want everyone to read your mail? What are you hiding? The only people who should worry about that are the ones who have something to hide right?

If the person having their mail opened is believed to be a terrorist for good reason, why not get a warrant and open the letter? Why open it without a warrant? You don't know if you are in the targeted group or not. That is part of the problem. Without having to get a warrant Bush is the one who decides who that group is, and he has given us no reason to trust his judgement on such issues. That is why we need checks and balances.

2. The unchecked power is that Bush decided that he no longer needs a warrant to open other people's mail. The warrant was to ensure there really was probable cause. That was the check and balance. It was removed by one man(our leader) in a power-grab. There may be reason to open mail and investigate it. That is why we have a system in place that allows that to happen. But in our system there were checks to make sure there was probable cause.

3. It isn't reasonable to doubt that I love liberty because I make a stink about it when someone in our govt. threatens my liberties. I question your love of liberty because you willingly give them away, and don't see any harm in doing so. I don't trust the govt. And neither should you. They have repeatedly broken our trust... this govt. especially so. If you trust them are at best naive, and possibly foolish.

 

If you were someone living in N. Korea you shouldn't worry about them following you, restricting your movement, and monitoring your every move, because they keep you safe, and afterall if you aren't against the govt. then you have nothing to worry about, right?

If you were alive in Nazi Germany and wernen't Jewish, gay or a gypsy then why should you be bothered by forcing groups into camps, or ghettos, taking away their rights. You, afterall, would be safe, and since you didn't belong to those groups you have nothing to worry about. The govt. should be trusted.

I'm not comparing Bush to Kim in N. Korea or Hitler, but I am saying that it is a non-sensical argument to say that if you aren't doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about any govt. infringement.

That is in essence is against the very principles our nation was founded on. It is also naive, moral cowardice, and nearsighted. It goes against the whole idea of innocent until proven guilty, a three branch govt. with checks and balances etc.

 

In the modern era, when was the last time that anyone signed anything up there that evaded detection? They knew it would come out; they knew there would be wing-flapping about it. They did it anyway.

 

And again, using the SAME LOGIC, why are they interested in harassing me. It's not hard to get a warrant, hell you can do it after the fact! There is no reasonable rationale that makes this necessary to "assess the level of terrorist infiltration". The capability is already there - which only makes the implication more dubious.

And I do to. Only they can do it without tromping on my rights, I'm not a criminal, and I don't deserve to be treated like one. Your argument about quantity is irrelevant - all it takes is one uncouth fed to make your life miserable.

Thus the dubious-ness of such an action. Most americans are (usually) uncomfortable with the loss of a right. People like you, suckered in by the "oh noes the terrorists are everywhere!" propoganda are the reason why this kind of stuff is allowed. Slippery slope indeed.

It has everything to do with you AND me. Those are OUR rights being trampled on for some obscure and unknown reason, or more likely just for a power trip by a president lacking the balls to actually write something like this as a law and instead relying on irresponsible abuse of the signing statement privledge.

A leader? What a good one! A president who ignored the constitution he's sworn to uphold and protect? I hope your children are not paying attention to his "leadership" as a source to emulate.

 

1. I wasn't aware the you were being harassed.

2. You can't do everything after the fact. After the phone call is complete the message is delivered.

3. The capability to assess is not there unless our approach is comprehensive because the terrorists adjust their methods and tactics based on what they read in the NY Times.

4. I never said that the terrorists are everywhere but they are here and we don't really know where they are, do we? It's time to catch-up from the decades when we were sleeping on the job.

5. From that standpoint it is about you and me, but my point was that this action was not done with my blessing or yours but for us. Why not a bill? Because it would take months if not years to get it passsed and then where are we. The time for flame r****dant of any sort is when the fire is starting to burn not after the house is burned to the ground. Sometimes you have to hurry.

 

Man any time I lose a right it's more than harassment. It's way beyond just harrassment. And your rationale is juvenile - its ok to do something bad as long as you don't bother anyone we care about? That's ignorant and unethical.

That makes no sense. let me try this again: The federal government does not even have to get the warrant ahead of time - they can get it after opening the mail of listening in on the call. There is NO REASON they are not complying with the warrant requirement other than the fact that they are power-hungry, and potentially full of ill-concieved motives.

Does not explain my point in response to #2, nor does it address the ludicrous ideal that removing freedoms will help keep us free.

And flushing away the bill of rights is hardly the way to go about it.

Why not a bill? Try because the people would have gone ape****, congress would have been indignant, and the courts would tear Bush into even less of president, and more a mockery. Time constraints my ass. Thank god signing statements are not law (well, traditionally not viewed as such).

 

if you are a suspected terrorist, how hard is it to get a warrant to open your mail?

 

The excuse that the President would use is that it's the time it takes to get the warrant that could mean the difference in being able to read that mail, and respond, and the mail going through and them not getting the information. This is why I don't mind them having a court set up for this particular purpose. One that just gives the NSA (or whomever) whatever warrant that they want. But it needs to be in court documents so that there is accountability.

 

1.already covered

2. Yes somethings can be done after the fact. Mail can be open and searched without a warrant, then then the President can go and get a warrant. That is the case without the President's signing statement

3. Opening mail just to see if someone is or isn't a terrorist goes against your idea that they won't open yours because you aren't a terrorist. If they don't know they will have to open them to find out. That is illegal search. There must be probable cause to search us or our property. That is the constitution.

I don't know why you get surprised that I question your love for liberty when you willingly encourage our govt. to act against our constitution.

 

1. There are a lot of rights you haven't had since birth; get used to it.

2. My rationale is mature and trusting... to a point. There is a war going on with enemies who have infiltrated our society and are only to glad to die while killing. We have not seen that before.

3. I'm with you on the warrants. There is really no reason to get them retroactively. I'm not sure what you are protesting here.

4. We have many freedoms long-ago flushed away. Another one at a critical juncture in history is not going to kill anyone. I'm not sure that "flushed away' is an apt description. Why you wish to go ape over this is interesting.

 

I don't mind if the government checks my mail. I'm not a terrorist. In fact, we should install cameras all over our houses and put it on the web for everyone to see. I have nothing to hide. And as a bonus I can check on my neighbors to make sure they aren't doing anything to me. Excuse me now, evidently I have an anal probing I'm late for, I don't want to keep Uncle Sam waiting.

Our slippery slope just turned into a 300 foot cliff.