• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. confirms warrantless searches of Americans

Where did i do this? Please point that out for me.

Despite clear evidence of why FISA warrants are rarely rejected (the strict requirements for requesting one), you employ conspiracy theory to discount them and then flat-out claim they don't exist.

Your argument is no different than a Truther claiming the planes were holograms. Please join us in reality.
 
That's nuts, and you're ignoring the other requirements.



So your tactic here is to deny reality and substitute fantasy?



The reason requests are rarely rejected is the strict requirements for making the request.



Black helicopter CT does not substitute for reality.

1. Why not? When I call the cable company etc. I am warned that the conversation may be monitored. People in the USA tend to assume that they have privacy unless they have specific reason to think otherwise.

2. We know that the no-fly lists were filled with errors that caused huge hassles for hundreds of people (including me). Many of the Guantanamo prisoners were released due to lack of evidence. Why should we believe that the current secret lists are accurate?

3. One of the premises of democracy and anti-corruption measures, and a lesson of history, is that politicians and government employees can not be trusted when they act in secret.

4. Are you denying that "extraordinary rendition" is still being used?
 
1. Why not? When I call the cable company etc. I am warned that the conversation may be monitored. People in the USA tend to assume that they have privacy unless they have specific reason to think otherwise.

If one person is out of the country and one is on the Terrorist Watchlist, that person has reason to believe they may be monitored.

Besides, many monitored calls do not come with warnings. You're confusing a private company with a warranted search.

2. We know that the no-fly lists were filled with errors that caused huge hassles for hundreds of people (including me). Many of the Guantanamo prisoners were released due to lack of evidence. Why should we believe that the current secret lists are accurate?

They're accurate enough to warrant taking a look at the conversation. No tap evidence can be used in obtaining the full warrant, if action is taken.

3. One of the premises of democracy and anti-corruption measures, and a lesson of history, is that politicians and government employees can not be trusted when they act in secret.

Well, state secrets must exist. That's just reality. Pretending otherwise is unhealthy.

4. Are you denying that "extraordinary rendition" is still being used?

Are you going to stay on topic?
 
Despite clear evidence of why FISA warrants are rarely rejected (the strict requirements for requesting one), you employ conspiracy theory to discount them and then flat-out claim they don't exist.
Did i ever state that they dont exist? No. I said it was rubber stamp. Stop lying.
 
Yes, clearly.

Rubber stamp=just, or fair. We live in a country where rubber stamps are not supposed to be given out. We supposedly stand for "liberty and justice for all". When a rubber stamp court is around that goes directly against that principle.
 
It's not really warrantless, that's just a catch phrase used by hacks. There are a few major requirements regarding these searches:

1. One of the communicators must be outside the US.
2. One of the communicators must be on the Terrorist Watchlist.
3. A special warrant must be obtained, from a panel of judges, before the tap occurs.
4. For anything in the tap to be used against someone, a full warrant must be obtained without the use of tap-gained material.

Frankly these requirements strike me as potentially extremely loose.

1 - I'd guess Americans are involved in hundreds of thousands of international calls a day. And most people probably make at least one international call a year. In other words the population of Americans who potentially meet this requirement and have done nothing wrong is huge.

2 - Without knowing the process by which people are added or removed from terrorist watch lists we have no way of know how hard it is to meet that requirement. Being the skeptic that I am I'd guess the government can pretty much add anyone they want to a terrorist watch list.

3 - We have no way of knowing what the criteria are the judges use for issuing a warrant. Is it probable cause, like most normal criminal warrants? Reasonable suspicion? Or just meeting your criteria 1 and 2 - which again are pretty flimsy.

4 - Number 4 is frankly irrelevant. A warrant issued on flimsy criteria isn't a good warrant simply because the fishing expedition failed to catch any fish.
 
Frankly these requirements strike me as potentially extremely loose.

1 - I'd guess Americans are involved in hundreds of thousands of international calls a day. And most people probably make at least one international call a year. In other words the population of Americans who potentially meet this requirement and have done nothing wrong is huge.

2 - Without knowing the process by which people are added or removed from terrorist watch lists we have no way of know how hard it is to meet that requirement. Being the skeptic that I am I'd guess the government can pretty much add anyone they want to a terrorist watch list.

3 - We have no way of knowing what the criteria are the judges use for issuing a warrant. Is it probable cause, like most normal criminal warrants? Reasonable suspicion? Or just meeting your criteria 1 and 2 - which again are pretty flimsy.

4 - Number 4 is frankly irrelevant. A warrant issued on flimsy criteria isn't a good warrant simply because the fishing expedition failed to catch any fish.

The article I linked in my previous post, about 10 back, states of 34,000 FISA requests, 11 were rejected. Rubber stamp, for real.
 
Rubber stamp=just, or fair. We live in a country where rubber stamps are not supposed to be given out. We supposedly stand for "liberty and justice for all". When a rubber stamp court is around that goes directly against that principle.

But it's not a rubber stamp. That's just your conspiracy theory.

It's a highly restricted and regulated process with requirements so strict as to virtually eliminate rejections. A full warrant must be obtained (without using anything from the tap) for anything from the tap to be used against someone.
 
But it's not a rubber stamp. That's just your conspiracy theory.
And the DPRK's and the PRC's legislature isnt a rubber stamp :roll: Thats just a geopolitical conspiracy theory...

It's a highly restricted and regulated process with requirements so strict as to virtually eliminate rejections. A full warrant must be obtained for anything from the tap to be used against someone, without using anything from the tap.
.03%.... .03%... Warrants have been given out to abuse lawyers who represent other countries in trade deals.
 
And the DPRK's and the PRC's legislature isnt a rubber stamp :roll: Thats just a geopolitical conspiracy theory...

.03%.... .03%... Warrants have been given out to abuse lawyers who represent other countries in trade deals.


You're using conspiracy theory to compare the US to North Korea. Let me know when you'd like to join us in reality.
 
You're using conspiracy theory to compare the US to North Korea. Let me know when you'd like to join us in reality.

Im not using a conspiracy theory. Im using facts. See post #6, and post #12 (just so happens you ignored the vast majority of that post and questions I asked).
 
Im not using a conspiracy theory. Im using facts.

The facts have a clear and simple explanation, which you eschew for conspiracy theory. Then you use your conspiracy theory to compare the US to North Korea. You don't honestly expect anyone to take you seriously, right?
 
The facts have a clear and simple explanation, which you eschew for conspiracy theory. Then you use your conspiracy theory to compare the US to North Korea. You don't honestly expect anyone to take you seriously, right?

:lamo

20u4bxc.jpg
 
..Are you going to stay on topic?

You are the one who mentioned conspiracy theories and black helicopters. Renditions and incarcerations without trial are completely relevant because without a legitimate trial government misdeeds used to obtain (or fabricate) evidence can not be revealed and used by the defense. The system has no true checks and balances and/or a system for preventing abuse. Not only does the current system make wrongful punishment likely, it creates a situation in which no one can feel that their privacy rights are maintained and they can not trust the government. All of the centuries of progress in making governments more just, fair and accountable to the people has been damaged by our over-reaction to the acts of twenty terrorists. I consider that damage more dangerous than the risk of occasional terrorist attacks, especially since oppressive governments without human rights protections are not significantly more secure than those that are more open. We survived over two hundred years, through a civil war and two world wars without a need to limit our human rights. (yes, I acknowledge that people's rights have been violated many times by our government, but it was generally not officially established policy.)
 
Last edited:
It's not really warrantless, that's just a catch phrase used by hacks. There are a few major requirements regarding these searches:

1. One of the communicators must be outside the US.
2. One of the communicators must be on the Terrorist Watchlist.
3. A special warrant must be obtained, from a panel of judges, before the tap occurs.
4. For anything in the tap to be used against someone, a full warrant must be obtained without the use of tap-gained material.

Good 'ol ecofarm--believes everything his govt. tells him.
 
You are the one mentioned conspiracy theories and black helicopters. Renditions and incarcerations without trial are completely relevant because without a legitimate trial government misdeeds used to obtain (or fabricate) evidence can not be revealed and used by the defense. The system has no true checks and balances and/or a system for preventing abuse.

That's why you should wear a tin hat.
 
Not to mention the huge database of all telecom traffic being stored in North Dakota that can be backsearched in perpetuity, regardless if you did something wrong now or not.

These government activities are evil and an unfortunate sign of the way things are headed.
 
That's why you should wear a tin hat.

Can't. All the tin hats have been taken by the right wing naivos who still believe everything their govt. tells them.
 
Can't. All the tin hats have been taken by the right wing naivos who still believe everything their govt. tells them.

In your world, does that pass for clever?
 
In your world, does that pass for clever?

No, "clever" is the last word anyone would use to describe the right wing naivos who believe everything their govt. tells them.
 
That's why you should wear a tin hat.

Can you name a foreign country that uses widespread surveillance of private communications authorized by secret courts using secret evidence to catch suspects that are then incarcerated indefinitely (and frequently tortured) without a legitimate trial that is a desirable place to live?
 
Can you name a foreign country that uses widespread surveillance of private communications authorized by secret courts using secret evidence to catch suspects that are then incarcerated indefinitely (and frequently tortured) without a legitimate trial that is a desirable place to live?

North Korea.
 
Back
Top Bottom