Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Do you think the National Security Agency's collection of Americans' phone records is necessary?

  1. Yes
  2. No
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(33)

revoltnow

Jan-03-14 11:50 AM

end americas involvment in non american soil...then we wouldn't need the N.S.A. or the C.I.A. or dozens of other orginizations with exclusive goals of making things worse instead of better. like the world bank....

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

Jan-03-14 12:47 PM

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The governments abuse of power is the reason Mr. Snowden is a hero.

8 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Jan-03-14 2:20 PM

Remember under GWB how every liberal was shouting how intrusive the government has become? This administration has blown that out of this universe! Go ahead and defend President Pinocchio. He can lie his way out of anything and them blame GWB and republicans!

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Jan-03-14 5:48 PM

can't add much to what has already been said.

So where is the rebuttal from the 27% ???

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Patriot1

Jan-03-14 6:58 PM

The question, as formulated and stated, is insufficient to generate a well-reasoned, proper answer. If evidence is uncovered indicating that specific individuals or organizations are involved in actions or plots jeopardizing the safety of American citizens, collection of their phone records is justified.

0 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Jan-03-14 8:57 PM

Patriot, there is this thing called the 4th Amendment. You can find that in the Bill of Rights, and that tends to limit the blanket surveillance that the NSA is accused of doing. The answer is NO

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Jan-04-14 6:59 AM

NO! This is America. Drugs, that (now) 23% of libs who think its ok are unable to tell you why right now, they have to check for commie authorization and talking points in order to regurgitate the latest Party Line BS, like..it's for our own good or some other idiotic excuse.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Patriot1

Jan-04-14 9:07 AM

I agree ALMOST 100% with respondents' replies. Perhaps I should have phrased my comment to read "If there has been ample evidence discovered to indicate that the individual/group is involved in action/actions involving the destruction/destabilization of the United States of America, this form of governmental observation is permissible". As long as I am not involved in any such action, I too do not wish to be "spied upon and monitored".

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

laker88

Jan-04-14 9:20 AM

I agree with you patriot in that if there is evidence then totally no problem with phone records. But aren't conservs more likely to vote yes for this rather than libs!!? Scarecrow..."Snowden is a hero"!!...Wow, the far right will be coming after you, be careful!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Jan-04-14 9:52 AM

revoltnow, If the USA took your advise and withdrew all involvement throughout the world. We would be viewed as the scum of the earth, uncaring, heartless and coldblooded. Next as we sit here withdrawn like a turtle someone would gain the power we surrendered to come by and crush us in our shell. We would never see it coming! Our military is all over the world not only protecting others from evil but also maintaining our OWN SECURITY. I would much rather see us fighting in Baghdad, Kabul or Tehran than NYC, Chicago, LA, Miami or any US city! If we let it all go, then they win, and they want to win.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Jan-04-14 9:58 AM

Laker, not me. I feel that our government has grown too intrusive, has enacted many unfair policies and has overspent to the point we have become unstable. Snowden on the other hand is still a traitor, there has to be a better way to handle this problem than supplying our enemies with every piece of evidence and defensive information we have. I do not believe that people understand how truly bad this action has harmed our defenses. This is EXACTLY why we need a strong military so we can survive such a thoughtless action.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

laker88

Jan-04-14 10:30 AM

tot...I totally agree with your comments about Snowden. That is neither a liberal nor conservative issue. He is a traitor, plain and simple.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-04-14 1:00 PM

ToT. english comprehension. take that class again and this time stay awake.. the subject is the N.S.A. and the likes. not ALL of ameica. we do have a few good things left. i just wish that the relief didn't come with dishonarable conditions. like the spy game for one.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Jan-04-14 1:34 PM

What is so hard to understand?

Your comment was "end americas involvment in non american soil"

BUT I do not understand "not ALL of ameica."

Is that in some sort of code or is it another language entirely?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-04-14 2:03 PM

T.O.T. obviously from the comfort of your chair you (like most) can't hear the cries of the bystander "VICTIM'S" left in the wake of the big green machine... PUT YOURSELF IN THAT POSITION? if the red cross comes to help, do ya hate the country it came from? or do ya hate the country who's military might is dictating your every move. now think of that tank parked on your front lawn. do ya love em. or hate em. meanwhile all your neighbors are fat from the cash cow parked down the runway. see what i mean? i didn't*****off anybody.. so why do i have to be hated? it sure wasn't the red cross's doing. we alway's hear words like honor, integrity,valor.. but not from non americans. why is that? as for Mr Snowden. he's just another victim. wrong for what he did. right for not playing the game.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-04-14 2:11 PM

no. that's proof that you need the class. you wouldn't think that 1 missing letter from a word we all know, is code if ya did understand

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Jan-04-14 2:52 PM

You are not going to convince anyone with talk like that. Big green machine... you can thank them for you ability to write those idiotic words. Who would hate you for standing aside and letting the evil rein down on them? EVERYONE! Do you believe that if you stop fighting they will love you for it? I have news for you they will see you as weak and flatten you like pee on a platter. Without that green machine, you would be dead or a slave.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-05-14 5:57 AM

there ya go again making a paragraph out of a few words. no, i don't want to stop defending the opressed. i want to defend ALL the opressed. not just the ones that belong to the world bank. i'd like to see an end to fighting over money. a good start would be to re-write the monroe doctorine.. yes the idealism of the thing is right. but it was writen before men hid in the jungle and couldn't stand face to face with people that didn't agree with them.

then there's the matter of christian beliefs? the real test is: when your tossed in with the lions. a true believer does what?

as for that comment about how we all would be slaves if not for our military? that's only because other doctorines have the U.N.'s piece keeping forces out of the fight. if your so TIRED OF TAXES. then why arn't you speaking out against the high cost of doing the U.N.'s job. you paid twice for the freedon you have. your defending the exact thing you hate so much..

keeping people l

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-05-14 6:21 AM

here's an example.

Excerpted from “The International Laws of Belligerent Occupation” by Professor of International Law Francis Boyle Belligerent occupation is governed by The Hague Regulations of 1907, as well as by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and the customary laws of belligerent occupation. Security Council Resolution 1322 (2000), paragraph 3 continued: “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in a Time of War of 12 August 1949;...” Again, the Security Council vote was 14 to 0, becoming obligatory international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the West Bank, to the Gaza Strip, and to the entire City of Jerusalem, in order to protect the Palestinians living there. The Palestinian People living in this Palestinian Land are “protected persons” within the meaning of the Fourth Geneva Convention. All of their

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

Jan-05-14 6:26 AM

The Palestinian People living in this Palestinian Land are “protected persons” within the meaning of the Fourth Geneva Convention. All of their rights are sacred under international law. There are 149 substantive articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention that protect the rights of every one of these Palestinians living in occupied Palestine. The Israeli Government is currently violating, and has since 1967 been violating, almost each and every one of these sacred rights of the Palestinian People recognized by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Indeed, violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention are war crimes. So this is not a symmetrical situation. As matters of fact and of law, the gross and repeated violations of Palestinian rights by the Israeli army and Israeli settlers living illegally in occupied Palestine constitute war crimes. Conversely, the Palestinian People are defending themselves and their Land and their Homes against Israeli war crimes and Israeli war criminals, both militar

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Jan-05-14 7:54 AM

Except there is no Country called 'Palestine', in the History of the World. No unique language, currency, leadership or Religion. It's simply a name given by the Romans to an area of land. The Levant would be a more appropriate description, then read the British Mandate of Palestine in 1922 for more clarification of existing borders. In other words, 'Palestine' as a Country is a invention supported by the UN. It's a kind of Political Appointment.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Jan-05-14 8:11 AM

Laker, question: Are you glad you know that the NSA is spying on you and other Americans, not just the bad guys, or would you rather you still didn't know? Honestly, I had to answer yes, I'm glad I know. In my opinion that takes him out of the traitor category. Traitors sell secret info for revenge and profit. I see neither in this instance but I do see Govt intrusion of the Fourth Amendment on steroids.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Jan-05-14 11:05 AM

Scare, how is it that you and I and a couple of other posters equal 78%? Is that Common Core Math? Come on drive-by's, speak up, this question crosses all political lines with the REAL question being 'Does the Govt Constitutionally have the 'right' to know everything about everybody'. The Constitution and The Bill of Rights say NO but I'm sure somebody will find where the Framers hid it to be found sometime perhaps around Feb.2014. I hear that's how, 41 yrs. ago, somebody discovered the hidden right to annihilate our offspring.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Annarondac

Jan-05-14 5:42 PM

The evidence is they didn't find the Boston Bombers. That's enough for me. Even with the Russians informing of the brothers proclivity. Get rid of the NSA.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hilltopper

Jan-05-14 8:08 PM

Here is the logical argument for: What's worse, having an invasive colonoscopy to screen for colon cancer, or death due to undetected colon cancer? Here’s the logical argument against: NSA couldn't find you’re a-s-s even if it had both hands in your back pockets.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 33 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web