What’s with the Fuss About Wiretaps?
The amount of angst being displayed by some lawmakers or the ACLU or public groups or individuals over FISA and ‘warrantless wiretaps’ has an absurd side. Understandably, people may be upset over the notion of anyone, including the government, prying into ‘private’ records of citizens. But no one appears to get nearly as bothered by the fact we are all much more vulnerable to abuse from any company or other entity who possesses our personal information.
The use, misuse or abuse of personal information collected by major players like ChoicePoint to the federal, state and local governments to the smallest company with which you do business should be of equal concern. How credit reporting agencies use our personal information was once a concern. Where is the concern now? The latest discussion about digital access to health records is another risk area no one seems to be upset about. All the hacked databases reported over the last year alone represent major risk to those whose personal information has been compromised. Where is all the angst about that?
Yet so many seem to have an unlimited amount of anger expressed about government wiretaps. Again, there is no attempt here to diminish or deter proper oversight of various intelligence gathering methods employed by the federal government or any other organization, public or private. But the integrity of personal data or rights to privacy and the risk to the average citizen from warrantless wiretaps is almost comical. All the outrage over the telecoms, the Fed, intelligence gathering and privacy of late versus the ongoing risk from ordinary transactions and securing the privacy of personal records seems to be caused by politically skewed motivations.
After all, the current appeals case is in San Francisco, the Ninth Circuit and one of the players is the ACLU. Like we haven’t been down this road before. One more time, it is understood that proper oversight and execution of lawful investigations are necessary, but really folks, when’s the last time you made an international phone call versus the last time you gave some company your personal information and where lies the greater risk? It would be refreshing and reassuring if public outrage (sometimes not so public) was equal in proportion to the risk and not incited by private agendas.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Spy chief quote cited in Verizon lawsuit
By JORDAN ROBERTSON, AP
Thu Aug 30, 9:05 PM ET
Top official gives scope of wiretaps
Bush seeks to shield telecoms that helped with wiretaps
DOJ Still Looks To Have Suit Against Verizon Tossed
Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Faultline USA, DeMediacratic Nation, Right Truth, Big Dog’s Weblog, Shadowscope, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Webloggin, Conservative Cat, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
September 6th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
The Fourth amendment is pretty clear about requiring Probable Cause and Warrants. FISA was a reasonable accomodation of the need to act quickly in criminal cases and the Amendment’s requirements.
The fact that there are potential abuses of personal data in the private sector has absolutely no bearing on this issue.
The Government argues that it can tap my phone without a warrant if the person I’m talking to is in a foreign country and is the one ‘targeted’. By that logic, could not the police, while pursuing a fugitive kick in my door without a warrant (since I’m not the one ‘targeted’)?
From a practical standpoint what if I (in our theoretical phone call) provide evidence of a crime? Since there was no warrant, could I be arrested? Could the evidence be used against me?
This is more than a slippery slope, and true conservatives should balk at it.
September 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
The point of this post was not to compare or equate the warrantless wiretap debate with other privacy issues. It is merely pointing to the contrast in outrage over the wiretapping and other protections of personal data and privacy.
I find little to be clear within the law. That includes discussions of the 4th Amendment.
The following link is offered as a reference
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt4.html
September 6th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
That’s Democratic talking points for you; FISA in fairly outdated. It does NOT account for electronic communications at all, merely land line telephone conversations. Furthermore, FISA, despite what the Left would have you believe, operates at a snail’s pace. It is not easy to obtain a FISA-administered warrant with a quick turnaround.
SO spare us the tired, Leftist rhetoric. Furthermore, the Left’s childish arguments will be rendered MOOT if/when another terrorist attack occurs.
September 7th, 2007 at 11:35 am
With all of the stupidity with this FISA crap what is it about the libs that they want to put us in the dumper? I think if we don’t look for the terrorist and get them ASAP then we are stupid.
I could care less if someone was listening to my confersations. It would give them some sleep time.
Do these whack job libs really think any one wants to know what they are saying? You can’t understand them in real time. Good Lord having to listen to them on a phone is the same a water boarding. Ok we can use that instead. The prisoners would be singing their lungs out after 5 mins of listening to their conversations.
I can not explain the libs or what they think. I just know that they haven’t a clue about anything. When you think of the of who the libs are. If I do I will have to go throw up. Sorry.
It’s called security and every one of the libs who think they have to know everything, don’t need to know. If Leahy knew anything he would run right to the NY Times. Hilderbeast right to the Chinese. Schumer anyone who will listen and give him money.
How do we get them all to stand inside of a train track for a picture? Just don’t tell them what time the train is coming.