My issues with this are more philosophical than actual. I really don't
care if they read all my emails and listen to all my calls (they wouldn't
hear anything interesting). But it's the Constitutional issues, the
slippery-slope, and the possibility of political abuse of the program that bugs
me.I can easily see overly ambitious politicians using the same
program to get an advantage on political opponents (ala the IRS scandal). And
taken to extremes (but extremes we have seen other governments reach in my own
generation)... I can see it being used to put people in concentration camps (or
re-education camps, call them what you will) if they find somebody who's
not towing the party line.So IMO it shouldn't be done. And I
don't care if it's a Republican or Democrat or a Communist who's
doing it. Unless you have a valid reason (aka "warrant") it should not
be done.They should listen to calls of people credibly suspected of
plotting harm... but it needs to be monitored or it will be abused eventually.
The NSA would also like to look through all of the wallets, purses and bank
accounts of every person in the US, but for now, they do not have the right.
Then again they don't have the right to look at my emails, listen to my
phone calls and eaves drop in my house, but they are doing much of that
anyway.When will a politician, any politician, stop saying they are
'concerned' or 'worried' about these events? When will they
start following the oath of office they swore (national office holders) to
protect and defend the constitution of the United States? When will any of them
stand up for our rights as citizens?
It's too bad Governor Herbert didn't have these same misgivings before
being all in favor of his state hosting the NSA facility.
If the Obama administration is spying, it must be for our own good. On the other
hand, if Bush did it, well, that's different at least according to
Mark, it will happen when enough people take a great enough interest that the
politicians can see the possibility of loosing their jobs (as in elections).
If you had a choice would you rather enter a lottery where first prize was
getting your foot blown off or would you rather than the NSA read your emails on
CHS 85,Whether there's a facility in Lehi or not is irrelevant.
There wasn't a facility in Lehi when this happened.If
there's no building in Lehi the data would just be stored somewhere else.
I don't see why the obsession with the facility in Lehi. It's not
just used for this program. It's used for all kinds of things. Many of
them good things that save American lives.It seems like you think
the facility is the problem, or that the building is bad or something.
It's the program, not the building, or the location in Utah.I'm against this surveillance program, but I'm not against the
building in Lehi. I don't see that as inconsistent in the least. I think
the facility in Lehi will do a lot of good for the United States. Just this
program isn't wrong-headed.This program could go away and the
facility in Lehi would still be needed. I suspect Herbert is STILL
for the NSA building in Lehi (even with his misgivings about this program).
@mountainmanwere exactly do you get that idea from any of the
comments or article? Please stop the straw men arguments. Liberal including the
ACLU have been complaining since 9/11 about spying on Americans to bad it took
so long for people like you to catch up.
@2 bits"I can easily see overly ambitious politicians using the
same program to get an advantage on political opponents (ala the IRS
scandal)."Actually that's not what happened, the IRS also
targeted progressive groups and the only group denied the tax exempt status was
a liberal one. Technically based on the law, none of those political
groups on both sides of the aisle should've gotten tax exempt status so the
real scandal should be why the IRS wasn't harsher on everyone.
@atl134The tax exemption rule is unconstitutional and
un-American.Political speech is constitutionally protected right,
for everyone and every group, and is the whole purpose and sole reason of the
part of 1st amendment concerning speech.IRS shouldn't be
targeting anyone.And the federal government definitely should NOT be
spying on the American people, to any degree, not without a warrant.
Conservatives 2002 with Republican President: We must protect this country. You
are with us or against us. Go NSA, protect us! Surveillance is patriotism!Conservatives 2013 with Democrat President: We have been violated!
What about the Consitution?Conservatives 2013 if Romney had won: We
must protect this country. You are with us or against us. Go NSA, protect us!
Surveillance is patriotism!
"If the Obama administration is spying, it must be for our own good. On the
other hand, if Bush did it, well, that's different at least according to
liberals."Mtnman,It is refreshing to know that you
have no double standard like those "liberals"Personally,
that is how I define a partisan. It that easy to spot double standard.
"IRS shouldn't be targeting anyone."Agreed. And no
group should get tax exempt status. That would solve everything.
Whoa, how long ago was that???? If you were doing something wrong your
targeted. Unfortunately, the don't have a sign saying "I'm a
terrorist, just watch me only" balloon atop of there head. Please
everybody who is doing bad, call the NSA so they can watch you only. Good grief
@JoeBlowAny group that is a non-profit organization should and can
be tax exempt.Any organization that is for profit obviously should
not be exempt.But speech should NEVER be a criteria.