Thursday, March 23, 2006

NOTHING TO HIDE?

THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THE WIRETAPPING OF AMERICAN CITIZENS WITHOUT EMPLOYING A COURT ORDER, ARE MET WITH, " IT'S NOT A PROBLEM IF YOU'VE GOT NOTHING TO HIDE."
THE WIRETAP POSSE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH BENDING THE CONSTITUTION.

SO, IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, I PROPOSE THAT
THE GOVERNMENT INSTITUTES THE FOLLOWING POLICIES FOR YOU.

YOUR EZ-PASS RECORDS ARE MONITORED, ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO KNOW WHERE AND WHEN YOUR CAR TRAVELS. GPS INSTALLATION IS MANDATORY ON YOUR VEHICLES, FOR MONITORING PURPOSES. YOUR LIBRARY RECORDS ARE SENT TO THE GOVERNMENT REGULARLY, AS ARE THE RECORDS OF YOUR PHONES AND CELL PHONE USAGE. ALL YOUR MAGAZINE AND NEWSPAPER SUBSCRIPTIONS RECORDS BECOME GOVERNMENT INFORMATION. YOUR USE OF THE INTERNET IS SENT THERE, INCLUDING THE PORNO YOU MIGHT 'ACCIDENTLY' CAME ACROSS. YOUR DRUG STORE RECORDS OF ALL MEDICATIONS AND OTHER PURCHASES ARE SUBMITTED TO WASHINGTON. YOUR DOCTOR VISITS REQUIRE A URINE SAMPLE AS WELL AS A DNA SPECIMEN. MEMBERSHIPS IN ORGANIZATIONS WOULD BE ON YOUR FEDERAL RECORD. AND, OF COURSE, BESIDE INVESTIGATING EVERY PENNY YOU CLAIMED ON YOUR INCOME TAX, ALL YOU FINE FOLKS WHO HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WOULDN'T MIND IF THE GOVERNMENT MONITORED THE UNDECLARED INCOME FROM YOU WHO PREFER CASH PAYMENTS RATHER THAN BY CHECK OR CREDIT CARD. ALL YOUR BANKING RECORDS WOULD BE PART OF YOUR DOSSIER AS WELL. YOUR VOTING BOOTHS WOULD LOSE ITS CURTAIN. WHO NEEDS A CURTAIN, ANYWAY?
THE GOVERNMENT WOULD INSTITUTE ALL THESE POLICIES FOR YOUR CHILDREN AS WELL. THE FEDS WOULD EVEN KNOW WHO WROTE THEIR COLLEGE ESSAY.
YOU CAN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ANY OF THIS, EVEN THE GROSSLY EXAGGERATED EXAMPLES.
HECK, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.

36 comments:

ThePoliticalImpaler.blogs.com said...

You are losing your mind. Your hatred of George W. Bush is destroying your little grey cells. You sound like a castrated liberal and belong out on a ledge with all the other Kool-Aid drinkers.

quicksand said...

MR IMPALER,
MY ASSESSMENT OF GEORGE BUSH MAY BE DESTROYING MY WEE CELLS, BUT THE IMPORTANT ISSUE IS HIS SLOW, BUT STEADY, DESTRUCTION OF OUR COUNTRY.

YOU MAKE A STRANGE ARGUMENT AGAINST MY ESSAY. IT'S ABOUT MY BRAIN CELLS, MY TESTICALS, MY LIBERALISM, AND SUICIDAL HYPNOTIC GROUP-THINK.

NOW, WHY NOT TRY ADDRESSING THE ISSUE?
YOU WOULD GLADLY WELCOME ANY AND ALL GOVERNMENT LOOKS INTO YOUR LIFE...BECAUSE, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE. RIGHT?
JUST WHO IS DRINKING CLICHES IS ANOTHER MATTER.

Anonymous said...

Very Dramatic.

quicksand said...

DRAMATIC? MORE LIKE A TRAGEDY.
SORRY, WASN'T LOOKING FOR A THEATER REVIEW.
YOU DIDN'T SEEM TO ANSWER THE QUESTION...
YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE? IF NOT, SAY 'YES' TO ALL MY EXTREME EXAMPLES.

Al Scionti said...

You are still missing the point of what I said. Your whole essay is flawed. It is not American citizens talking to American citizens, it's anyone in this country talking to members of Al Queda outside the United States. No one said anything about being a citizen. You and I have not lost one freedom, nor will we. Your hatred is blinding you and you are making up stuff that has not happened. I expect this from the driveby mainstream media but not from you. Only the Supreme Court can decide if the administration broke the law, not Maureen Dowd and George Cloony.

Anonymous said...

You should title this posting
"Imaginations Gone Wild"

Your lack of objectivity is obvious.

I agree with the "Very Dramatic"
assessment.

quicksand said...

THERE IS A LEGAL WAY FOR THE PRESIDENT TO 'PROTECT' US. IF THEIR IS REASONABLE CAUSE, THE COURTS WILL APPROVE A WIRE TAP....EVEN RETROACTIVELY.
YOU SEEM TO SUGGEST THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THE JUDGEMENT OF THE COURTS. THEN WHY DOESN'T THE PRESIDENT USE THE COURTS TO APPROVE OF ANY DESIRED WIRE TAP?
WILL THE PRESIDENT GIVE A SELECT GROUP OF SENATORS A FULL LIST OF ALL WIRE TAPS? IF NOT, WHY NOT?
YOU STATE THAT WE'VE NOT LOST ONE FREEDOM. ISN'T THAT A BIT LIKE THE FOLKS WHO SAY, 'HEY, IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE...'
'HEY, YOU HAVEN'T LOST ANY FREEDOM...'
MY EXAMPLES ARE ILLUSTRATIVE. ARE THERE ANY YOU WOULDN'T WANT APPLIED TO YOU?
IF SO, WHY? DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE?

quicksand said...

DO MEMBERS OF AL QUEDA CARRY MEMBERSHIP CARDS?

The Ancient Rocker said...

I can only imagine the Madison Avenue style campaign on Al Jezzera... " The al queda card, Don't leave your terror cell without it!! " Then we'll know who the bad guys really are!
Where is Carl Malden when we really need him??

quicksand said...

DEAR NO NAME,
I MAY HAVE NO OBJECTIVITY BUT I SURE HAVE AN OBJECTIVE.

" I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN, MISS KATRINA."

NO ONE HAD ANY IDEA THE LEVEES WOULD FAIL! BUSH AFTER THE HURRICANE

WATCH THE VIDEO OF BUSH HEARING THAT THE LEVEES MIGHT FAIL...BEFORE THE HURRICANE.

DO YOU TRUST THIS MAN?

quicksand said...

HEY ROCKER,
AL QUEDA IS COMING OUT WITH A NEW SPRING LINE. 20% POLY AND 90% COTTON. GREAT FOR THOSE CASUAL MOMENTS.
WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THE SOVIET UNION WAS IMPLODING. WE FAILED TO SCOOP THE BERLIN WALL TAKE-DOWN.
WE DIDN'T KNOW HAMAS WAS GOING TO WIN THE ELECTION.
WE THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE WEAPONS OF ....YOU KNOW WHAT. OOOPPS AGAIN.
WE CAN'T FIND BINNY AND THE JETS.
AND WE KNOW WHO'S A MEMBER OF AL QUEDA?
MUST BE THEM COONSKIN CAPS THEY WEAR.

ThePoliticalImpaler.blogs.com said...

As long as your premise is Bush broke the law I can't argue with you. Believe what you want.You win, I'm beaten, I give up. As far as me hiding something, I only wish I had something to hide.
When I talk to my plants they tell me "shutup your boring."

quicksand said...

IMPALER,
THE POINT IS THAT YOU DON'T NEED ANTHING TO HIDE. YOU HAVE A SIMPLE RIGHT TO PRIVACY.
YOU SEEM MUCH TOO INTERESTING TO CALL YOURSELF BORING.

MTH said...

The politics of "dont look behind the curtain" have to end.
Any law that must be prefaced with, "but don't worry, we're not looking to arrest YOU" WORRIES me. Maybe you won't be arrested today, but the precedents being set regarding the privacy of Americans is not about ONE president, and those who think so are clearly short sighted. The essay was not about Bush, it's about Policy, and if Bush's administration is the one who sets the policy that private information such as conversations can now be deemed government property, this opens up the flood gates for every other president to infringe on our rights.
When will people stop defending Bush, and start looking at the stark reality that this administration is eroding some of the fundamental rights of Americans. We cannot rule our country one president at a time. We cannot be a nation of citizens who have no vision and no memory. Laws do not rise and set like the sun, the become part of the fabric of our nation, regardless of who is behind the curtain.

Anonymous said...

Fat Guy,

People aren't defending anyone. I just don't think the sky is falling.

As of right now I have no problem with what is being done to find the terrorists who want to kill us.

If the government goes too far, then I will exercise my right to vote them out of office.

There is no slippery slope here. It will only get out of control if we allow it to happen.

Anonymous said...

People like the Fat Guy are the same people who will complain that we didn't do enough when a nuclear bomb goes off in NYC.

Your logic sounds good sitting at your computer, but has nothing to do with reality.

Jim said...

Boy! Quicksand really stirred up a hornests nest this time!

It is just incredibly naive and dangerous to suggest that government, police, prosecutors can be trusted to only go after the bad guys. During the McCarthy era it was the Commies, or the Pinkos or those who were soft on Communists and pinkos. Now the target is terrorists or those who are too "soft" on terrorists. Any one who dares to suggest that the government has gone too far in its zeal is labeled a "castrated liberal," or a terrorist sympathizer. I am reminded of Arthur Miller's sardonic line from "The Crucible" (remember that play about the hysterical witch hunt in Salem)..."The pure of heart need no attorneys." I guess the pure of heart need not fear a wire tap either.

MTH said...

Anon,

Remember the great words of Felix Unger: "When you ASSUME you make an ASS out of U and ME"
Do not assume that I don't think that we should be fighting the war on terrorists and that I am "soft" on terror. It's just that I don't think that our "leaders" should spend valuable time and taxpayer money barking up the wrong tree, while at the same time invading my rights. And I'm certainly not going to give them the OK to do it.
In addition, you're saying in one breath that you don't think the sky is falling, then you talk about "when a nuclear bomb goes off in NYC". HHEELLOO!!! Anyone home??? If bombs dropping in the city isn't equivilant to the prophet Chicken Little's prediction...
And I'm supposed to rely on someone who uses dumb-dumb logic like that to vote ANYONE out of office, only AFTER they "F"-up our country? Yeah, there's a good plan.
Benjamin Franklin spoke on security and said that personal freedoms should not be given up in the same of security. And until your face is on a $100 bill, my friend Anonymous, I'm takin' HIS advice! :)

quicksand said...

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
FAT GUY IS SMART GUY!

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEIR GOVERNMENT. IT'S OUR CONSTITUTION AND OUR LAWS. IF A PRESIDENT THINKS THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE A POLICY, WE HAVE A WAY TO DO IT. PERIOD!

Anonymous said...

I hate slippery slope arguments. They are so lame (like cliche's) You cant ever get anywhere. Why cant an issue be evaluated at face value. If (and this is a big if) the administration is gathering information on Americans communicating with al Queda so be it. It that so wrong? Is that such an abuse of power? We are talking here about a very specific situation. How does intercepting al- Queda communications get morphed into library card abuse.

Anonymous said...

I agree 100%. If the administration goes too far, then I would be the first one to react.

I don't think they have gone too far based on what I know right now.

Anger makes some people, including myself at times, irrational.

quicksand said...

IT'S NOT ABOUT 'NOTHING TO HIDE.'
IT'S NOT ABOUT SLOPES WHICH MAY BE SLIPPERY.
IT'S ABOUT AN ADMINISTRATION NOT ABIDING BY OUR VERY OWN LAWS.
ADMINISTRATIONS CANNOT MAKE THEIR OWN LAWS.
IT'S ESPECIALLY IRONIC COMING FROM JOHNNY DEMOCRA-SEED.

Anonymous said...

Isn't the Constitution open to interpretation???

Some competent people think a president can do these things legally.

Why not challenge the issue legally?

People have different views on the issue. I understand your position, but disagree with it. I agree with the earlier posting which stated that your position sounds ok in theory but doesn't work in the real world.

quicksand said...

CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION?
THEN WHY DID BUSH SAY THE FOLLOWING?

“Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order,” he said on April 20, 2004 in Buffalo, New York.
“Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so,” he added.

WAS THIS A LIE....OR WAS HE JUST TRYING TO FOOL BIN...BIN....
WHATZIZ NAME?

Anonymous said...

My point exactly. The only thing that has changed is that there are some specific circumstances where authorization is given to do this without a court order.

Do you disagree with this being done on a limited basis for specific circumstances, or do you think that there is too much potential for abuse?


FYI- There are many issues dealing with the constitution which are debated. The limits of presidential powers being one of them. You seem surprised by this.

quicksand said...

I.F.STONE SAID, "GOVERNMENTS LIE."
WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION.
WE HAVE A JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
IT SHOULD BE USED.

Anonymous said...

I agree. Use the system.

I don't have a problem with the limited scope of these actions as we are told they are happening now. If there are abuses in the future then there should be consequences. As of right now, I am fine with the government doing this.

Do you disagree with what is being done or are you afraid of the potential abuse?

quicksand said...

I SEE NO REASON TO BREAK LAWS, OR CHALLENGE INTERPRETATIONS OF LAWS, WHEN THERE IS A LEGAL, SAFE, AND TOTALLY FUNCTIONAL WAY OF ACCOMPLISHING THE NECESSARY RESULTS.

HAS THIS ADMINISTRATION EVER LIED TO YOU?

Anonymous said...

What legal training do you have to say that a law has been broken? You sound so sure.

Do you have experience in intelligence gathering to state that this method of collecting information is not needed?

How do you know that the old way is totally functional?

Apparently some people responsible for protecting this country think that this is useful. Until I see that the authority is being abused I have no problem with it.

I have asked you in my last few posts:

Do you disagree with what is being done or are you afraid of the potential abuse?

quicksand said...

SO, WE'RE GOING TO PLAY "HOW DO YOU KNOW?"
NO LEGAL EXPERTISE HERE.
JUST NATIVE INTELLIGENCE, INTUITION, AND OBSERVATION OF PAST EXPERIENCES...ESPECIALLY OF THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION.
SHALL I LIST THE LIES AND 'MISTAKES' SO FAR?
NO NEED. YOU KNOW THEM.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION...
I DO NOT TRUST THE GROUP IN THE WHITE HOUSE. I CAN IMAGINE THEM GROSSLY ABUSING UNMONITORED WIRETAPPING.
REMEMBER THE SECRET ENEMIES LIST?

Ben's Friend said...

"Those who are willing to trade freedom for a measure of security, deserve neither freedom nor security." Ben Franklin

Hester Prynne said...

The attorney general can begin immediate surveillance of domestic calls 72 hours before applying for a permit. Can you explain why, when this administration had FISA law amended several times, this procedure isn't being followed? That kills the, "They're only looking for terrorists" argument, because there's not reason why they can't look for terrorists and do it legally. So what, exactly, is their justification??? And, btw, how many Quakers have perpetrated terrorist attacks on this nation? Any stats on that?

quicksand said...

HESTER,
NO ONE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.
HHMMMM?

Anonymous said...

This is very interesting site... »

Anonymous said...

I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! http://www.audi-bremi-ignition-wires.info/thomasedisonlightbulbpatent.html Botox paralysis http://www.spamfilters5.info/best-free-spam-filter-outlook.html adipex cheap price Fredericksburg injury lawyers http://www.anti-depressants-6.info/email-filter-outlook-express.html Bath enamel tub Best black gambling jack online Boating in greece antispam removal Sacramento ca brain injury lawyer truck air mattress antique chair value web browsers antispam Ney york lottery mega millions Water filter for water hose Texas ben bolt laser tatoo removal

Anonymous said...

I have been looking for sites like this for a long time. Thank you! »