Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse

National Guard, Bucknuts to Sponsor Weekly JJHuddle Fall Sports Player & Team of the Week Awards

This Fall we are pleased to announce that the Ohio National Guard, Bucknuts and JJHuddle have partnered together to award weekly player and team of the week honors in Football, Boys & Girls Soccer, Boys & Girls Cross Country, Volleyball, Girls Tennis and Boys & Girls Golf.

Each week during the fall sports seasons (regular and post), we will hold a fan-generated contest on JJHuddle to tab a weekly Team and Player of the Week in each sport. Each weekly winner will receive awards.

There will also be Player & Team of the Year voting in each sport at the conclusion of the respective seasons.

How it works?
http://www.jjhuddle.com/2014/08/06/n...e-week-awards/
See more
See less
Obama administration urges freer access to cellphone records Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse


Latest Topics Latest Topics Module
Collapse


X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Obama administration urges freer access to cellphone records

    It's easier to criticize for violating rights than to govern and have to decide yourself. (Reuters) - The U.S. Congress should pass a law to give investigators freer access to certain cellphone records, an Obama administration official said on Thursday, in remarks that raised concern among advocates of civil liberties and privacy.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84215620120503

  • #2
    Originally posted by DGUtley View Post
    It's easier to criticize for violating rights than to govern and have to decide yourself. (Reuters) - The U.S. Congress should pass a law to give investigators freer access to certain cellphone records, an Obama administration official said on Thursday, in remarks that raised concern among advocates of civil liberties and privacy.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84215620120503
    you've seen a democrat and a republican both do this now, so it makes me wonder if indeed we really need to do this in order to provide security. i didn't think so, but now i wonder.

    Comment


    • #3
      GWB did it in the name of "security" and as Repubs put it---that's "different".Lo and Behold,pot meet kettle

      Comment


      • #4
        It's not different, it's the same. OAB, I could say the same thing -- the Democrats decried it when the R's did it; and now do it themselves. Pot me kettle, as our friend Bethere alluded to. As Benjamin Franklin said: They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. it is incumbent on the government to adhere to our Constitutional protections. Constitutional rights are constitutional rights. I wonder if it's necessary; I wonder if it's constitutional. Very very difficult issues.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DGUtley View Post
          It's easier to criticize for violating rights than to govern and have to decide yourself. (Reuters) - The U.S. Congress should pass a law to give investigators freer access to certain cellphone records, an Obama administration official said on Thursday, in remarks that raised concern among advocates of civil liberties and privacy.

          http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84215620120503
          So, is this a liberal position, or a conservative position? The ACLU (liberal) opposes the Obama administration (liberal) and it's quest to gather more information on citizens (conservative) in order to head off terrorism and enforce existing laws (conservative). Help! As usual, I'm confused and don't now which side to take!

          Comment


          • #6
            Jimmacqueen -- that's twice in two days where we see eye to eye. This is a dangerous trend. As for your question / comments: It's either neither or both -- I don't know. I think it shows the complexities involved in today's terror world coupled with our constitutional rights. You are rightfully confused. Hindsight being the luxury that it can be, we may look back years from now and see this as a gross infringement of our rights; but given today's situation it's alot more real-time dangerous.

            Comment


            • #7
              ......So,these terrorist break into a phone factory in New Jersey--steal a million phones.They implant a plastics explosion in each one.They sell them on the blackmarket,The phones can be detonated simultaneously by merely dialing a to-date unused,unrealeased number------oooooooooooh-------sounds like the makings of a Steven King movie.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by DGUtley View Post
                Jimmacqueen -- that's twice in two days where we see eye to eye. This is a dangerous trend. As for your question / comments: It's either neither or both -- I don't know. I think it shows the complexities involved in today's terror world coupled with our constitutional rights. You are rightfully confused. Hindsight being the luxury that it can be, we may look back years from now and see this as a gross infringement of our rights; but given today's situation it's alot more real-time dangerous.

                the thing, again, that gives me pause for concern is that obama agrees completely. the con law prof in him for sure knows it is a gross infringement and yet he made this call. i know that we can't share all of our intelligence with the public. so, in a best case scenario i'd have a judicial panel of some sort making these hopefully temporary calls, we at least have a president of both parties making the same call.

                for the moment, that's good enough for me.

                but we WILL revisit this.


                and yeah it is a gross infringement on our rights. a good call.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ^^ Agree.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Requirements for getting warrants to catch terrorists would cripple the investigators too. But that was fine with liberals. I don't think liberals want to get blown up or have to jump from burning buildings. But they acted like they did in order to oppose Bush!

                    BHO couldn't care less what is legal/constitutional. He's proven that many times. He and his drones are against warrantless wiretapping of terrorist phones. But pro warrantless wiretapping of republican phones (republicans=criminals in his red mind).

                    When terrorists use new phones for every call, and say only one word when their call is made, there really isn't time to get a warrant. but hey, it's only American lives we're talking about. The bad guys.

                    Bill Ayers (BHO's idol/mentor) is thrilled.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bethere View Post
                      the thing, again, that gives me pause for concern is that obama agrees completely. the con law prof in him for sure knows it is a gross infringement and yet he made this call. i know that we can't share all of our intelligence with the public. so, in a best case scenario i'd have a judicial panel of some sort making these hopefully temporary calls, we at least have a president of both parties making the same call.

                      for the moment, that's good enough for me.

                      but we WILL revisit this.


                      and yeah it is a gross infringement on our rights. a good call.
                      Very well stated and I do agree with you. The big question "is this a trend that we really should be worried about?" I do think so because the specified intent seems to be stretching into a position that can set a precedence for future violations.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It's a very dangerous constitutional issue. Very. The slippery slope concerns me. The precedent is dangerous. I don't have the answer, but I certainly have my eye on it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jimmacqueen View Post
                          So, is this a liberal position, or a conservative position? The ACLU (liberal) opposes the Obama administration (liberal) and it's quest to gather more information on citizens (conservative) in order to head off terrorism and enforce existing laws (conservative). Help! As usual, I'm confused and don't now which side to take!
                          Call it bipartisan confusion.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X