of The New York Times publishes an editorialof The other day Titled Defending Warrantless Government Surveillance “Government surveillance keeps us safe.” big brother himself I could not do it‘t have come up with an idea A better title.
The article begins with the assertion that “these are extremely dangerous times for the United States and our allies.” I would like to ask the editors of the New York Times. why These are extremely dangerous times for the United States and our allies. You said Donald Trump was going to destroy peace on Earth. Rather, he brought us closer to peace. He accomplished what I thought I would never accomplish in my lifetime.
The chamber, which included 30 Republicans, voted that Fourth Amendment rights were not important. They defer your rights to bureaucratic opportunism.
You said that if Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, there would be a war. The opposite happened. We were forging a historic peace agreement. So why are we in such a difficult situation? I think it’s important to answer that before proposing a solution.
Let me state some obvious points. Our economy is out of control. Who caused it? Morgan Stanley said if it doesn’t pay off its debt within two years, it’s doomed. 2 years! Do you think he’s about to turn that corner? Do you think things will change with the next election? Do you think our current government even cares about that? no.
We pulled out of Afghanistan and showed the world that we were completely crazy. And we are encouraging war and paying for the war in Ukraine. Then we sent money to Iran and said: Just promise me you won’t do anything. ” And it was done! That’s surprising.
The people who caused this problem are not aware of the problem and are therefore unable to fix it. They are is the problem. Who exactly was it that ignored our national debt and economy and financed foreign wars to the brink of World War III? Certainly not Donald Trump.
The editorial continues as follows.
Israel’s unpreparedness on October 7th shows that even a powerful nation can be in for a devastating surprise. Fortunately, early Saturday morning, Congress passed an unusual bipartisan bill to reauthorize critical intelligence agencies that provide critical intelligence on threats ranging from hostile nations and terrorism to fentanyl trafficking.
Indeed, great powers can be surprised in devastating ways. But catastrophic events can happen to powerful countries that are not at all surprising. For example, every American knows that our borders are now open. If the Times was serious about the catastrophic events happening in the United States, it would be focusing on open borders. They will call on Congress and the president to lock down and allow only those who can be vetted into the United States. But it’s not serious. They are using the crisis for their own benefit. You should never let a good crisis go to waste, right? They are using it to distort and control the crisis.
Of course, this op-ed attacks “ignorant” people like you and me who voiced concerns about this bill.
Liberals argue that the surveillance bill violates Americans’ privacy rights and point to examples where Americans have been caught up in investigations. Importantly, the latest version of the bill adds dozens of legal safeguards regarding oversight of the issue. This is the most sweeping privacy reform in the history of the bill.
Because this bill definitely erodes Americans’ right to privacy. Congress continues to give the executive branch more power.
This work continues as follows.
The focus of the debate is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It was originally passed in 1978 and required law enforcement to obtain orders from a special court to monitor foreign agents in the United States. Court approval was not required to collect communications of foreigners abroad. In the digital age, the lines have blurred. Many foreign nationals rely on US providers such as Google and Meta to route or store their data within the US, making it difficult to determine where the targeting is or whether the rules apply to where the data is collected. Questions have arisen.
In 2008, Congress addressed this challenge with Section 702. This provision requires the government to annually approve the rules governing the country, instead of seeking a court order for each targeted alien. as a whole program.
Do you have a problem with foreign targets? I don’t. This isn’t even what we’re talking about. Why does the New York Times think it’s important to explain that part? Because no one thinks it matters. People like me who are concerned about Section 702 have no problem targeting foreign threats. It’s not partisan. That’s common sense.
The problem is that Americans are being targeted as a result. The editorial authors don’t just say this is “inevitable in today’s globalized world.” They claim it “could be critical to the national security of the United States.” So, in other words, you can’t do anything about it anyway. It is better to accept the fact that digital communications can be searched and seized without a warrant.
In fact, the editorial argues that “requiring such a warrant would have been unnecessary and unwise.” Obtaining a FISA court order is bureaucratically burdensome and delays investigations. ”
Well, we don’t want to delay anything. If someone unknowingly gets into an argument with someone who is under investigation by the FBI, throw them in jail. Cut through the bureaucratic nightmare of the Constitution. If your rights are put on the back burner for the convenience of bureaucrats, that’s something you have to deal with. It’s all for the “greater good” of safety, security, and government efficiency.
It turns out, to the wrath of our bureaucratic state, you have a right. In this particular case, you have the right not to be subject to unreasonable search or seizure. It’s called the Fourth Amendment. But now Congress, including 30 Republicans, has voted that Fourth Amendment rights don’t matter. They defer your rights to bureaucratic opportunism. They swore an oath to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” If they continue to sacrifice your rights on the altar of federal bureaucracy, doesn’t that make them the enemy they are sworn to protect?
Want more information about Glenn Beck? Get Glenn’s free email newsletter Get his latest insights, top stories, show prep and more delivered to your inbox.
