Comments Posted By Jason M
Displaying 1 To 8 Of 8 Comments
Dave in Boca:
What a weak point to make:
“Among his possessions are a couple of cell phones--phones that contain several American phone numbers. In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, what's a president to do?â€
-William KristolWell let’s see. Under the current FISA Bush could tap the lines now and get a warrant retroactively. And since the inception of FISA, it rejected only five of the 14,000 warrant applications it received before 2001.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 17:36
The Supreme Court has ruled several times against warrant-less spying. That supersedes any agreement between the President and the few congressional leaders he met with.
Also: “We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in the case of Hamdi vs. Rumsfeld. The Constitution "most assuredly envisions a role for all three branches [of government] when individual liberties are at stake," she said.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 17:20
Executive Order 12333 still has congressional oversight as stated:
Part 3.1:Congressional Oversight. The duties and responsibilities of the Director of Central Intelligence and the heads of other departments, agencies, and entities engaged in intelligence activities to cooperate with the Congress in the conduct of its responsibilities for oversight of intelligence activities…
Without following set procedures and oversight, Mr. Bush has the ability to do surveillance on any citizen for any purpose. Our government is not intended to operate as a “trust me†institution.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 16:24
If the process was slow Bush could request changes or increased power as he has done before,but he did not Instead he circumvented established rules and laws as he saw fit. Presidential power is not absolute, checks and balances exist to prevent unbridled power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 15:45
Gabriel:
Foreign terrorists are not citizens. Again the FISA allows a warrant to be granted retroactively so time is not a factor. What Mr. Bush is doing is bypassing any oversight of his actions.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 12:45
Not a liberal, a patriot.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 12:02
Mesmerized Bush idolizers wearing GOP issued brown pajamas. What happened to you? Before your power was absolute you fought against excessive government, are you now willing to abandon the underpinnings of your democracy for a chance to touch his magnificence?
The fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.â€
Bush said he got authorization when congress approved the use of force in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, Attorney General Gonzales acknowledged that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires a court order for such domestic spying. Pressed on why he did not follow the surveillance act and get court approval, Bush said that would be too slow, even though such approval can be granted retroactively.
What is he trying to hide?
Comment Posted By Jason M On 20.12.2005 @ 11:58
Having invested so much in the intellectual debate over the years that Republican control of our government would yield utopia, the apologists now live in denial like a battered housewife unable to leave the abuse.
Comment Posted By Jason M On 19.12.2005 @ 12:09
