I actually heard someone say on a related matter, "I'll give up all of my civil liberties in order to keep my freedom." It's almost tempting to say that someone that stupid doesn't deserve freedom, but, in fact, they need even more protection from a totalitarian government.
The U.S. government's argument that the wiretapping is a vital tool is ridiculous. They could apply that description to anything and just because they call it that doesn't mean it's so.
How ironic -- and sad -- that the same country that boasts about bringing democracy to other countries -- even if they have to force it upon them at gunpoint -- is becoming less free by the day. As the old saying goes, "Physician, heal thyself".
<quote>I actually heard someone say on a related matter, "I'll give up all of my civil liberties in order to keep my freedom."</quote> Ouch. That hurts... I sometimes wonder how such people make it through daily life ;-)
<quote>How ironic -- and sad -- that the same country that boasts about bringing democracy to other countries -- even if they have to force it upon them at gunpoint -- is becoming less free by the day.</quote> They go by the line "Do as I say, not as I do."
[b][u]SHE[/u][/b] [u]RESPECTS[/u] the Contsitution AND her Constituency!!! Now [b]that[/b] is a rare and [b]extremely[/b] [u]PRECIOUS[/u] [i]commodity[/i] in today's political arena!
Here's what is really happening; President George Bush may feel that as Commander-in-Chief he is entitled, even demanded, to engage in this type of program. But, in reality, nothing prevents him from using the FISA program set up for this, with maybe a little legislative tweak to allow "pre-warrant" surveillance, with the warrant issued after the fact, say within 24-48 hours. This would allow the necessary action to be taken to protect us, and at the same time satisfy the constitutional requirements against "unreasonable search and seizure," our privacy laws. Bush's real concern is the absolute sieve we sustain in our maintenance of secrecy within our judicial and legislative system. It seems that people just can't "keep a secret." Whether for political or personal reasons they disagree, they just can't wait to disclose what they know, whether or not that disclosure hinders our efforts to prevent terrorism. That, though unspoken, is what is part of the problem. So now, because of this problem, and Bush's advisors wanting to increase the power and potency of the presidency, he is rapidly facing a dilemma he could have avoided. What will he do when the courts finally determine that he can't do what he wants? And, could that determination really hurt our anti-terrorism efforts? So forget the power grab, set up the program to comply with the law, and proscecute those who leak. Diogenes
Wow, God - Terrorists - Fear - Congress vowing to "do whatever"
We all know the President already has an avenue to tap any phone at any time. This ruling simply says that LIMPY has to follow the rules just like every other authority in the United States. I suppose the thing that bothers LIMPY is that the rules are not his rules. But hey, at least he can ban shampoo and diet soda from airplanes to "make AMURICANZ feel safer".
The terrorists have won. They don't even need to attack us any more for us to willingly give up rights, just throw out vague threats.
Thank God we still have a few jurists left in this country who actually believe in constitution, bill of rights and ideals that our country were founded on.
Shame on all these cowards that willingly accept any level of survellence just so they can feel safe. Doesn't it scare the crap out of you that we have a president that constantly puts himself above the law and willfully ignores the constitution?
I am curious what Bush is going to do if a true freedom loving american is voted into the oval office next election. Will Bush hold himself above that provision in the constitution as well?
What is so shocking is that how many brainwashed cowards are in this country? Is this the same country that used to stand against oppression. The same one that was formed out of the belief that safety and fear did not overrule liberty?
Since when is ruling in favor of the constitution un-american or pro-terrorist?
The fact is that Bush is an idiot and wanna-be dictator. Even more scary is that people are actually defending them because they are too scared to think.
Almost all totalitarian societies got that way through inspiring fear throughout the populace, this one is no different.
The ironic thing is that the Bush administration is acting exactly like the old USSR is, yet now all these people that used to hate Russia for its actions against their people are now in favor of it. Stupidity and fear know no bounds it seems.
Get a backbone, take a civics class and learn to think for yourself. This country is quickly turning into an anti-freedom nation and Bush and his blind followers are making it happen.
A question for all these stupid Bush supporters. How is this judge a "freedom hater" when it is Bush that is eroding all our freedoms?
There is hope though. People are realizing what Bush(judging by his approval rating) is and there are still jurists who care about us and our country.
They lie, who say that we can't continue monitoring terrorism suspects. It's just that now there'll be a warrant through the FISA court. We'll have to comply with federal law. I don't see anything wrong with that.
It seems the hate-spewers here think their Supreme Ruler is above the law. The US government, no matter who is President, is not above the law. War and terrorism do not justify abandonment of the US Constitution. I am so glad that the framers of the Constitution made it the way it is, otherwise we would long have been a totalitarion country.
Alas, just because the Federal Judge issued the ruling, it automatically does not mean the bad hats and the cronies who are abusing both the law and the constitution, will either automatically change their ways or spots!
They will continue on their merry way abusing all people's rights and freedoms, because chief Chicken George, the supreme leader tells them to do so, as they continue to fail to the right thing at all times and fail to honour the oath, when they were sworn into the office!
this is a solid conservative strict-constructionist decision
>"...no powers not created by the Constitution"
The judge got this one exactly right. Bush now has his work cut out for him. He needs to get Congress and the states to repeal not only the first and the fourth amendments, but the tenth amendment as well.
What makes anyone believe that every government in the world that has some access to select technological capabilities has not been or who would discontinue to monitor everyone in their own (and any other) country due to this court decision or for any other such civil concern? Monitoring started many years before 911. It is my humble opinion all governments that can are monitoring at will in a similar fashion to this US case. They will continue to monitor everyone they want when and where they want with or without or the knowledge or blessings of their populations. Such monitoring is of course justified in the name of every nations national security; therefore this specific issue is not limited to our government.
Many communications techies know the required technologies are currently available that would allow any other country to monitor anyone they please to monitor even if that person is in our own country. Who can say with 100% confidence that other countries are not monitoring US citizens in the same manner this at this very minute? Would these others counties stop their illegal monitoring of Americans because of this US federal court decision? The short and obvious answer is no! Assuming we now stop will we be giving all others a significant intelligence advantage? Can we stop the others- probably far too cost prohibitive find a small flexible non-metal needle that is constantly moving around in a 100 mile high stack of hay.
Unfortunately Americans are joined only by a small number of other countries who agree we need as a people must uphold civil liberties and to follow such civil laws. I have worked in many countries that we Americans call friends and in others that we consider not so friendly. After returning to the US after many years of work and time for observation overseas, it seems to me that many of us, especially those who have not traveled much internationally have no idea how many people bare open disregard and distrust and or who even openly hate Americans for what we have and who we are.
More astounding to me they have grown up being taught these impressions in their very homes. There are many reasons why and I do believe these impressions can be positively changed. But the point here is that there are literally millions of such people all over the world. And nothing anyone does or can do in the next 20 years is going to change these impressions in the majority them absolutely nothing.
Thanks to our media the whole world is now sorely aware of the vast numbers of those that we now call radical who will stop at nothing to destroy every living person in the USA and they will never stop working toward this horrific goal - regardless of our laws. Also we must understand that we cannot simply ignore them. They are here to literally die for their beliefs and their cause regardless of our opinions and certainly they have no fear of our laws.
Before I close I must add that I reject to some of the positions that some of our American media news idols are taking and how they are spinning stories based on some of numerous terrorist stories that are also becoming almost daily breaking news.
The American media and every American citizen must understand these radical people do not care if our President and/or Congress are controlled or that we are under the leadership of George W Bush or Ted Kennedy and they certainly don't care if Americans or either Democrats or Republicans the blood of all our elected officials is the same color red regardless of any party preferences. The will indiscriminately kill Republicans and Democrats. They are definitely not going to stop when we finally pullout of Iraq and Afghanistan or anywhere else. More importantly to me this is time when I believe there is a far greater chance of many more significant and horrific attacks on our own soil once we stop fighting them on their own soil. They will move their fight here into our country and our cities killing thousands of innocent people.
We live in dangerous times in a very dangerous world the good old days of American and the rest of the free world will never return at least in life times of most us living.
Back to this federal court the decision: If you listen carefully I am sure you could hear our enemies laughing at us now because this court decision is helping them achieve their goal!
P.S. I am not a republican or democrat and I have not been able to vote for either party for 16 years Our governmental system is long overdue a major overhaul. We need a new party that our Silent Majority would be able to rally to. Call me whatever you like but for me and regardless of the favor of a politician or for that matter a president the security of my family and loved ones and my wonderful country comes absolutely first regardless of court decisions.
Spying. America is the uncontested number one leader, and obviously, nobody likes being spied on. No other country has anything vaguely resembling the NSA, CIA... and so on, in terms of size or budget. The whole shebang should have been largely dismantled at the end of the cold war. I am disgusted at the idea the Israelis had access to spy satellite info when smashing up the Lebanon. The idea that curbing the NSA's power slightly would somehow give another country some kind of advantage is utterly paranoid and quite literally absurd. Also, America has huge military bases right round the globe and in many countries looks and behaves like a colonial power. Disagree with us and we'll send a fleet. Try to understand that Europe, Russia, China, Japan, S.Korea, most of South America, South Africa, Canada, India, and Pakistan have totally different agendas that do not consist of military spending, miltary power, spying and so forth. It's about co-operation and economic power - a totally different kettle of fish. This is the 21st century - not the 19th. America upholding civil liberties.... where? When? Of course if you started doing that impressions might change. People do not, in my experience, 'openly hate Americans for what you have and who you are'. Try to understand that many of them suffer as a consequence of American foreign policy and the behaviour of some corporations, which of course the US govt backs. It is as if you thought the US treats foreigners overseas the same way it treats its own citizens. The fact that it doesn't, far from it in fact, leads many to believe the US govt. does not itself believe in the values in its own constitution. Can you blame them? The other major bone of contention is Israel. There, I've said it. Not only has America allowed the situation to fester for 60 years now, to the rest of the world it seems, rightly or wrongly, that America encourages and bankrolls Israel to do whatever it takes into its head, no matter how inappropriate or horrific. Using the usual recipe of arm-twisting and bluster, you wrongly think others support you in this. We'd just like to see an end to the killing and destruction, and the rest of us can't gang up on Israel until it makes peace with its neighbours and provides some form of justice to the Palestinians until America stops throwing a spanner in the works every single time anyone tries to do that. What America needs to do is stop giving the Israelis money and support and let the rest of us - read the UN - deal with it. We don't want anybody to die, but clearly some form of compromise will have to be reached - Israel can't have it all its own way. You're right in thinking that the color of the administration makes no difference to 'them'. This is because although there have been differences on the domestic front, for the last 50 years most of the foreign policy has been republican - neither Carter nor Clinton were able to affect it that much, alas. For 'pulling out' of Iraq and Afghanistan, read 'losing', because that's the way the locals will see it in all likelihood. The US military were brilliant at smashing the place up and about as effective as a concrete parachute at fixing up the mess afterwards. The business world would call it a 'PR disaster'
OK, so where does that leave us. Well, the real true tragedy in all of this is that the average American and his way of life is much admired by all but a very, very few religious zealots. You all need to take a step back and realise that you are being fed a line of fake populist nationalist BS that would have made Hitler proud - the difference being that Hitler wasn't fake. You need to have faith in the ideals you profess - and this starts with the constitution. America is proud of and defends its ideals. America tries to convince others of the worth of these ideals, but never by force. America believes in religious freedom, tolerance, and the separation of the church and the state, and will not support a country that does not adhere to those principles. Amercica believes in the right of the individual to go out and seek his fortune, and will not support any country that does not believe in the principle of individual freedom. I don't know, I'm not American, but to me these seem principles worth dying for, but not in some godforsaken field in a foreign land without a damned good reason, and none of those presented in the last 50 years would past muster. Well - there's my 2 cents. Take it as you will.
This judge is absolutely correct! The president takes an oath of office to defend and uphold our constitution. Bush broke his oath when he decided that he is above our law!
He not only ordered these wiretappings to begin with, he did so without the supeona he needed to make it lawful. He has done so some 30 times since then. He had 72 hours in which to obtain that supeona AFTER he issued those orders, BUT he decided that he is above the law of our land and he is the one who decided that he did not have to follow our law. He overstepped his power.
Our constitution is what gives us our freedom and the bill of rights to go along with it. A president who thinks he is but a king and not a president at all is one that one should depose of. After all that is what you do with kings. In america's case, it is impeachment we must look for. This judge has now opened the door for that opportunity. What makes you think for one minute that Bush is not dangerous? He blamed a man for 911 who he now no longer pursues. Why do you suppose that is? Because that man was not responsible for the attack.
Bush never finishes anything. He has waged war in FOUR countries since he took office. And for what? A power he thinks he holds in his hands and use at will? Iraq never did anything. There were no weapons of mass destruction. A country torn apart by a man, lives lost, families shattered, all for nothing.
He most definitely has broken the laws of our nation and he must pay for doing so. The american people do not stand behind Bush any longer. 2/3 of us want him and his administration OUT. You sir are running scared. We must now fix all of Bush's "mistakes". Never in the history of our country has any president brought us so low.
We not be in so much "danger" if Bush had not brought this upon us. This warmongers time has come to pay the pentence for what he has wrought.
If the un's call for a cease fire had not sustained, Bush was looking at war on Iran and on Syria next. Thank God it did not come to that.
So he went from Usama Bin Laden (who he never brought to justice, and does not intend to) to Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, and it goes on and on. Not to mention what he has done to our own country.
Now if your family is so important to you, then you best look at who is putting you in danger and vow to fix that. That would be standing with the rest of the country in unison to get this government back into the checks and balances where it is supposed to be.
Remember--the government works for us. Not the other way around.
Everyone wants to turn this into a partisan battle or make this about President Bush. This argument is about neither. This is about a program that 1/3 of our government was running. This is not about an individual man but about the powers of the executive branch of our government.
We are at WAR, now this is where many will try to say, Only Congress can declare a WAR and they havent done that . This is partially true. Congress is the only branch of our government that can declare a war. But the constitution is very vague about how they do that, does congress need to say Ok terrorist, we declare a war on you . No, the constitution does not spell out the language or method they use. The founding fathers were intentionally vague when it comes to certain areas. Its not because they did not know how to do spell it out but rather they wanted to give latitude to the different branches of government, in certain areas, to adapt to changing situations. They figured that a future congress would be in a much better state to decide what was needed for a particular event, then they were, at the time. The congress did authorize many emergency measures after 911, the patriot act being one of them. They also authorized force in dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan. By any reasonable measure these met the constitutional requirement of declarations of war. (by the way, before someone starts yelling How do you know what the founding fathers meant , well, you have only to read the copious materials surrounding the writing of the constitution i.e. federalist papers and the actions of the executive branch and the support it garnered from the legislative branch and judicial branch for the last 200+ years to understand this)
Now that we are at war, the founding fathers knew that war called for certain latitudes be given to the branch of government charged with fighting that war. Hence the war powers of the executive branch. You can argue all day and night about the FISA court and whether or not the executive branch should have gone to it for warrants but the arguments break down quickly when placed in context of the war powers granted the executive branch. The FISA court was written by the legislative branch of the government; it can not over rule the constitution and hence can not over rule the war powers of the executive branch.
This case will go to the Supreme Court and if the court recognizes the fact we are at war they will have no choice but to overturn the verdict.
I am by nature a civil libertarian. It abhors me that we tolerate laws whose sole purpose is to make it easier for the government to intrude into my life or whose sole purpose is to make the representatives of the state legally able to ask what are you doing? Where are you going But this argument is not about civil liberties, its about the ability of the government to wage war and in this case and due to the nature of this war the actions of the NSA program are fully reasonable. If/when we finally win this war I will demand the NSA program be stopped, but until this time war powers must be used.
While Congress has authorized the misnamed Patriot Act, it has not declared formal war on terrorists. The Patriot Act and other acts by Congress are not enough. You say "by any reasonable measure" they are, but you fail to provide any of these "reasonable measures." Just stating something doesn't make it so. Point to one constitutional scholar who thinks these are "reasonable". If these measures were "reasonable", the Bush administration could have clarified them easily. They have the majority in Congress, right? The fact that they haven't shows that they know quite well that these measures do not hold up to constitutional requirements. So, your starting point is already wrong, and hence, you can't deduce anything from that. I indeed hope that this case goes to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS has ruled recently about detainees in Guantanamo, and has hold that the US government is not above the US Constitution. Oh, and yes, I have read the Federalist Papers...
You make an argument of the powers granted to the executive branch by the constitution, but you fail to also acknowledge that the same consitution give the judical brach the power of interpretation of the constitution.
This is merely a judge doing their job and saying that the executive brach has stepped over the line. The constitution is not something for anyone to trifle with and choosing which sections you follow and which you don't is very dangerous. This is why our wise founding fathers created a balance of powers. We are seeing this balance working.
My hope is that we reign in the current abuses before we wind up having something like the internment in camps that happened to so many Americans of Japanese descent during WWII.
Our great veterans fought and many died to protect OUR NATIONS and OUR FREEDOMS. Let's not passively give them up so easily to someone who would think he knows whats best for us even if it means trouncing on our freedoms. I would rather live in fear of terrorism than live in fear of my government.
So you claim that the president has unlimited power in times of war? Where does it say that and specifically where does it sayt that the constitution and amendments are void during times of war?
The patriot act itself is unconstitutional. There is also no provision for it to end when the 'war on terror ends'.
The action in Iraq has nothing to do with fighting terror. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or Bin Laden. Therefore it has nothing to do with the war on terror. Other then helping to create more terrorists to keep this sham called the war on terror alive.
The fact is that the war on terror is a war on ideology, not a country or even specific people. It will have no end, thus what you are supporting will not only go on forever, but controls will get worse. Which is what this government wants.
Spying on US citizens(yes this is what is going on) without probable cause is unconstitutional. There is no provision that suspends these rights in wartime.
You can lay this on the doorstep of Bush because a rational president with the best interests of this country in mind would not authorize this, nor declare that laws do not apply to him. What can you expect from a "man" that argues against a law banning torture and calls those who believe in the consitution and therefore opposes him traitors and unpatriotic?
Think about this: Bin Laden is more free then you, and has less to fear from the US government then you do.
The resolution that Bush uses to justify the NSA wiretaps says:
"the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 ..."
The dirty little secret here is that the NSA monitoring is done by monitoring ALL international communications, even those without terrorist connections, then discarding those communications that don't have a terrorist connection. This level of monitoring wouldn't be approved by FISA. So Bush's administration is trying to extend the above resolution to justify breaking federal law (FISA).
Please read the resolution carefully: No where does it allow the administration to take any action whatsoever against folks or entities not involved with terrorism at all. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.
I would rather live in fear of terrorism, than live in fear of my government.
I want to be protected, but not at the cost of having my freedom trounced upon.
I love this country and all that it stands for, and especially the freedom to speak up when I have an opinion.
The problem of power is how to achieve its responsible use rather than its irresponsible and indulgent use - of how to get men of power to live for the public rather than off the public. Robert F. Kennedy (1925 - 1968),
Executive Branch largest threat to US national security
I wrote this before Room 641A was disclosed at the AT&T facilitiies on Folsom St in San Francisco and I believe it tenfold more.
"The Executive Branch has assaulted the Constitution, circumvented US Law, taken us to war in Iraq under false pretense, and now is trying to get this case dismissed rather than operate within the Judicial System. The Executive Branch refuses to act within the bounds of the most respected institutions of the US and is therefore our largest threat to the National Security of the United States."
I have yet to see a discussion of using simple basic technology like payphones and prepaid cell phones to make calls, not to mention anonymous proxies and VPNs. Why should we think that the bad guys will use easily tappable technology? Does Osama still use that traceable satellite phone? Is he listed in the White Pages?
This isn't a discussion about technology. This isn't a discussion about politics. This isn't a discussion about terrorism. It's a discussion where some members of the older generation are telling you that you have been sold snake oil. We have lived with terrorists for the last 50 years - at the end of the day it's a relatively small problem compared with the big issues. You must learn to develop a sensitive rear end so that you know when something is being stuffed up it. OK, I mean something the size of an Nimitz class aircraft carrier, which is what you have failed so far to notice. Bush is a friend and business associate of the Bin Liner family. Bin Liner n° 1, who apparently requires frequent kidney dialisis, has never been found. Iraq has never, ever had anything to do with Islamic terrorists. Is there any line of complete ********* you won't swallow? UFOs? Elvis? The tooth fairy? The rest of us are desperate. We'd shoot you on sight. How can you be so completely stupid and still know how to breathe air. Please, smoke dope, smoke crack, take LSD, anything that might open your mind... before the wicked witch of the north lets the monkeys loose... before the cylons take over the universe... before we all go mad and kill you!
"Does Osama still use that traceable satellite phone?" No, Osama doesn't use the traceable satellite phone anymore. Why? Because some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decided to [broadcast/ write] that "The U.S. almost got him while he was using his (traceable) satelllite phone." * Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to [broadcast/write] that the U.S. is monitoring calls [to/from] known or suspected terrorists overseas with people in the U.S. * Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to [broadcast/write] how the U.S. govt. data mines the internet to try to pick up search patterns that could lead to terrorist cells. * Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to [broadcast/write] that they've just recieved copies of a "confidencial/secret" report detailing how America's [milk/ water/food supply/nuclear power plants/etc.] might be suseptable to terrorist attacks and "here's a detailed report on how they can do it." All of this under the "auspices" that the public had a right or need to know. And the fact that we may be clueing the terrorist in on the methods in which we may catch them or even showing them the methods of new attacks they could make on us? The "media" claims they could have found all of this out through other methods so them broadcasting it on primetime doesn't make any difference. But, since Bin Laden no longer uses his satellite phone - what do you think? And regarding the 1st as well as the 4th amendments and your right to "Freely Speak" to a known or suspected terrorist over seas without the govt. invading your "Right to Privacy"? The next 3,000 people to die on a single day through a terrorist attack will be laid right on your heads.
Finally some reason is prevailing south of the border. Its about high time that Mr. Bush and his friends are stopped in this insane quest to see terrorists on every corner. Lets hope the decision will be held up, too many treaties and commitments have been ignored and overturned by the Bush administration. Lets hope some sanity will return to the White House.
Just read some of the idiotic comments written so far. Instead of culling seals, which everybody likes, why don't you cull 'Murcans', who are universally unpopular. If it looks like a republican, then shoot it - who'd blame you? Much easier than trying to talk sense into an administration with a collective IQ of less than your shoe size. I mean, you just know they paid to copy notes or suck **** at university. In the real world they wouldn't last 10 minutes - you'd fire them before they ever got a paycheck. Their appeal is to the complete failures that romantically think 'they're as good as everybody else'. Come on Canada... BS is BS...
if you haven't read it, i'd download the judge's ruling, and see for yourself.
What she said is there is NO authority under the Constitution of The United States of America for this illegal activity. Period.
Don't confuse the willingness of everyone to stop terrorists. There is a very easy LEGAL way for the government to "listen in" whenever they want, with very little in the way of justification.... but BushCo have violated this law.
It was a thoughtful and correct ruling -- but should the Justice Department's appeal reach the Supreme Court, today's decision will probably be struck down. Bush has already stacked the deck on the Court.
Another key point is that the domestic spying program continues to operate today as it did before the ruling. Both sides in the case agreed to hold the ruling in abeyance at least until the Justice Department's appeal is heard.
Stacked the deck? CBSTV, do you work for the biased media?
Last count Bush has appointed only two Supreme Court justices. Hardly stacking the deck I would say.
You all claim that this judge is upholding the Constitution. But the ruling totally ignores the powers the Constitution grants the President as Commander in Chief, specifically the power to gather intelligence.
You also misrepresent the issue and taint the program as spying on everybody. It only comes into play when we capture a list of phone numbers from a terrorist and find numbers called in the US.
You are all the same people who blame the President for not connecting the dots after 9/11.
As reflected in earlier posts you think Bush was at fault because there was "Plenty of Data, Not enough logic" to predict the 9/11 attacks. Did all of this data suddenly appear after 1/20/2001, Bush's inauguration? Why didn't Clinton and the democrats act on this data prior to then?
Wow! Its obvious you've been drinking at the Kool Aid fountain a long time.
I suggest you re-read the Constitution (if you've read it at all)and the Federalist Papers to get a better understanding of its meaning.
Do your OWN reading. Don't take the word of some Left Wing, moonbat, educator who tells you that the Constitution is a "living document", subject to the whims of society, 'cause it aint so.
Additionally, you should look up the definition of cowardice. People aren't cowards just because they allow the president and the military to do their jobs properly by letting them intercept enemy communications.
One last thing, next time you rant, thank a soldier. Because without him you wouldn't have that right. I've spent over 30 years protecting & guarding your rights and just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a coward.
No, people are cowards when they don't stand up for the ideals and principles that they were raised on. To give up your freedom for a false sense of security - you don't deserve either (thank you, Ben Franklin).
P.S. I like Kool-aid. Especially the cherry flavor, with a little ice. Yum.
It is the current administration that tries to bend the Constitution. The President is NOT above the law. They have to get a warrant. Period. End of story. Oh, and unlike you, I have read the Constitution AND the Federalist Papers...
Poor government can't spy on citizens. Well, maybe <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.techknowcafe.com/content/view/627/43/" target="_newWindow">http://www.techknowcafe.com/content/view/627/43/</a> they should try going after the terrorists. Oh wait, they can't do that because then they won't be able to further their anti-American agenda.
Well... and the second point is that the President is not above the law. He willfully violated the constitution and FISA, and without remorse.
What would a man with morals do?
He would acknowledge that violating the 4th Amendment is a no-no and would immediately work with congress to arrange oversight and allow a ruling of constitutionality. That's what a person who swares to uphold the constitution should do.
That would be the real question then. Your try at some partisan cheap shot just backfired. Better luck next time... Oh, and if you didn't get it yet: 6 years into Bush's presidency you can't argue anymore with Clinton. What did Bush do in these 6 years?
This isn't "Domestic Spying". The NSA isn't listening in on J. Kerry talking to H. Dean at the DNC or Ms. Soccer Mom talking to Grandma or her hair dresser.
They're listening in on calls between known or suspected terrorists, terrorist groups, or phone numbers connected to such, outside the U.S., and someone in the U.S. either initiating or recieving said call.
When those calls happen you don't just go: "Hey Jim, check it out. I think that's Bin Laden. Whoa! Hang on. He's talking to someone in the U.S.! Sue, cut the connection. Mike, stop recording and erase that tape. Phil, I need you to wake-up Judge So and So to get a warrant in case Osama calls back to this number"
And as the paperwork is being processed and the ACLU lawyers are scrambling to block said warrant, another possible 3,000 innocent victims could be on their to death instead of work.
How come you guys can not stop using strawmen? How about sticking to the topic? Read the US Constitution. But it seems you rather live in a totalitarian country. Go ahead, there are enough such countries in the world.
And you know the government isn't spying on its citizens.... because.. you.. trust the government? A true patriot never trusts the Government. The people should always been above the Government. The people have the rights.
Your just assumming everything is ok. Hey.. don't look over there behind that screen.. nothing is happening.. look away. Open your eyes... and you might actually be able to see.
I think what you don't get it, the Government has been lying to "the people" for a very long time. And unfortunately you don't understand this, or are *to afraid* to believe it. Conquer your fears and react.
You have a complete lack of understanding as to how the FISA Court works. Why don't we just do away with that pesky old Constitution that just seems to tie the hands of all our valiant terrorist fighters? Isn't that what your position boils down to? Why not just come out and say it? Obviously you aren't happy with any legal restraints. That used to be how we differentiated ourselves from less civilized groups. Now it's "the ends justifies the means" like all the rest. God Bless America!
Manage updates with the Download App
The U.S. government's argument that the wiretapping is a vital tool is ridiculous. They could apply that description to anything and just because they call it that doesn't mean it's so.
How ironic -- and sad -- that the same country that boasts about bringing democracy to other countries -- even if they have to force it upon them at gunpoint -- is becoming less free by the day. As the old saying goes, "Physician, heal thyself".
Twenty-nine months until regime change.
Ouch. That hurts... I sometimes wonder how such people make it through daily life ;-)
<quote>How ironic -- and sad -- that the same country that boasts about bringing democracy to other countries -- even if they have to force it upon them at gunpoint -- is becoming less free by the day.</quote>
They go by the line "Do as I say, not as I do."
Bush's real concern is the absolute sieve we sustain in our maintenance of secrecy within our judicial and legislative system. It seems that people just can't "keep a secret." Whether for political or personal reasons they disagree, they just can't wait to disclose what they know, whether or not that disclosure hinders our efforts to prevent terrorism.
That, though unspoken, is what is part of the problem.
So now, because of this problem, and Bush's advisors wanting to increase the power and potency of the presidency, he is rapidly facing a dilemma he could have avoided. What will he do when the courts finally determine that he can't do what he wants? And, could that determination really hurt our anti-terrorism efforts?
So forget the power grab, set up the program to comply with the law, and proscecute those who leak.
Diogenes
Poor LIMPY.
Thank God we still have a few jurists left in this country who actually believe in constitution, bill of rights and ideals that our country were founded on.
Shame on all these cowards that willingly accept any level of survellence just so they can feel safe. Doesn't it scare the crap out of you that we have a president that constantly puts himself above the law and willfully ignores the constitution?
I am curious what Bush is going to do if a true freedom loving american is voted into the oval office next election. Will Bush hold himself above that provision in the constitution as well?
What is so shocking is that how many brainwashed cowards are in this country? Is this the same country that used to stand against oppression. The same one that was formed out of the belief that safety and fear did not overrule liberty?
Since when is ruling in favor of the constitution un-american or pro-terrorist?
The fact is that Bush is an idiot and wanna-be dictator. Even more scary is that people are actually defending them because they are too scared to think.
Almost all totalitarian societies got that way through inspiring fear throughout the populace, this one is no different.
The ironic thing is that the Bush administration is acting exactly like the old USSR is, yet now all these people that used to hate Russia for its actions against their people are now in favor of it. Stupidity and fear know no bounds it seems.
Get a backbone, take a civics class and learn to think for yourself. This country is quickly turning into an anti-freedom nation and Bush and his blind followers are making it happen.
A question for all these stupid Bush supporters. How is this judge a "freedom hater" when it is Bush that is eroding all our freedoms?
There is hope though. People are realizing what Bush(judging by his approval rating) is and there are still jurists who care about us and our country.
American is clearly logically challenged.
So I predict your argument will, sadly, have zero impact.
mark d.
CMSgt, USAF, Retired
The US government, no matter who is President, is not above the law. War and terrorism do not justify abandonment of the US Constitution. I am so glad that the framers of the Constitution made it the way it is, otherwise we would long have been a totalitarion country.
They will continue on their merry way abusing all people's rights and freedoms, because chief Chicken George, the supreme leader tells them to do so, as they continue to fail to the right thing at all times and fail to honour the oath, when they were sworn into the office!
The judge got this one exactly right. Bush now has his work cut out for him.
He needs to get Congress and the states to repeal not only the first and the
fourth amendments, but the tenth amendment as well.
Many communications techies know the required technologies are currently available that would allow any other country to monitor anyone they please to monitor even if that person is in our own country. Who can say with 100% confidence that other countries are not monitoring US citizens in the same manner this at this very minute? Would these others counties stop their illegal monitoring of Americans because of this US federal court decision? The short and obvious answer is no! Assuming we now stop will we be giving all others a significant intelligence advantage? Can we stop the others- probably far too cost prohibitive find a small flexible non-metal needle that is constantly moving around in a 100 mile high stack of hay.
Unfortunately Americans are joined only by a small number of other countries who agree we need as a people must uphold civil liberties and to follow such civil laws. I have worked in many countries that we Americans call friends and in others that we consider not so friendly. After returning to the US after many years of work and time for observation overseas, it seems to me that many of us, especially those who have not traveled much internationally have no idea how many people bare open disregard and distrust and or who even openly hate Americans for what we have and who we are.
More astounding to me they have grown up being taught these impressions in their very homes. There are many reasons why and I do believe these impressions can be positively changed. But the point here is that there are literally millions of such people all over the world. And nothing anyone does or can do in the next 20 years is going to change these impressions in the majority them absolutely nothing.
Thanks to our media the whole world is now sorely aware of the vast numbers of those that we now call radical who will stop at nothing to destroy every living person in the USA and they will never stop working toward this horrific goal - regardless of our laws. Also we must understand that we cannot simply ignore them. They are here to literally die for their beliefs and their cause regardless of our opinions and certainly they have no fear of our laws.
Before I close I must add that I reject to some of the positions that some of our American media news idols are taking and how they are spinning stories based on some of numerous terrorist stories that are also becoming almost daily breaking news.
The American media and every American citizen must understand these radical people do not care if our President and/or Congress are controlled or that we are under the leadership of George W Bush or Ted Kennedy and they certainly don't care if Americans or either Democrats or Republicans the blood of all our elected officials is the same color red regardless of any party preferences. The will indiscriminately kill Republicans and Democrats. They are definitely not going to stop when we finally pullout of Iraq and Afghanistan or anywhere else. More importantly to me this is time when I believe there is a far greater chance of many more significant and horrific attacks on our own soil once we stop fighting them on their own soil. They will move their fight here into our country and our cities killing thousands of innocent people.
We live in dangerous times in a very dangerous world the good old days of American and the rest of the free world will never return at least in life times of most us living.
Back to this federal court the decision: If you listen carefully I am sure you could hear our enemies laughing at us now because this court decision is helping them achieve their goal!
P.S. I am not a republican or democrat and I have not been able to vote for either party for 16 years Our governmental system is long overdue a major overhaul. We need a new party that our Silent Majority would be able to rally to. Call me whatever you like but for me and regardless of the favor of a politician or for that matter a president the security of my family and loved ones and my wonderful country comes absolutely first regardless of court decisions.
Also, America has huge military bases right round the globe and in many countries looks and behaves like a colonial power. Disagree with us and we'll send a fleet.
Try to understand that Europe, Russia, China, Japan, S.Korea, most of South America, South Africa, Canada, India, and Pakistan have totally different agendas that do not consist of military spending, miltary power, spying and so forth. It's about co-operation and economic power - a totally different kettle of fish. This is the 21st century - not the 19th.
America upholding civil liberties.... where? When? Of course if you started doing that impressions might change.
People do not, in my experience, 'openly hate Americans for what you have and who you are'. Try to understand that many of them suffer as a consequence of American foreign policy and the behaviour of some corporations, which of course the US govt backs. It is as if you thought the US treats foreigners overseas the same way it treats its own citizens. The fact that it doesn't, far from it in fact, leads many to believe the US govt. does not itself believe in the values in its own constitution. Can you blame them?
The other major bone of contention is Israel. There, I've said it. Not only has America allowed the situation to fester for 60 years now, to the rest of the world it seems, rightly or wrongly, that America encourages and bankrolls Israel to do whatever it takes into its head, no matter how inappropriate or horrific. Using the usual recipe of arm-twisting and bluster, you wrongly think others support you in this. We'd just like to see an end to the killing and destruction, and the rest of us can't gang up on Israel until it makes peace with its neighbours and provides some form of justice to the Palestinians until America stops throwing a spanner in the works every single time anyone tries to do that. What America needs to do is stop giving the Israelis money and support and let the rest of us - read the UN - deal with it. We don't want anybody to die, but clearly some form of compromise will have to be reached - Israel can't have it all its own way.
You're right in thinking that the color of the administration makes no difference to 'them'. This is because although there have been differences on the domestic front, for the last 50 years most of the foreign policy has been republican - neither Carter nor Clinton were able to affect it that much, alas.
For 'pulling out' of Iraq and Afghanistan, read 'losing', because that's the way the locals will see it in all likelihood. The US military were brilliant at smashing the place up and about as effective as a concrete parachute at fixing up the mess afterwards. The business world would call it a 'PR disaster'
OK, so where does that leave us. Well, the real true tragedy in all of this is that the average American and his way of life is much admired by all but a very, very few religious zealots. You all need to take a step back and realise that you are being fed a line of fake populist nationalist BS that would have made Hitler proud - the difference being that Hitler wasn't fake.
You need to have faith in the ideals you profess - and this starts with the constitution. America is proud of and defends its ideals. America tries to convince others of the worth of these ideals, but never by force. America believes in religious freedom, tolerance, and the separation of the church and the state, and will not support a country that does not adhere to those principles. Amercica believes in the right of the individual to go out and seek his fortune, and will not support any country that does not believe in the principle of individual freedom.
I don't know, I'm not American, but to me these seem principles worth dying for, but not in some godforsaken field in a foreign land without a damned good reason, and none of those presented in the last 50 years would past muster.
Well - there's my 2 cents. Take it as you will.
He not only ordered these wiretappings to begin with, he did so without the supeona he needed to make it lawful. He has done so some 30 times since then. He had 72 hours in which to obtain that supeona AFTER he issued those orders, BUT he decided that he is above the law of our land and he is the one who decided that he did not have to follow our law. He overstepped his power.
Our constitution is what gives us our freedom and the bill of rights to go along with it. A president who thinks he is but a king and not a president at all is one that one should depose of. After all that is what you do with kings. In america's case, it is impeachment we must look for. This judge has now opened the door for that opportunity. What makes you think for one minute that Bush is not dangerous? He blamed a man for 911 who he now no longer pursues. Why do you suppose that is? Because that man was not responsible for the attack.
Bush never finishes anything. He has waged war in FOUR countries since he took office. And for what? A power he thinks he holds in his hands and use at will? Iraq never did anything. There were no weapons of mass destruction. A country torn apart by a man, lives lost, families shattered, all for nothing.
He most definitely has broken the laws of our nation and he must pay for doing so. The american people do not stand behind Bush any longer. 2/3 of us want him and his administration OUT. You sir are running scared. We must now fix all of Bush's "mistakes". Never in the history of our country has any president brought us so low.
We not be in so much "danger" if Bush had not brought this upon us. This warmongers time has come to pay the pentence for what he has wrought.
If the un's call for a cease fire had not sustained, Bush was looking at war on Iran and on Syria next. Thank God it did not come to that.
So he went from Usama Bin Laden (who he never brought to justice, and does not intend to) to Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, and it goes on and on. Not to mention what he has done to our own country.
Now if your family is so important to you, then you best look at who is putting you in danger and vow to fix that. That would be standing with the rest of the country in unison to get this government back into the checks and balances where it is supposed to be.
Remember--the government works for us. Not the other way around.
Everyone wants to turn this into a partisan battle or make this about President Bush. This argument is about neither. This is about a program that 1/3 of our government was running. This is not about an individual man but about the powers of the executive branch of our government.
We are at WAR, now this is where many will try to say, Only Congress can declare a WAR and they havent done that . This is partially true. Congress is the only branch of our government that can declare a war. But the constitution is very vague about how they do that, does congress need to say Ok terrorist, we declare a war on you . No, the constitution does not spell out the language or method they use. The founding fathers were intentionally vague when it comes to certain areas. Its not because they did not know how to do spell it out but rather they wanted to give latitude to the different branches of government, in certain areas, to adapt to changing situations. They figured that a future congress would be in a much better state to decide what was needed for a particular event, then they were, at the time. The congress did authorize many emergency measures after 911, the patriot act being one of them. They also authorized force in dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan. By any reasonable measure these met the constitutional requirement of declarations of war. (by the way, before someone starts yelling How do you know what the founding fathers meant , well, you have only to read the copious materials surrounding the writing of the constitution i.e. federalist papers and the actions of the executive branch and the support it garnered from the legislative branch and judicial branch for the last 200+ years to understand this)
Now that we are at war, the founding fathers knew that war called for certain latitudes be given to the branch of government charged with fighting that war. Hence the war powers of the executive branch. You can argue all day and night about the FISA court and whether or not the executive branch should have gone to it for warrants but the arguments break down quickly when placed in context of the war powers granted the executive branch. The FISA court was written by the legislative branch of the government; it can not over rule the constitution and hence can not over rule the war powers of the executive branch.
This case will go to the Supreme Court and if the court recognizes the fact we are at war they will have no choice but to overturn the verdict.
I am by nature a civil libertarian. It abhors me that we tolerate laws whose sole purpose is to make it easier for the government to intrude into my life or whose sole purpose is to make the representatives of the state legally able to ask what are you doing? Where are you going But this argument is not about civil liberties, its about the ability of the government to wage war and in this case and due to the nature of this war the actions of the NSA program are fully reasonable. If/when we finally win this war I will demand the NSA program be stopped, but until this time war powers must be used.
Thank you
You say "by any reasonable measure" they are, but you fail to provide any of these "reasonable measures." Just stating something doesn't make it so. Point to one constitutional scholar who thinks these are "reasonable".
If these measures were "reasonable", the Bush administration could have clarified them easily. They have the majority in Congress, right?
The fact that they haven't shows that they know quite well that these measures do not hold up to constitutional requirements.
So, your starting point is already wrong, and hence, you can't deduce anything from that.
I indeed hope that this case goes to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS has ruled recently about detainees in Guantanamo, and has hold that the US government is not above the US Constitution.
Oh, and yes, I have read the Federalist Papers...
This is merely a judge doing their job and saying that the executive brach has stepped over the line. The constitution is not something for anyone to trifle with and choosing which sections you follow and which you don't is very dangerous. This is why our wise founding fathers created a balance of powers. We are seeing this balance working.
My hope is that we reign in the current abuses before we wind up having something like the internment in camps that happened to so many Americans of Japanese descent during WWII.
Our great veterans fought and many died to protect OUR NATIONS and OUR FREEDOMS. Let's not passively give them up so easily to someone who would think he knows whats best for us even if it means trouncing on our freedoms. I would rather live in fear of terrorism than live in fear of my government.
The patriot act itself is unconstitutional. There is also no provision for it to end when the 'war on terror ends'.
The action in Iraq has nothing to do with fighting terror. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or Bin Laden. Therefore it has nothing to do with the war on terror. Other then helping to create more terrorists to keep this sham called the war on terror alive.
The fact is that the war on terror is a war on ideology, not a country or even specific people. It will have no end, thus what you are supporting will not only go on forever, but controls will get worse. Which is what this government wants.
Spying on US citizens(yes this is what is going on) without probable cause is unconstitutional. There is no provision that suspends these rights in wartime.
You can lay this on the doorstep of Bush because a rational president with the best interests of this country in mind would not authorize this, nor declare that laws do not apply to him. What can you expect from a "man" that argues against a law banning torture and calls those who believe in the consitution and therefore opposes him traitors and unpatriotic?
Think about this: Bin Laden is more free then you, and has less to fear from the US government then you do.
"the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 ..."
The dirty little secret here is that the NSA monitoring is done by monitoring ALL international communications, even those without terrorist connections, then discarding those communications that don't have a terrorist connection. This level of monitoring wouldn't be approved by FISA. So Bush's administration is trying to extend the above resolution to justify breaking federal law (FISA).
Please read the resolution carefully: No where does it allow the administration to take any action whatsoever against folks or entities not involved with terrorism at all. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.
mark d.
CMSgt, USAF, Retired
I want to be protected, but not at the cost of having my freedom trounced upon.
I love this country and all that it stands for, and especially the freedom to speak up when I have an opinion.
The problem of power is how to achieve its responsible use rather than its irresponsible and indulgent use - of how to get men of power to live for the public rather than off the public.
Robert F. Kennedy (1925 - 1968),
facilitiies on Folsom St in San Francisco and I believe it tenfold
more.
"The Executive Branch has assaulted the Constitution,
circumvented US Law, taken us to war in Iraq under false
pretense, and now is trying to get this case dismissed rather
than operate within the Judicial System. The Executive Branch
refuses to act within the bounds of the most respected
institutions of the US and is therefore our largest threat to the
National Security of the United States."
It's a discussion where some members of the older generation are telling you that you have been sold snake oil. We have lived with terrorists for the last 50 years - at the end of the day it's a relatively small problem compared with the big issues. You must learn to develop a sensitive rear end so that you know when something is being stuffed up it. OK, I mean something the size of an Nimitz class aircraft carrier, which is what you have failed so far to notice.
Bush is a friend and business associate of the Bin Liner family. Bin Liner n° 1, who apparently requires frequent kidney dialisis, has never been found. Iraq has never, ever had anything to do with Islamic terrorists. Is there any line of complete ********* you won't swallow? UFOs? Elvis? The tooth fairy?
The rest of us are desperate. We'd shoot you on sight. How can you be so completely stupid and still know how to breathe air.
Please, smoke dope, smoke crack, take LSD, anything that might open your mind... before the wicked witch of the north lets the monkeys loose... before the cylons take over the universe... before we all go mad and kill you!
No, Osama doesn't use the traceable satellite phone anymore.
Why?
Because some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decided to [broadcast/
write] that "The U.S. almost got him while he was using his
(traceable) satelllite phone."
* Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to
[broadcast/write] that the U.S. is monitoring calls [to/from]
known or suspected terrorists overseas with people in the U.S.
* Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to
[broadcast/write] how the U.S. govt. data mines the internet to
try to pick up search patterns that could lead to terrorist cells.
* Just like some stupid dumb a$$ reporter decides to
[broadcast/write] that they've just recieved copies of a
"confidencial/secret" report detailing how America's [milk/
water/food supply/nuclear power plants/etc.] might be
suseptable to terrorist attacks and "here's a detailed report on
how they can do it."
All of this under the "auspices" that the public had a right or
need to know.
And the fact that we may be clueing the terrorist in on the
methods in which we may catch them or even showing them the
methods of new attacks they could make on us?
The "media" claims they could have found all of this out through
other methods so them broadcasting it on primetime doesn't
make any difference.
But, since Bin Laden no longer uses his satellite phone - what do
you think?
And regarding the 1st as well as the 4th amendments and your
right to "Freely Speak" to a known or suspected terrorist over
seas without the govt. invading your "Right to Privacy"?
The next 3,000 people to die on a single day through a terrorist
attack will be laid right on your heads.
Lets hope the decision will be held up, too many treaties and commitments have been ignored and overturned by the Bush administration. Lets hope some sanity will return to the White House.
for yourself.
What she said is there is NO authority under the Constitution of
The United States of America for this illegal activity. Period.
Don't confuse the willingness of everyone to stop terrorists.
There is a very easy LEGAL way for the government to "listen in"
whenever they want, with very little in the way of justification....
but BushCo have violated this law.
Department's appeal reach the Supreme Court, today's decision
will probably be struck down. Bush has already stacked the deck
on the Court.
Another key point is that the domestic spying program
continues to operate today as it did before the ruling. Both sides
in the case agreed to hold the ruling in abeyance at least until
the Justice Department's appeal is heard.
But they all understand too that many consituents will just conflate
a call for legality with a call to stop preventing another 9/11.
We can thank Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Rove, and Snow (etc.) for
carefully creating that confusion.
You all claim that this judge is upholding the Constitution. But the ruling totally ignores the powers the Constitution grants the President as Commander in Chief, specifically the power to gather intelligence.
You also misrepresent the issue and taint the program as spying on everybody. It only comes into play when we capture a list of phone numbers from a terrorist and find numbers called in the US.
You are all the same people who blame the President for not connecting the dots after 9/11.
As reflected in earlier posts you think Bush was at fault because there was "Plenty of Data, Not enough logic" to predict the 9/11 attacks. Did all of this data suddenly appear after 1/20/2001, Bush's inauguration? Why didn't Clinton and the democrats act on this data prior to then?
I suggest you re-read the Constitution (if you've read it at all)and the Federalist Papers to get a better understanding of its meaning.
Do your OWN reading. Don't take the word of some Left Wing, moonbat, educator who tells you that the Constitution is a "living document", subject to the whims of society, 'cause it aint so.
Additionally, you should look up the definition of cowardice. People aren't cowards just because they allow the president and the military to do their jobs properly by letting them intercept enemy communications.
One last thing, next time you rant, thank a soldier. Because without him you wouldn't have that right. I've spent over 30 years protecting & guarding your rights and just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a coward.
P.S. I like Kool-aid. Especially the cherry flavor, with a little ice. Yum.
Oh, and unlike you, I have read the Constitution AND the Federalist Papers...
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.techknowcafe.com/content/view/627/43/" target="_newWindow">http://www.techknowcafe.com/content/view/627/43/</a>
they should try going after the terrorists. Oh wait, they can't do that because then they won't be able to further their anti-American agenda.
It can be effective and legal.
Well... and the second point is that the President is not above
the law. He willfully violated the constitution and FISA, and
without remorse.
What would a man with morals do?
He would acknowledge that violating the 4th Amendment is a
no-no and would immediately work with congress to arrange
oversight and allow a ruling of constitutionality. That's what a
person who swares to uphold the constitution should do.
It was not to evesdrop on terrorists, but to spy on foreign corporations to gain competitive intelligence and pass that to US companies.
Where was the outcry then?
Your try at some partisan cheap shot just backfired.
Better luck next time...
Oh, and if you didn't get it yet: 6 years into Bush's presidency you can't argue anymore with Clinton. What did Bush do in these 6 years?
This isn't "Domestic Spying".
The NSA isn't listening in on J. Kerry talking to H. Dean at the
DNC or Ms. Soccer Mom talking to Grandma or her hair dresser.
They're listening in on calls between known or suspected
terrorists, terrorist groups, or phone numbers connected to
such, outside the U.S., and someone in the U.S. either initiating
or recieving said call.
When those calls happen you don't just go:
"Hey Jim, check it out. I think that's Bin Laden. Whoa! Hang on.
He's talking to someone in the U.S.! Sue, cut the connection.
Mike, stop recording and erase that tape. Phil, I need you to
wake-up Judge So and So to get a warrant in case Osama calls
back to this number"
And as the paperwork is being processed and the ACLU lawyers
are scrambling to block said warrant, another possible 3,000
innocent victims could be on their to death instead of work.
Are we happy now?
Congress could surely make them easier to get if the
administration should interest in doing so, rather than being
unilateral in its actions.
How about sticking to the topic?
Read the US Constitution. But it seems you rather live in a totalitarian country. Go ahead, there are enough such countries in the world.
Your just assumming everything is ok. Hey.. don't look over there behind that screen.. nothing is happening.. look away. Open your eyes... and you might actually be able to see.
I think what you don't get it, the Government has been lying to "the people" for a very long time. And unfortunately you don't understand this, or are *to afraid* to believe it. Conquer your fears and react.