Thursday, May 11, 2006

This is Outrageous

OUTRAGEOUS. What the hell does this administration have to do before someone in our government or judiciary stands up for our constitutional rights?

5 Comments:

Blogger brian said...

From George Orwell's 1984
"There was no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to."

Once again he saw it coming

9:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It will take the American public actually giving a damn. Look at how France buckled regarding its employment practices when people hit the streets. That's what people need to do here. Make it known that elected officials who do not protect our rights will be out of a job. But the closest most Americans get to political activism is voting for their American Idol.

10:13 AM  
Anonymous Phil said...

I support the President's right for warrantless surveillance of alleged terrorist's phone calls but not this. The disinctions are obvious; in one case NSA profiles and selects calls to monitor based on evidence and reasonable suspicion. In the other case, there is no profiling or evidence whatsoever. The selction is completely baseless and thus violates the presumption of innocence.

10:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Phil,

How can you justify illegal warrantless wiretapping? If the president has an urgent need to eavesdrop, he can legally do so without a warrant...so long as he provides sufficient evidence to the FISA court within 72 hours after the wiretap (a request which has been granted every single time since 1978). But Bush even bypasses that and refuses to ask Congress to change the law if he feels it is too constrictive. What he is doing is illegal and impeachable.

5:47 AM  
Anonymous Phil said...

Congress was notified after 9-11 about the wiretapping and said and did nothing. The democrats vociferously complained more recently about it but when push came to shove and Bush and Frist pushed for a vote only Russ Feingold backed it. Why? Because the legal issues here are murky (you calling the program illegal is very unfair as legal scholars still debate this) and, more importantly, the American public supports this measure. (Zogby had it, at I believe a difference of 7% in January).
I suppose NSA bypasses the courts because of the time-sensitive and vital nature of the work being done.

9:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home