Posted on 01/19/2006 5:39:46 AM PST by conservativecorner
DEMOCRATS who criticize President Bush for using warrantless wiretaps to elicit information about potential terrorist activity should be aware that the American people strongly support his decision to do so. Believe it or not, they trust their own government and the president they elected to use the information wisely and for our own protection. The Fox News poll of Jan. 11 asked voters whether the president "should have the power to authorize the National Security Agency to monitor electronic communications of suspected terrorists without getting warrants, even if one end of the communication is in the United States?" By 58 percent to 36 percent, the answer was "yes." Indeed, 42 percent of the nation's Democrats agreed that the president should have this power.
The poll also tells us that Americans attribute the absence of terrorist attacks over the past 41/2 years to our government's efforts to protect us. Asked if the fact that there has been no major terror attack since 9/11 was due to "security measures working" or to "no attack having been planned" by terrorists, Americans credited government efforts by 46 percent (to 22 percent for the terrorists, with another 20 percent saying both factors contributed).
Other results: Some 61 percent — including a majority of the Democrats — said they'd be willing to surrender some of their own privacy to help prevent terror attacks. Respondents support renewal of the Patriot Act by 57 percent to 31 percent. (Even Democrats only oppose renewal by 40-47.)
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I'd say Clinton should be in jail because he did just that during his presidency. Bush on the other hand has not tapped into converstions of people who are not suspected terrorists. We all know that wire tapping people who are US citizens with out a warrent is illegal, for that very reason Clinton and a lot of his cronys should be in jail right now.
Why are you going on about what Dims did in the 90s? Do you think that 'the Dims did it' makes anything okay?
You know this how?
This is not about what the Dems did in the 90s. This is about what the Dems did over the last year, working overtime to redact key sections of the Barrett Report that details abuses of the IRS by the Clinton Admin.
Do you think that 'the Dims did it' makes anything okay?
Uh, no. I was pointing out how the Dems don't have a leg to stand on here.
You mean like Aldrich Ames? And he wasn't just wiretapped. Did you have a problem with that?
If any of our congress people are receiving calls from outside the country, the I hope THEY are getting WIRETAPPED too! They certainly have exhibited enough traitor-like actions (ie: Rockefeller, Durbin, Bagdad Jim from WA, etc)
Define "unreasonable".
how about "data mining from millions of phone calls, e-mails, and online correspondence"
Whether or not this program is okay is not dependent on anything Dims did - yesterday, in the 90s, or otherwise.
Then why didn't you object when Toon was doing it?
As soon as you come with proof that any surveillance of Ames was outside the framework of then-existing FISA law, I'll tell you whether I think it was okay. The Clinton EO relating to Ames relating to physical surveillance, which wasn't included in FISA at the time. If you are claiming there were other-than-FISA wiretaps on Ames, show me.
It wasn't just outside, lug. They tossed his house. That's a warrantless search of his premises, not just wiretapping.
B) Object to what? NSA telephone monitoring of US citizens without a warrant? Show me where and when that happened.
The debate over warrantless searches came up after the case of CIA spy Aldrich Ames. Authorities had searched Ames's house without a warrant, and the Justice Department feared that Ames's lawyers would challenge the search in court. Meanwhile, Congress began discussing a measure under which the authorization for break-ins would be handled like the authorization for wiretaps, that is, by the FISA court. In her testimony, Gorelick signaled that the administration would go along a congressional decision to place such searches under the court — if, as she testified, it "does not restrict the president's ability to collect foreign intelligence necessary for the national security." In the end, Congress placed the searches under the FISA court, but the Clinton administration did not back down from its contention that the president had the authority to act when necessary
Read #33 and get back to me.
"22 percent for the terrorists
"How lovely"
yeah, when all you need are 19 individuals to wreak plenty of havoc
bttt
As I said - physical searches weren't covered by FISA at the time. Wiretaps were. If you are claiming they wiretapped without going through FISA, show me.
As I said - physical searches weren't covered by FISA at the time. Wiretaps were. If you are claiming they wiretapped without going through FISA, show me.
Okay - I'm back to you. You got something showing eavesdropping outside the FISA framework, or you gonna keep up with the misdirection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.