Army troops from Fort Riley, Kan. listen to President Bush speak about terrorism during his visit to Kansas State University on Monday, Jan. 23, 2006 in Manhattan, Kan. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Posted on 01/23/2006 12:04:23 PM PST by The_Victor
MANHATTAN, Kan. - President Bush on Monday rejected critics' assertion that he broke the law by authorizing domestic eavesdropping without a warrant, saying he was doing what Congress authorized him to do to protect Americans from terrorist attacks.
With congressional hearings set to begin on this issue Feb. 6, Bush kicked his administration's new intensive public relations effort to win support for the program run by the National Security Agency. As part of that, he gave it a new label — the Terrorist Surveillance Program.
Bush noted that hearings will open in Congress soon, and Sen. Pat Roberts (news, bio, voting record), R-Kan., who accompanied the president here, was among the lawmakers on Capitol Hill who were given regular updates about the surveillance by the White House. Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, will preside over the hearings.
"It's amazing that people say to me, `Well, he's just breaking the law," the president said, with Roberts sitting behind him on stage at Kansas State University. "If I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress?"
Bush said the spying program was targeted at communications between people in the United States and al Qaida associates overseas. He said he made sure he was acting within the law before authorizing the program after his aides suggested it.
"I'm mindful of your civil liberties and so I had all kinds of lawyers review the process," Bush told some 9,000 students, soldiers and dignitaries in the audience.
Critics have said the president broke the law by authorizing the eavesdropping without a judge's approval and by failing to fully consult with Congress. The White House told congressional leadership about the program, but not all members of the intelligence committees.
Bush said a congressional resolution passed after Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism, also allowed him to order the top-secret program. That operation was disclosed last month by The New York Times.
"Congress gave me the authority to use necessary force to protect the American people, but it didn't prescribe the tactics," Bush said, adding that the government needs to know why people linked to al Qaida are calling into the U.S. "One of the ways to protect the American people is to understand the intentions of the enemy."
A majority of Americans — 56 percent — said the Bush administration should be required to get a warrant before monitoring electronic communications between American citizens and suspected terrorists, according to an AP-Ipsos poll earlier this month.
When people have been asked in other polls to balance their worries about terrorist threats against their worries about intrusions on privacy, fighting terror is the higher priority.
Bush's appearance was the fourth in the last six weeks in which he's taken questions from the audience. But Kansas State offered the largest audience yet, with a coliseum full of roughly 9,000 people who got tickets distributed by the university. Six thousand were students, 800 were soldiers from nearby Fort Riley who just returned from Iraq, officials said.
The White House says none of the questions was prescreened. The site chosen for Monday's event, however, was in friendly Bush territory in the reliably "red" state of Kansas.
Bush received a hero's welcome, with long standing ovations and loud applause as he defended his most controversial positions. There was a noisy crowd of a couple hundred sign-waving anti-war protesters outside the arena where Bush appeared. "Wage war, not peace!" they chanted to a drumbeat.
While the president was in Kansas, anti-abortion activists were gathering in Washington and elsewhere to protest the 33rd anniversary of the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. As he has in past years, Bush called in his support rather than attend in person.
___
Go W! I'm glad to see the White House acting quickly for once to neutralize the Democrat attacks.
We really need a DNC Pickler alert for this scum. Wonder what this waste of Human DNA tie to the DNC is? In any other industry the level of conflict of intrest between the DNC and the Junk Journalists of Asso Press would be ground for criminal inditement of the owners of the business.
Way to look around for a poll that supports the Leftists. Every other one says the American people want the terrorists monitored, period. Then spend most of the article on one topic that nobody even cared to ask question about. Nedra, you need some fresh batteries.
Nedra Pickler??
We have no choice but to increase surveillance, increase intrusion into privacy, and limit the freedoms terrorist will use against us.
imo
"There was a noisy crowd of a couple hundred sign-waving anti-war protesters outside the arena where Bush appeared. "Wage war, not peace!" they chanted to a drumbeat."
Huh?
Another editor asleep at the wheel.
Good grief...what Yahoo wrote that...WERE, NOT WAS!
The site chosen for Monday's event, however, was in friendly Bush territory in the reliably "red" state of Kansas.
No bias there, LOL!
"Wage war, not peace!"
Too funny...
Is it antibiotic resistant.
I always took this to mean the American public is ignorant of exactly what the NSA is doing: I. E. electronically monitoring random telephone calls of known or suspected AQ members for 'buzz words', then selecting those calls that contain them for further surveillance. When a given call becomes of interest, then it may be monitored or recorded for future reference. This may not include a warrant due to the immediacy of the situation. Monitoring of further conversations would be done through warrants.
At least this is how I understand the issue and I see nothing wrong with it. What I doubt is the public's understanding of the distinctions involved between initial electronic monitoring vs. later specific monitoring. I think the public would be much more in favor of the program if they understood it. And the MSM sure isn't going to help educate them.
"Wage war, not peace!" they chanted to a drumbeat."
We are, and still they are not happy. They should be chanting, lose war, lose war, surrender, surrender. An editorial fubar that doesn't change much. How does one wage peace? I know about a wage for piece, maybe they mean wagging the piece?
Army troops from Fort Riley, Kan. listen to President Bush speak about terrorism during his visit to Kansas State University on Monday, Jan. 23, 2006 in Manhattan, Kan. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
The AP polls had 52% democrats, 40 Republicans and probably the majority of the 8% independents are democrats leaning ones. All other polls like Foxnews, Rasmussen, and ABC/Washington Post show that majority support eavesdropping on terrorist suspects in the US without any warrant.
A resolution has the weight of law??? A resolution trumps the Constitution???
"Congress gave me the authority to use necessary force to protect the American people, but it didn't prescribe the tactics," Bush said, adding that the government needs to know why people linked to al Qaida are calling into the U.S. "One of the ways to protect the American people is to understand the intentions of the enemy."
Now that's quite a stretch, isn't it??? Using force to protect Americans turns into spying on Americans...I got a feeling that's not what this resolution was intended to do...With that logic, George can bust into any house in the US to search for, whatever, without cause...
If you are acting as a foreign agent, the president can do just that. Ask Aldrich Ames.
Thanks for the report!
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.