Posted on 02/03/2006 5:13:43 PM PST by new yorker 77
I was recently apprised of your assessment of the President’s terrorist surveillance program – an “early warning” capability to intercept the international communications of al Qaeda terrorists to and from persons within the United States. With respect to this important program, you stated, “President Bush’s secret program to spy on the American people reminds Americans of the abuse of power during the dark days of President Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew.” As Chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, I find your statements to be irrational and irresponsible.
Any suggestion that a program designed to track the movement, locations, plans, or intentions of our enemy – particularly those that have infiltrated our borders – is equivalent to abusive domestic surveillance of the past is ludicrous. When Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson approved the electronic surveillance of Martin Luther King, those Presidents were targeting American citizens based on activities protected by the First Amendment. When President Richard Nixon used warrantless wiretaps, they were not directed at enemies that had attacked the United States and killed thousands of Americans.
I believe Americans understand that the careful and targeted program authorized by President Bush has no relation to the abuses of the past. Indeed, its closest antecedent is the direction of President Franklin D. Roosevelt to Attorney General Robert H. Jackson on the eve of World War II. With war looming and reports of lurking enemy saboteurs, President Roosevelt ordered the use of domestic electronic surveillance to target “persons suspected of subversive activities.” As President Roosevelt noted, “It is too late to do anything about it after sabotage, assassinations and ‘fifth column’ activities are completed.” Significantly, President Roosevelt’s direction was issued despite a statute (Section 605 of the Communications Act of 1934) and Supreme Court precedent (United States v. Nardone, 302 U.S. 379 (1937)) that prohibited such wiretapping.
When President Bush exercised his constitutional authority and responsibility as Commander-in-Chief to target international communications between potential terrorists within this country and al Qaeda members overseas, he recognized, just like President Roosevelt, that after a terrorist attack occurs “[i]t is too late.” Our nation had been attacked on September 11, 2001, by foreign enemies. We were, and are still, at war with an enemy that Congress identified in an Authorization for Use of Military Force (Pub. L. No. 107-40 (Sept. 18, 2001)). Much of the war against al Qaeda is being fought overseas – Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq. But the war against terrorism is not confined to foreign lands. The war against terrorism is being fought every day in our own backyard. America is a battlefield.
In peacetime and especially when our nation is at war, our leaders, including the chairmen of our political parties, should be more careful and better informed before they criticize the intelligence programs that protect our nation. Vibrant debate is important in our free society, but that debate should be serious and rational, especially where national security is concerned. Too many are looking at national security issues through partisan lenses. I have seen it on the Intelligence Committee for the past three years. Our nation, and the men and women of the military, law enforcement, and the intelligence community, deserve better.
Senator Roberts is a serious man. If you saw the Intelligence Committee hearings on Thursday, I sense that he is getting a bit fed up with the antics going on. I certainly hope that is the case.
Make that four jackasses very much in evidence on that committee.
Sounds like the good Senator is becoming NON collegial. Finally.
Past due smackdown of one of the sorriest specimens of corrupt, unprincipled, lying, traitorous bum to hold public office.
Better put some ice on that Howie...
So, what you are saying is that he is completely unlike the Democrats...
Expound on your statement, bug man.
Never forget that their whole line has been to put up a straw man and then link the straw man to who they attack. The real facts do not matter. This is a school boys debate.
I read the FISA statute myself and, while I'm no attorney, I can read. I believe the President has full authority to order this surveillance and and very glad that he has pledged to continue it.
In a word, yes. If you watched those hearings, which were supposed to be about threats to the security of the US, all the dems were doing was accusing the President the Vice President of wrongdoing so you had to conclude that, in their view, al Qaeda, no problem, President Bush, big threat. Oh, and they were very upset that they are not being told everything that is going on. Bless us all, I hope that continues.
I was hoping that Senator Roberts had it in him and would finally speak out. He is an honorable person but he is dealing with slime with Dean and the DemocRATs!
Now, THAT is too cute to be How-wierd!
Rational? From this man? 
Roger Kahn in the Codebreakers also noted that Communications Act sec (605) also expressly forbade the activities which resulted in both the Magic intercepts of Japanese diplomatic traffic and the Venona intercepts of Soviet NKVD/KGB communications with agents in the US.I suppose the ACLU would demand the arrest of those involved in breaking and intercepting Japanese traffic prior to 7 December.
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.