Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: conserv13

"When we broke the Jap code and used it to win the Battle of Midway, we didnt get a warrant for spying. Was that wrong???"

"Of course not. Were Japanese agents calling spies in the USA? Probably, and I'm sure we intercepted some of them."

And it would be strange indeed if the US army had to get court orders on any transmissions on US soil to Japanese contacts.

This is the issue. The Dems see this as a 'law enforcement' issue, and many of us see this is a wartime powers issue.
The President is well within rights to do this under the latter powers, and this is clearly not purely 'law enforcement' since what we are doing is preventing the next crime, not solving the last one.


"Please also remember that we put Japanese nationals in detention camps, legally."

It wasnt right then and wouldnt be legal now, USSC Korematsu decision was wrong.

"Why haven't we done that to Muslims here today? Do you think that would be legal now??"

No. Do you?

That's a bit of a red herring to bring up vis a vis a very limited, focussed, justified, not-very-instrusive program that is picking up information from those who talk to suspected terrorists.


Gore called the NSA program a 'massive domestic wiretap program'. Well, it's not massive, it's not domestic, and it's not really wiretapping. but other than that, he has it pegged.



101 posted on 02/08/2006 12:02:12 PM PST by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies ]


To: WOSG
I agree with you on almost everything. I like the terrorist surveillance program, I just want to make sure it is done legally, both for my sake and for Bush's.
102 posted on 02/08/2006 12:13:57 PM PST by conserv13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

To: WOSG
This is the issue. The Dems see this as a 'law enforcement' issue, and many of us see this is a wartime powers issue.

I agree. But I'm having a hard time grasping the follow-through, the "action" that is taken to stop attacks. Will the military come on the scene with the information gathered? Will the suspects be ushered off to military brigs and subjected to military trials? Or will even those formalities be dispensed with?

If there is arrest, detention and trial other than military, i.e., ending up in court, then one bumps into evidentiary issues and the 4th amendment.

I can imagine the same sort of jumbled up situation with regard to surveillance that we now have with detention, Hamdi, Hamdan, Padilla, Rasul, etc.

Or is it better that Congress and the Courts forgo interaction with the President on this? Why bother with laws and judges, eh?

104 posted on 02/08/2006 2:40:39 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson