Posted on 08/18/2006 4:53:19 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
August 18, 2006 - 07:42
If not quite from the grave, the decision by one of Jimmy Carter's judicial appointees, striking down the NSA terrorist surveillance program, was an unwelcome blast from past. Call it Carter's Revenge. Malaise Redux. The spirit of Desert One lives.
That this was a political decision more than a legal one is evidenced by the intemperate language of the decision itself: "“There are no hereditary kings in America," harumphed Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the United States District Court in Detroit, in a case filed by the ACLU.
Naturally, the NY Times wildly applauded the decision, calling it "good news," lauding the opinion as "careful" and "thoroughly grounded." Engaging in some intemperate language of its own, the Times claims that Judge Taylor "has reasserted the rule of law over a lawless administration."
We can be thankful that this decision wasn't in effect over the last several months, else we might not be talking about a 'foiled' Islamist plot to blow up multiple airliners over the Atlantic.
>> I have seen almost nothing ab our role in this. Can anybody point me to an article?
Time is one of the better sources on this, though the Journal has also covered it.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1225453,00.html
That would make a great tagline! This is not a victory for constitutional rights, it is a victory for CAIR, the ALCU, the Peanut Gallery and all those who would save the constitution by destroying it.
Thanks! Sometimes I get lucky.
Without the all knowing 'Karnack' (CIA/NSA), the rest of the world are potted plants....right?
Life isn't a 90 western where the good guys always win.
Even if the CIA and NSA shared their technology with the British, I don't think the judge's ruling would have compromised it.
That was my only point.
>>an allegiance to and fawning for democrat party interests first.
>>You couldn't be more wrong. The last thing the DNC wants is to put the issue of terrorist surveillance at the top of the political agenda right now. Majorities of 52-70% (depending on the question) think the government should EXTEND its current surveillance. Karl Rove must love this woman.
I don't take condescension very well. If you can expound on the topic, please do...otherwise well...GTH!
Malaise Redux
Perhaps we need a proper discriptor for Benedict Carter.
We need a poll: "Do you respect Jimmy Carter?" Yes/No.
>>Without the all knowing 'Karnack' (CIA/NSA), the rest of the world are potted plants....right?
Thanks for introducing me to your friend the strawman. I hear he hasn't got a brain, so, no doubt his contributions to this conversation will be limited.
>>Life isn't a 90 western where the good guys always win.
I know. If you want to win, you have to work at it.
>>Even if the CIA and NSA shared their technology with the British, I don't think the judge's ruling would have compromised it.
They didn't share their technology, they shared their intelligence. So failing to gather the intelligence in the first place, self-evidently, WOULD have compromised the operation.
Of course, the intelligence came from several sources, so it is entirely possible that even without this part of the picture the plot would still have been foiled. Since we don't know the full extent of the intelligence, or how it was gathered, we have no idea one way or the other.
One thing we DO know, though. Taking one valuable source out of the equation can't possibly help. It can only hinder.
Well goodgollie, geewhiz and Shazaam! That's exactly what I'm trying to do, dumb@ss.
Thanks.
I believe this is an intentional hinder. The left is engaged in a turf war.
The left wants all "conflict" to be judicial. If Ronald Reagan had left it to the state department, we would STILL be in the cold war.
Remember Carter is the traitor who pushed the Salt II treaty to neuter the USA. (despite the fact the soviets violated all treaties)
Police action vs war.
I wonder what the reaction will be if the decision is overturned, as most legal experts believe it will.
What good would it do? QLANGLEY and others have already explained it to you, but you'd rather press on with your so-called point. Believe what you like. We know what we know.
1979 + 19 = 1998
Wonder who was Co-President then?
p.s. She also went to Yale Law School.
>>I believe this is an intentional hinder. The left is engaged in a turf war.
Oh yes. But it cannot possibly stand. The Supreme Court ruled on this in 1972. All three branches of government are clear that international intelligence gathering is the prerogative of the Commander in Chief.
Great issue to be debating between now and November, though. I really thought that after 1980 Carter would never lose another election. Looks like I could have been wrong.
"Of course, the intelligence came from several sources, so it is entirely possible that even without this part of the picture the plot would still have been foiled. Since we don't know the full extent of the intelligence, or how it was gathered, we have no idea one way or the other.
See? Now that wasn't hard, was it??
Born in 1932 in Washington, D.C.
I suppose that The New York Times didn't notice that "Judge" Taylor is 74 years old, and that society carefully removes most 74-year-olds from important positions in order to minimize the damage they can inadvertently cause.
Except the federal bench, of course - where drooling, senile old fossils are CELEBRATED for their "insightful" decisions...
I think M-15 is allowed to do some of the surveillence that the ACLU, excuse me, the Constitution forbids. Like roving wire taps for example. They were able to fill the gaps that probably would have gotten convictions thrown out in US Courts.
YAWN!
Read my tagline.
Great news! The New York Times is on a mission to chase off readers and to become completely irrelevant. Guess they want to see how low their stock can go.
They are truly the elitist of the elite and watching their downfall is truly delightful.
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.