Replies

First off, thank you for your reasoned reply. Very refreshing. However, as a reasonable individual, you must admit that this is a misdirection:

"The same people who keep yelling about 'inherent Article II powers' about this case are the same ones who yelled it for Hamdan and other cases."

No, this is not. That is so because this is about warfare, and not the Constitution, or Bill of Rights for US citizens. If one of our country's enemies, or their support organizations/nations calls into the United States -- how can you reasonably say that our enemy's conversation is sacronsanct and protected by the Constitution or Bill of Rights?

If you care to, please respond with a good reason to make this our national policy -- protection for the coversation's of our enemies -- our standard of treatment for those who wish our destruction.

Thanks.

"While I respect people who honestly think that FISA is an unconstitutional encroachment on Article II powers, I think the matter needs to be dealt with. The current administration (as prior ones did, yes) has made all sorts of claims about Presidential powers, quite a few of which didn't survive a trip to the US Supreme Court."

Listen, maybe you can see some "reason." This post I am making now is being broadcast to the internet over my phone line, wireless, and according to your logic, my conversation is private and cannot be intercepted by . . . say, Canada or Mexico, because of my US Constitutional protections. . .

What expectation of privacy do you have in receiving it? Is Canada forbidden to read this -- or any reply you may make; however "public" your method of communicating with the internet happens to be? The whole idea that yours or my conversation is "private" when broadcast, is ludicrous. It is the same as saying, Canada can read my mail all they want, but my own country can't. . .

Okay, okay, we have protection for cellular/broadcast calls if the intent is to have them private, here in the US and because it limits the danger of government using that against us in a criminal action; which Canada would be unlikely to do, unless caught there. However, that putative/supposed privacy is a fiction the emperor's fine clothing if there actually is criminal plotting or during a time of war when subversion, sedition, sabotage and terrorism are being planned.

I tried to give an example from outside the box in having the interception, analysis and reporting done from Iraq by military intelligence. I tried to show that when our enemy calls into the United States, they can be overheard, both sides, citizen or not, recorded, analyzed and reported back to the United States through NSA and other intelligence channels.

Neither you, this judge, or the puling partisans attempting to gain politically (war profiteers of politics) by defaming this action and completely and totally lying to the public about it can stop this during warfare.

Indeed, as this professor and others are coming to realize -- doing so is treasonous, subversive, seditition, anti-patriotic and self-destructive!

. . . and neither is it "criminal" for the government to ask for semi-public information from phone companies about the numbers they already have of our enemy calling into the United States . . . it was done to help protect means-and-methods, but some companies hate America and are actually owned/controlled by inimical interests . . . which the Leftist/Democrats assisted in their desire to marginalize or destroy America economically or totally . . .

The Leftist/Democrats can drop that hot potato, too. . . and Plame/CIA treason . . . and etc. . .

"A lot of people have a problem with the President deciding which laws to enforce and which to ignore. . ."

Ironically, the president doesn't have a choice. That's right, the action of listening to our enemies is automatic. If they try to call from outside the country, in whatever electronic way, they will be actively listened to, or that attempt made. Bush can't do a thing to stop that, and as I said, neither can anyone else; individual or group.

Unless you want to completely delete one of the major intelligence gathering processes our country has . . . I can't believe you'd want that!? Unless you aren't an American, or want the US destroyed, ultimately.

Is that your intent? Indeed, I can't imagine what kind of political idiocy it is to even begin attempting to use this to gain political advantage -- to destroy the NSA and their ability to collect information about our very, very deadly enemy.

In my opinion gross political negligence, but what do you expect from a leadership that nominates a traitor to be president, eh? Or the slavish partisans that vote for it.