Bush won't reauthorize eavesdropping program

BREITBART.COM ^

[street_lawyer]

My point is not that you are ever going to find out, my point was more to the effect that it appears that it will be a secret panel of "judges". Maybe I misunderstood, but if that is the case, perhaps you might consider the possibility that you will never be truly informed about the entire process.

Let me put it this way. NO matter what the case is, don't you see that we are merely substituting the authority of unelected officials, for the judgment of elected officials.

When congress passes a law, and the president executes it, please tell me who you would want to oversee a constitutionally appointed authority?

[street_lawyer]

I did not miss your post about the kneejerkers. The point is well taken as it may apply to a few; however, I was referring to those of you who have a brain. Those of you who are able to understand that a constitutionally appointed body like Congress and the Executive should not be "overseen" by a secret panel of unelected officials. No matter how qualified you might expect this body to be, they are going to determine the constitutional rights of enemy combatants. I for one do not see how that arraignment is constitutional, or desirable.

Now post your picture of the knee-jerk.