Posted on 07/30/2007 1:27:44 PM PDT by RWR8189
Last Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing--at which Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was insulted by senators and ridiculed by spectators--was Washington political theater at its lowest. But some significant information did manage to get through the senatorial venom directed at Mr. Gonzales. It now appears certain that the terrorist surveillance program (TSP) authorized by President Bush after 9/11 was even broader than the TSP that the New York Times first revealed in December 2005.
It is also clear that Mr. Gonzales, along with former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, tried to preserve that original program with the knowledge and approval of both Republican and Democratic members of key congressional committees. Unfortunately, they failed and the program was narrowed. Today, the continuing viability of even the slimmed-down TSP--an indispensable weapon in the war on terror--remains in serious doubt.
The administration's most immediate concern since 9/11 has understandably been whether al Qaeda sleeper agents, already inside the U.S., would carry out additional catastrophic strikes. To counter this real and continuing threat, President Bush authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to intercept a full range of al Qaeda communications, presumably on a global basis.
The TSP was not implemented pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which permits a special federal court to issue surveillance orders when Americans and others are targeted for intelligence gathering inside the U.S. Rather than utilizing FISA's cumbersome and restrictive procedures, the administration relied on the president's inherent constitutional authority as commander in chief to monitor enemy communications in wartime, as presidents have done since Lincoln's day.
In addition, the administration correctly relied on Congress's Sept. 18, 2001, authorization for the use of military force against al Qaeda. In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled that this statute authorized the president to employ all the "fundamental incident\[s\]
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
The problem is not that they're monitoring enemy communications, but that they claim the right to monitor citizens' communications.
Leave it to the next Dem president to define the word "enemy", and see what happens. We dare not give W any powers that we would not also give President Hillary/Obama/other-nightmare.
What we must make sure that NO demoncrat gets elected President and that they loose Congress by enough cut and run cowards that we can fight this war the way it’s supposed to be fought.
Given the endless nature of this fight, what matters is not just the next election.
Unless we stop having elections, there will be a Democrat president before we have eliminated all terrorism.
And surely the enemy is kind enough to differentiate himself from the rest of the citizenry he is hiding amongst...
thanks, bfl
So we should all willingly surrender our Constitutional rights until terrorism as a tactic has been eradicated from the globe, right?
Sorry, but Benjamin Franklin knew what he was talking about. Sad to see that so many have forgotten....
Slight correction. They claim the right to monitor citizens' communications with known terrorist connections."
And so long as that remains the case, they can continue to get warrants for the wiretaps. No problem.
As long as Alberto Gonzales is in charge of the Justice Department, we must watch them like hawks.
But I have no problem with them monitoring you if they apprehend a terrorist and that terrorist has your cell phone number in his cell phone.
That would be enough to get a warrant.
I believe we are in agreement.
If the calls are international, either originating here or coming here, yes.
WHICH RIGHT HAVE YOU SURRENDERED?
Me? None. I won’t surrender any rights without a fight.
They Federal Government will chip away at the right to privacy we all have, if we let it. I support the reasons behind it, but that doesn’t mean we ought give the Fed unlimited and unchecked power.
Will you not mind if the next Administration continues to maintain and build a massive database of private citizens’ phone calls within the United States, citizens without suspected terrorist ties? Will you trust them to only use this database to investigate terrorists?
What if that next President was a Dim?
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.