Joe, commented that "Clearly the FISA law that requires warrants for domestic surveillance is outdated and may as well be repealed."
I would have to say that I disagree. The law is still THE LAW. And the law must be followed. If you want to or not, something that is CLEARLY STATED which says that you need a warrant has NEVER been clearly canceled in any law. Thus we must default to the actual law, which currently requires a warrant.
We must not kid ourselves that because of the constitution, Bush can tap a phone without a warrant. There is NO place in the constitution which gives the President unchecked power, even during wartime. Yes, the President does have some very limited power expansions during war but that does not ever constitute that he may have a full range of unchecked power.
We must protect our civil liberties and protect our privacy. Once we give up our rights to privacy, we move one more step closer to 1984.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Thank you for reading and responding. I notice a common theme in your post:
We must default to the actual law . . .
We must not kid ourselves . . .
We must protect our civil liberties . . .
We must protect our privacy . . .
The question I keep scratching my head about is — How?
You will note in my original response I said that the only way the Congress (representing the people) could legally stop the electronic surveillance would be to cut off the funding for it. The purse is the Constitutional mechanism the Congress possesses to thwart rogue Presidents. Thus, cutting the funding for the NSA is the how for me. But Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are too lily-livered to introduce a bill to remove funding for the NSA's wiretapping.
I would like to continue this conversation, but I ask you to provide a few hows of your own. If a Democratic Senator or Congressperson were to introduce a bill to deny funding for electronic surveillance, there would be political consequences to pay (Limbaugh and others would have a field day!). If a bill of impeachment were to be introduced - things would be tied up for months as Bush's term of office ticked away. It's a tough question. What are your answers?
Post a Comment