Isn't that kinda like passing a law making it legal to breath?
Bush, Cheney Defend Iraq War, Spying
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney tried a one-two punch Wednesday in defense of the Iraq war, a domestic spying program and the terrorism-fighting Patriot Act they want Congress to renew
...
Cheney, speaking at a conservative think tank in Washington, defended the domestic spying program, which he says does not violate Americans' civil liberties.
A presidential order, which is the subject of upcoming congressional hearings, gave the National Security Agency permission to eavesdrop without a warrant on communications between suspected terrorists overseas and people inside the United States.
...
Parts of the Patriot Act are set to expire on Feb. 3. Whether to renew them will dominate debate on Capitol Hill this month.
"We look forward to a renewal of the Patriot Act in 2006 because that law has done exactly what it was intended to do, and this country cannot afford to be without its protections," Cheney said.
4 comments:
I freely admit I may be misuderestimating what is going on here, but isn't the patriot act concerning domestic activities?
the wiretap mess, well he does have the ability to monitor the terrorists that are overseas I believe, I'm somewhat curious about the requirement to turn of the tap simply because the other end is domestic. I don't think there is enough information about what went on to have a valid opinion. I'll point out that what we know was leaked criminally (unless the rules covering classified information are drastically different then what my clearance entailed) most likely by someone who had an agenda. An adequate defense can not be made publicly because it would require another criminal leak of classified information. It may very well be the entire program is illegal, but at this moment in time I only know of one certain crime.
There is no acceptable way to leak classified information.
Yes, Tommy, I was just kidding (sort of). The Patriot act and FISA are two completely different things.
He is allowed to monitor foreign terrorists. I don't argue that he doesn't. But FISA and the bill of rights still block him from domestic interception without a warrant regardless of there the communication is going.
My point was that if Bush, as he claims he does, has unlimited authority to "protect" us, he doesn't need the patriot act or any other act.
I think it is pretty much apparent that there were two crimes here. One was the program itself, and the other is the leaking of the program.
one definite crime, one that at least for me is a wait and see, simply because of the classified information aspect of it. As a result, we are in a situation where the prosecution has been allowed to talk, and the defense is required to remain silent.
I find it ironic that people are so willing to judge with only one side of the information, when all we know about that is that laws were broken to bring it forth. I think that's part of why it's getting so much mileage too, because they know any defense would require leaking classified information, so either he breaks the law to defend himself, or he lets them attack him unopposed.
I think it is pretty clear that Bush did break the law with the NSA. If the FISA court had no idea it was going on and it entailed warrantless searches, then there is little doubt that it was done illegally. I can't think of what kind of defense to it that could exist that would be classified. It is not like the laws regarding this kind of stuff are classified, just the methods used.
I think Bush has pretty much already laid out his defense.
Post a Comment