http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-_Hv91zk8cq14vnfVPYi9Zmj8x4rBN_H4?p=49
What are your thoughts on the subject?
On the analogy in the link above?
2006-08-19 05:02:16 · 8 answers · asked by Just Ask 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Breaking rules in English doesn't lead the path for the powers that be to put you in jail for dissent.
The analogy doesn't fit.
2006-08-19 05:13:27 · answer #1 · answered by DEP 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Breaking the law is not acceptable, especially for an elected official who has sworn an oath of office to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed.
Besides, the law in questions is black-letter. There are no real ambiguities, and the administration is not claiming any.
Read 50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. Warrantless wiretapping is illegal if anyone US citizen or resident alien is a party to the conversation.
Then read 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the **exclusive means** by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted".
Bush is claiming justification, based on the "war on terror" (which was never declared by Congress, who has sole authority to declare war). However, the law is very clear. FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance may be conducted".
The huge gaping flaw in Bush's argument is that it wasn't a choice between following the law and getting the job done. Everything Bush wanted to do could have been done under the existing laws. It just would have required a bit more paperwork. But everything done as part of the current surveillance program still could have been done legally.
Bush didn't break the law because he didn't have another choice. He broke the law because he could be bothered to follow it. And that's not a valid reason.
2006-08-19 05:10:01 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First off, if someone here is calling the over to Iran, Pakistan or some other country, and they are talking to known terrorists, then why not make it legal to listen in?? What have they got to hide??
International calls, yes, monitor them depending on the area they are going to or coming from. Had we had this capability in the late 30's, we would have had a surprise for the Jap's on Dec 7th, 1941. The whole fleet would have been sitting their waiting for them.
If we dont use the science at our disposal and try to head off another attack, then when one ocurs, more people will complain because we didnt do " something to stop them."
2006-08-19 05:10:41 · answer #3 · answered by bigmikejones 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they break the rules because they know that they can, and that they have enough people brainwashed that no one will do anything.
here's an interesting little tid-bit. look at the picture of the statue of george washington that's on the page of the yahoo blog, then look at this picture of Baphomet, the malevolent goat-headed diety. (put them side by side) http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1896/baphomet.gif
2006-08-19 05:13:15 · answer #4 · answered by list 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The ones that break the rules need to have their wires tapped.
I have no problem with that.
If we have done nothing wrong they would be wasting thier time.
what would they get us for,answering questions on Yahoo?
2006-08-19 05:28:04 · answer #5 · answered by mark h mickey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that if that is what the government has to do to keep us safe fine let them. I have nothing to hid, and they would probably find my life problems or conversations a bore.
2006-08-19 08:29:40 · answer #6 · answered by paige_98_69 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't listen to anybody's propaganda, but we are at war.
2006-08-19 05:38:36 · answer #7 · answered by lighthouse 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
www.ImpeachBush.org
Sums it up pretty well 4 me.
X
2006-08-19 05:08:53 · answer #8 · answered by citizen ex 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋