Do you think th NSA's domesic spying program being judged as unconsitutional is justified?

Question

If not, do you think Bush was correct in implying that many of the American people are naive by stating, "Those who herald this decision simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."

Answer 1

It's black letter law. There's no ambiguity.

Read 50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. (FISA) Warrantless wiretapping is illegal if anyone US citizen or resident alien is a party to the conversation.

Read 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted".

Read the court opinion. Bush admitted to violating FISA. He just said that the interests of national security allows him to break the law, and argued that national security prevents the courts from even reviewing his actions.

Look at the quote. He's saying "Those who approve this decision are stupid for demanding that I be required to follow the law." He's flat out saying that he should be above the law. NO!

There is no justification for doing illegally what can just as easily be done according to existing laws. Everything Bush wanted to do in his surveillance program was allowable under FISA. All he had to do is fill out a little bit more paperwork. He didn't even try to follow the rules.

People don't seem to get this simple fact. Bush didn't choose between breaking the rules and getting the job done. The job could have been done within the rules. Bush just couldn't be bothered.

And that's not a valid reason to break the law.

Answer 2

No. The judge rendering that decision was wrong because the program does not spy by any means other than eavesdropping on those numbers which have been associated with possible links to Al-Quaeda and other known terrorist groups with overseas connections. There is no attempt to actively listen-in on domestic in-country calls here between citizens, unless a warrant is issued for express purposes of a specific nature

Answer 3

The judge that ruled on this is a very well known liberal, the case should have been dismissed on merit alone, The parties sueing do not have standing to even sue.

But beyond that it will be upheld at the next level.

And yes most people don't want to admit the type and danger of the world we live in.

Answer 4

Yes. Damn straight it's unconstitutional and unjustified! It's one giant fishing expedition designed to take away what what few Constitutional rights we have left.
I know what I'm talking about. As the wife of someone who used to work in an extremely sensitive area in another country, I have grown to accept the intrusion into our own privacy as a legitimate component of our national security. So I'm not even talking about my own personal situation. I am not questioning the interception of any international calls and analysis of their patterns. I'm talking about having a look into normal people's medical records, library activities and credit card info. I am talking about all kinds of activities, we are not even aware of.
It's entirely laughable that Bush is trying to put himself forth as someone who has any inkling about "the nature of the word we live in." - especially after the WMD lying and a whole host of other botched attempts at foreign policy. He is my 8th cousin, and he is the worst president we ever had. I haven't met a single cousin from that group who is proud to be related (even remotely) to him.

Answer 5

Sorry not believing this fear world we live in answer, this fear is destructive and is no way for the American people to live, I think changing or giving up freedoms for these terrorist bastards is what they want, to change our ways. I don`t blame you, when a president comes on T.V. and tell the American people to 'Be Afraid" and "We are no longer safe" when they should comfort the people and insure them that we will revenge.

Answer 6

It depends on what they were using it for. I do know the NSA has a colorful history. With them being so secretive its hard to say what will come of this. I just know that if they were spying on me they couldve at least given me a call when I was dating that using ***** that was working at my job. They couldve been all "Hey buddy, we know whats goin on and we just want you to know you were right in cutting her off". I mean sometimes you just need to hear that from somebody else ya know?

Answer 7

because the Democrats had to apply the money saved through defunding the NSA to feed detrimental human beings, and they hate that. Dems must have mixed defunding NSA with utilising those money to construct a Thunderdome the position we stress homeless human beings to wrestle to the shortcoming of existence.

Answer 8

Our government was setup to have checks and balances. The executive branch doesn't have the right to override that process.

So it is Bush that doesn't understand America.

Answer 9

if nsa wants to spy on the innocent and elderly then go get a warrant or court order. the govt has overstepped its boundaries when they terrorize those who are not connected with terrorists.i am a law abiding taxpayer and landowner. when i see thermal imagers and creepers at night upon my land then it makes me suspicious why they are here. i have done nothing illegal-- i do not train terrorists here. the deliberate destruction of my trees by sgt clark and easy company is totally illegal and these dirtbags are not held accountable for crimes against the u.s. citizens. i have contacted the justice dept- sheriffs dept-- the media-- the aclu and it falls on deaf ears. i let these lowlifes come and get their surveillance out of my trees on oct 14th and 15th of 2005. the next time i catch prowlers on my land then they will follow my rules of engagement. i have been nice so far. you could see them slimeballs in my trees for 2 nights.cutting fibre optic cables and retrieving their equiptment and crawling under my trailer. theyre lucky i went along with them. these twerps dont know how close they came to being snuffed out during their escapades.now i see white streaks of light along the ground at night. i suppose now that i am under satellite surveillance and receive constant barrage of lasers and radiation from their aerial platforms. its called "slow kill" and they will pay for their persecution of the innocent and elderly. i dont dial 911 and those caught violating my civil rights and comitting crimes against me will deal with it on my terms.i now know who the terrorisrs are. its the task forces that invade my privacy (govt entities) trespassers found here at night will also be found here in the morning. you dont play fair using your night vision and zuit suits. but to let you know the lord has given me the ability to see you with my bare eyes. dont fear the night-- fear what hunts at night

Answer 10

If you are satisified to have your freedoms curtailed for reasons of national security you will agree with Bush. If you love and want to hold onto freedoms that have been hard earned you will be grateful that you have the courts to protect your freedom. These are the choices.