The court ruled the warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional because Mr. Bush signing statement alter the intent of the law. Congress wanted to include accountability into wiretapping spy operations. So they allowed warrantless wiretapping requiring 48hrs to report to special/secret court, disclose their findings, and destroy what was not related to terrorism. Mr Bush objected to the disclosure requirement, thus the signing statement. Congress thus rewrote the law regarding wiretapping and its in the rewritten bill on torture, Rewritten bills are often hard to read example the Patriot Act 2 it has a lot of numbers in reference to the first patriot Act. I have not been up to looking up these wiretapping and torture 2 bills and wading through them.
2006-10-10 06:11:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by longroad 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
On October 4, 2006 the US Court of Appeals ruled that domestic spying was OK and approved that the program can continue on a temporary basis.
According to USA Today, The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in January seeking to stop the program on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say it has made it difficult for them to do their jobs because they believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets. Many said they had been forced to take expensive and time-consuming overseas trips because their contacts wouldn't speak openly on the phone or because they didn't want to violate their contacts' confidentiality.
This quote is directly from this link: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2006-10-04-domestic-spying_x.htm?csp=34
Basically what this is saying is that lawyers, journalists, and educators want to be able to openly communicate with known terrorist groups to get the story. But they don't want to warn the government of pending attacks. How is that right? Why does the ACLU want to protect the terrorist groups?
Too bad if it costs the the lawyer, journalist, or educator extra to fly to Beruit or Demascus to talk confidentally. Its the price they have to pay to be associated with these groups.
2006-10-09 10:46:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, since it was completely legal up until the passing of FISA (1978) and the question is whether or not its still legal for the sitting President to listen in to INTERNATIONAL phone calls. The 6th Circuit is about to say thet FISA cannot override the President's constitutional right to obtain foreign intelligence. What then? Will libs admit they've been taken on a joyride by the press?
2006-10-09 10:32:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by MEL T 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
did your life change when someone made up the word neocon? The mentioned program is not designed to spy on Americans. It is designed to detect certain key phrases in conversations that will prevent a plane you may be in one day from being used to kill innocent Americans. They aren't looking for stoners trying to get weed . they are looking for People hellbent on doing harm to Americans. I know i just wasted my time because simple minded people are in capable of changing their simple little notions of how things are. I could care less who listens to my phone calls.I am sure Libs are much more interesting. That's why they hate the idea.
2006-10-09 10:33:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by carolinatinpan 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
BUSHCO has put our country and the world on the fast track to global annihilation, DUHbya's fascist tendencies are reminiscent of Germany in the late 1930's, It appears that the NEOCON wall of hypocrisy and politics of fear and hate is crumbling, someone/thing must be on our side :)
http://www.semiskimmed.net/bushhitler/jameslove.jpg
2006-10-09 10:45:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dr.Feelgood 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe the only one that is right, is Bush. The others lean to the left.
2006-10-09 10:29:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush and his antics make me even more grateful that the ACLU exists. The ACLU very necessary especially during these times.
2006-10-09 10:27:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by brian2412 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Baaa! baaa! baaa! Sheep, the whole bunch of his supporters.
2006-10-09 10:28:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by auld mom 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rush is Right!
2006-10-09 10:27:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Shiraz the truth detector 2
·
0⤊
0⤋