Phone Wiretaps. Why Do Liberals Think Foreigners' Rights Are More Important Than Stopping Terrorist Attacks?

Question

Besides, FISA is not unconstitutional. It takes into account the Supreme Court's ruling about wiretaps.

In March 2006 a hearing was held that was called "Wartime Executive Powers and the FISA Court"

The most famous FISA Judge Allan Kornblum (also a constitutional expert) said: " The Supreme Court said that the Fourth Amendment was highly flexible, and that the standard for criminal, what they call ordinary crimes, what I would call traditional law enforcement, need not be the same as that for foreign intelligence collection, and that different standards for different Government purposes are compatible with the Fourth Amendment."

"As you know, in Article I, section 8, Congress has enumerated powers as well as the power to legislate all enactments necessary and proper to their specific authorities, and I believe that is what the President has, similar authority to take executive action necessary and proper to carry out his enumerated responsibilities of which today we are only talking about surveillance of Americans."

Clinton allowed no warrant searches. In 1995 he wrote this Executive Order:
"the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order" http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayEO.cfm?id=EO_12949_

Clinton allowed his Attorney General to conduct no warrant searches without a search warrant and Clinton did not have "Wartime Powers".
Funny how Democrats are now against allowing President Bush's Attorney General to do the same as Clinton's Attorney General, even when Clinton did not have "Wartime Powers".


http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayeo.cf...

There are many people asking questions who are saying the 4th Amendment is being trampled on.

Answer 1

How dreadfully bizarre, that so many Y!A Libs feel that those who declare war on the US should be offered constitutional protection from surveillance.

Answer 2

Nobody ever said that FISA was unconstitutional, just that Bush needed to follow the law and abide by the terms of FISA. We don't have a problem with legal wiretaps, and there really is no good argument for not following the law.

Answer 3

Why can't the liberals understand that our leader, King George, needs to solidify his control over the country so we don't have those once in a blue moon terrorists incidences here in the states. If we don't give all the power to the executive branch we might even have terrorist incidences as often as say, once a year.

Answer 4

Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. We have to be very careful to preserve everyone's rights, especially the rights of those whom we most despise. Once we find a reason, any reason to ignore, curtail or negate anyone's rights that same rationale becomes easier and easier to apply across the board. First it's "terrorists" then it's anyone who isn't white or anyone who practices a different religion. All too soon you could count the number of people with a full compliment of civil liberties on one hand.

Answer 5

With the hundreds of millions of phone calls in the United States daily (perhaps hourly), trust me, the government doesn't monitor your call to the local pizza parlor to see what you prefer on your pizza - and they really don't care if you call your mistress.
The only possible tracking they can do is based on key words or known terrorists or countries known to harbor terrorists. This "intrusion of privacy" doesn't effect the vast majority of Americans in any way what so ever. I'm personally tired of hearing of all of the alleged rights we've lost from the paranoid few who think Mr. Ahmed Mohammad Saheib
Ahmadinejad has a right to call his "uncle" in the Middle East post 9/11 and not expect that his call may be monitored for content relative to terror.
How else can we possibly even begin to assure that we are not attacked again? It isn't as though this enemy wears a different uniform or carries around a sign declaring war against the U.S.

Answer 6

we think the law is too important to violate.
they are not following FISA law. FISA law gives a few days to tap without a judge's permission to get enough evidence in order to get permission to monitor someone.

Answer 7

You do know that Congress extended the FISA guidelines on Saturday, don't you?

Answer 8

I can't wait for you to get home one day to find out they tapped your phone and heard you schedule a date with the DC madam, contacted your coke dealer for a kilo and listened in while you talked to candy on the 900 line. And don't try to deny any of this. You are a member of the Bush family right? Your identity says so, so you must be like the rest of that family. Drug users, alcoholics and liars who don't have to follow the rules. Don't worry when you get caught uncle Georgy will step in and pardon you. You have nothing to worry about.

Answer 9

Bush has been going around FISA, and they are no real court, they are a rubber stamp!

It isn't foreigners rights I am concerned with! It is mine! The FBI has admitted to illegally using their search power against American Citizens in front of a Senate Committee, without ever getting approval from any court!

Where were you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xha8sVrJ0ho&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSw5-C-41cY&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhCR5dcLyAI&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5piwGWpiUc&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6eEvIBjSro&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guYXH_0-YAQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsdn4J2FVNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrZmhPqozd0&NR=1

Answer 10

Because they think presidential power is obscene as long as Bush is the president.
If slick Willy were in office this would either not make the media hit parade or they would be talking about how Bill was getting tough on terror.

If Hillary does the improbable and makes it to the white house, when she exercises this power, and no doubt she will, you won't hear a peep.