IJ,
For you being a lawyer I find your willingness to give up the rights of others,just so you can give up your rights, unbelievable. This is what you posted...and please note that I've already addressed the issue of whether you called me ignorant or not...your own words I gave you back!
"On substance you have me right. I would allow government monitoring of all phone calls. I do not fear that. I do not take our civil rights lightly. Nor do I take the threats of Islamic terrorists to kill us or drive Israel into the sea lightly. So when I consider the trade-off of my privacy for my safety, I come down in favor of monitoring calls. It is a balancing of interests decision. Perhaps, I am wrong - but it is my view. I do not believe that those who balance the interests in favor of absolute privacy are un-American (though some of them may be but for other reasons)."
IJ, the issue isn't whether YOU want to give up your consitutional rights, in your case what you are doing is giving up the rights of your clients...something that if you did, you would not have any clients. IJ, do you actually believe that the government is only going to record YOUR words when a client is speaking to you via a telephone? What purpose would that serve...doesn't the Bush crowd already have the file on you that says you are one of them...didn't you donate any money to Bush...your church organization surely did? What person is going to go to a lawyer and be subject to having every word conveyed to the the likes of Alberto Gonzalez...remember IJ, Alberto hasn't found a job for one long year --- does anyone wonder why? The former Attorney General and he can't find work? Would you hire him IJ? Forget that question...we know the answer!
IJ, what you are doing is placing yourself in the role of the decision maker for others. It's comparable to what Gov. Palin has said about her daughter and her pregnancy. Paraphrasing her words, "It was Bristol's DECISION to have the baby." vs. her avowing that any other woman in the United States should not be afforded the opportunity for her to make a decision as to her pregnancy options. Why is it okay for Bristol Palin to have the rights of making a decision, but Jane Doe...being out of luck? The key word here IJ is DECISION and OPTION...what is the difference other than Palin wanting it both ways for her daughter but not for anyone else's daughter.
Okay, IJ! I'm ignorant but let me hear your defense. Stop making this a quail on the ground event!
PS: On this issue of monitoring, let me remind you of one key fact....the individuals that attacked our nation on 9-11 were being monitored, and Bush was told about it, he was even warned that the chance of it being done with airplanes....and what did he do about it? Nothing...he was too damn busy working up reasons to invave Iraq. His own cabinet member has admitted the first charge given when Bush went into the White House..."give me a reason to attack Iraq." |
