Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (719122)	12/20/2005 7:07:41 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"Only an idiot would be against that." I agree. Weird that so many dems are. "why Bush decided to go above the law" He didn't. I think common sense and a look at the facts verify this. We will see where it ends up, but my guess is that we can listen to terrorists we are at war with, even if they call to the U.S.A. "By the way, the law allows for a 72 hour lag between" Fred Barns has given the best explanation for Bush avoinding the UNNECESARY step you guys are so concerned about. In a nut shell, lets say terrorist A that we are currently tracking calls orcastraitor, who has a clean record. Bush goes to fisa court and they say the orcy's clean, he's a US citizen and you can't listen. If that is possible (I think it is), a VERY IMPORTANT TOOL that most Americans want him to use would be gone. Better to leave the beuracracy out of the war on terror. "since Bush has decided to keep this operation of spying on American Citizens a secret" The operation is to prevent terrorist attacks and involves known terrorists (American citizens are not the target). I would support a limited number of people (the Senate Intellignece committee for example) to see the list of the TERRORIST side of each conversation. If an unknown American citizen that is not previously suspected takes a call from Zarqawi, I want to know why, and he would not be protected. And if the program proves to be legit (and I bet it will), then I am sure you will want an investigation as to who leaked this SECRET INFORMATION. I would be nervous if I was that person. My bet is Pelosi.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (719122)	12/20/2005 7:12:55 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"By the way, the law allows for a 72 hour lag between beginning the surveillance and obtaining the warrant. That means that security will never be compromised by delays. But since Bush has decided to keep this operation of spying on American Citizens a secret...folks want to know what Americans he was spying on. I'd like to see the list myself. At the very least let a panel of judges review the list of people spied on, and a bipartisan group of congress too." You hit the nail on the head. No one opposes chasing down terrorists or terrorist collaborators, but the 72 hour retro window is such an easy process to follow, virtually never denied (and certainly not if a shread of relevance had been shown in the intercept), why not just follow it? Why raise even the hint of suspicion that the intercept MIGHT have been used for a purpose other than the broadly existing purposes? Why create the question if not necessary to do so?