SI
SI
discoversearch

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: trouthead who wrote (720532)1/4/2006 11:32:52 AM
From: Srexley  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
"This is more complicated than you make out"

No, it isn't. The haters want to make it complicated so they can fool dumb people into hating also. Do you think when we are tracking terrorists during the war on terror that we should stop tracking once they call the U.S.? That's insane imo. Plenty of reasons why the CinC should not rely on a buerocratic body to decide these national security issues. The constitution is pretty clear on it, and Carter and Clinton claimed the same power. Clinton used it for physical searches, and nary a peep from the dems.

"There is a law in place that requires..."

Congress cannot pass laws that supercede the constitution. Plain and simple. Not complicated at all.

"If it is found to be unconstitutional"

I don't think the constitutional authority the President sites will be declared unconstitutional. FISA is not unconstitional. It just does not SUPERCEDE the constitution.

"Once those issues are taken care of it can be determined if the President committed a criminal act"

Only the extreme haters are even insinuating that protecting our country and tracking known terrorists is a criminal act. The backlash for these hateful charges that are detrimental to our country and our safety by the sane Americans who think the President should be able to track known international terrorists when they call the U.S. will not help the Pelosi's of America.

"Whether it's war time or not makes no difference."

Starting to think you are not too smart. The best analogy I have heard that puts the haters charges of criminal activity by our President in perspective is that we can zoom in on one of these terrorists and blow him up, but to the dems if he calls the United States and we listen, the President should be impeached.

The haters have gone too far with this one.

"These are at the heart of what it means to be an American"

Calling the President (or even insinuating it) a criminal for tracking our enemy when he calls the U.S. is so far from "the heart of what it means to be an American" that I can't even comprehend that view. I would say it is at the heart of what it means to undermine America and in some cases to support the terrorists.

And to give one of our top national secret policies to the New York Times is treason. As it is for them to print it when the President emphatically requested they did not.

But hurting the President is more important to them than our National security. They will pay for it with lost circulation, and hopefully some jail time for the execs.



To: trouthead who wrote (720532)1/4/2006 12:34:01 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Respond to of 769670
 
Absolute nonsense. If the Congress chooses to make NOISE about the "eavesdropping" they can simply be ignored. If a court tries to intervene, the only POSSIBLE solution is to lock up the judge-for the DURATION, if necessary.

We are at war, and this is NOT a question of law...