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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (198445)	8/21/2006 8:35:04 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

At least you now admit they are guesses. 1. The culture of lying that is this administration I don't notice more lying than from most politicians. Admittedly that's not exactly a high standard to live up to. 2. The lack of an explanation as to why easily obtainable FISA warrants and/or a change in FISA itself weren't pursued. Either would result in the methods used getting out to the public, and thus to Al Qaeda. If you publicly explain why FISA wouldn't work or wasn't a good idea, or if you ask for specific authorization through a new law than there isn't any hope for a secret program. Of course a secret program has some major downsides. Less checks on abuse, less analysis of problems before the program starts etc. But there are also legitimate reasons to desire secrecy in a situation like this, so merely the desire for secrecy isn't evidence of some sinister plot, or illegal activity. when you place another human being above the law. I do no such thing. I argue that the law is unclear. Even if it was actually clear that still would not amount to be putting another human being above the law. Also even if I argued the administrations interpretation of the constitution is correct (which I have not done), and if you start with the assumption that it is not correct, than it also would not amount to me putting anyone above the law, it would rather be a case where I made a mistake about the proper interpretation of the constitution. Not agreeing that geode00's interpretation of the law is clearly correct, is not the same as putting anyone above the law.