Courts have upheld intelligence gathering as an inherent power of the Executive pursuant to his role as commander and chief under a valid use of force. Therefore any "requirement" that impedes that power is unconstitutional.

Furthermore, exactly what is the point of getting approval AFTER the fact? The most utterly stupid part of FISA is the notion of going for a warrant AFTER something has happend, and not a single person, left or right, has bothered to point out the utter stupidity of such a thing.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

[IMG]http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C8%3B2%3C%3B%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3275%3E696%3E9%3A6%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3B7255573nu0mrj[/IMG]

BULLSHIT!
Nice timeline manipulation. Not to mention the fact that this operation had very minimal US involvement. A concerned UK citizen brought this to the attention of the authorities, who subsequently placed an undercover agent into the cell. The only reasons why BushCo can weasel their way into trying to steal some of the glory is because virtually every international call gets routed thru the US. Did the UK need our help? Probably not.
Some people seem to think that the US is the only govt with a surveilance capacity.
Don't the Rightards grow tired of repeating the same lies and misconceptions about these spying programs? Obviously not, because it keeps rearing its' ugly head. It is genious in its' simplicity. Democrats - and some Republicans - want BushCo to follow existing laws when implementing these wiretaps. Bush says that he will not obey the laws, so therefore BushBots conclude that Dems want to kill the entire program. Nice transferrence of guilt.
Typical play on emotions. First BushCo instills terror into the weak-minded and weak-willed. Then his minions attempt to force gratitude out of those who were "saved".


One last point. If this surveilance had been in place since last December, there is no excuse whatsoever for the NSA to intercept these communications w/o warrants. I don't believe anything has been reported on whether or not warrants were obtained. But even though there was ample time to request them, I would not be surprised if the FISC was bypassed yet again.

__________________
[FONT="Times New Roman"][SIZE="3"]One good deed every day[/SIZE][/FONT]

Well, let's see, one of two things would happen if they had gone to FISC, either they would have received the warrant (in which case what is the fucking big deal), or they would not have, in which case thousands of people might have died.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

[IMG]http://images1.snapfish.com/346%3C8%3B2%3C%3B%7Ffp344%3Enu%3D3275%3E696%3E9%3A6%3EWSNRCG%3D32337%3B7255573nu0mrj[/IMG]

Well, what do ya know-
Can you say " using the threat of terrorism for political gain "?
BushCo sure can.
I got to give them some credit - they do know how to play the system.

__________________
[FONT="Times New Roman"][SIZE="3"]One good deed every day[/SIZE][/FONT]

So, you seem to be assuming that FISC was bypassed.
I, on the other hand, would prefer to wait until more info is released before reaching that particular conclusion.
You also seem to have a haphazard position when it comes to abiding by the law. Let me guess - everyone but BushCo should be so constrained.

__________________
[FONT="Times New Roman"][SIZE="3"]One good deed every day[/SIZE][/FONT]

So Little-Acorn wrote 'probable bullshit' then?

So they're 'rightards' until you need to include some of them in your statistics? I don't disagree with your point here but using 'retard' as an insult is offensive to many people. I had hoped it left our language along with calling people 'gay' as an insult.

There are many on the left who want it gone completely. There are even more who have no moral issue playing politics with such a life saving system.


I like to think the terrorists are the ones instiling terror.

That's right, we on the right are scared animals who look up to papa George. Policies are for lefties, we are only interested in crushing arabs and murdering civilians. The goal of this is the simple fun of watching civilians die combined with the 5000 shares of arab oil companies that papa george promised each republican voter.

Along with our secret plan for world domination (where our plan of course is to occupy every country and turn their civilians into slaves), robbing billions of dollars from 3rd world countries (through the IMF), this plan just looks better and better.

I wouldn't be 100% sure as you seem to be as there may be reasons we are not privy to, but I mostly agree.

And I wouldn't be surprised if you are wrong.

You might want to quote the part of the article you are referring to instead of that monstrosity. But if you are talking about the US wanting to pull the ripcord earlier than the UK, there is quite sound reasoning behind it.

Or perhaps to be more precise, both decisions carry a large pro and a large con:

Waiting longer to arrest them increases the risk of an attack due to unknown intelligence aspects of the case. Imagine what the public would be saying if they had blown 10 planes while the government knew about it for 6 months. Arresting them earlier cuts out that (small but very, very, very significant risk).

Arresting them earlier means that we lose additional information about this project and possibly others, along with information about other terrorists. This may not seem like much to some people but it could be the difference between a civilian dying or not.

Obviously a tough decision and one that would be devistating if not done incorrectly. It was so far from being a political decision that I don't think even Sam would back you up on that one.

To judge which decision was correct would definately require detailed information about the case.

Even if this turns out to be true it is irrelevant.
Issues of constitutional law do not turn solely on the effectivensss of the practice in question. Only totalitarian facscist-like systems can justify the sacrifice of citizens' rights merely by appealing to efficiency.

From what I can gather, the intercepts were of calls/communications made by citizens of Pakistan to/from Pakistan to/from English citizens in England.

You may argue that the US has "no right" to monitor/intercept such transmissions, but the US Constitution simply doesn't apply in this situation.

THE NSA regularly monitors millions (if not billions) of communications inititated and ending outside the US every day between non-US citizens. It has done that for decades (technology obviously inreasing its ability/capacity), needs no "warrant" from a US court to do so, and is not required to notify any US court that it is doing so.

The US is also not the only country that does it.

No -- not probable.
L-A wants us to believe that the US was in the lead on this. That could not be further from the truth.


Rightards are republicans who lie repeatedly about these NSA programs. Rightards and their actions speak for themselves. They don't need my assistance.

You did notice that I used Democrats, not democrats?
Please name the "many on the left", or the "even more who have no moral issue playing politics with such a life saving system".


This is still a free country, you can think whatever suits you. Bush' "fear factory" hypes up these incidents. If they would spend more time actually trying to solve this terrorism problems rather than working them to Republican advantage and as a way to further personal goals, I would have some respect for the Administration.

You wouldn't be angling for Roves' job, now would you?



I don't think this will end up being the case. BushCo failed to secure warrants thru FISC on many ( if not all ) previous surveilance missions. Why should anyone believe that he belatedly changed his MO. That would be seen as him having been operating in error previously, and as we all know he doesn't admit to making these type of mistakes.

__________________
[FONT="Times New Roman"][SIZE="3"]One good deed every day[/SIZE][/FONT]