Domestic Spying Endangers Freedoms

Losing Liberty Too High a Price

By Jason Carson Wilson, published Jan 11, 2006
Published Content: 8  Total Views: 2,623  Favorited By: 0 CPs
Rating: 3.1 of 5


Losing liberties is a small price to pay for ensuring the nation's safety. That's the conclusion the Bush administration seems to have reached. President George W. Bush must have missed history class when Patrick Henry was the man of the hour. Henry was more than ready to give up his life in pursuit of liberty for all in the our nation's early days.

"We're at war and we must protect America's secrets," Bush said during a Monday press conference.

Bush is staunchly defending a once top secret domestic spying program, unmasked by the New York Times last Thursday.

"We looked at the possible scenarios...The people responsible for helping us protect and defend came forth with the current program because it enables us to move faster and quicker. And that's important. We've got to be fast on our feet, quick to detect and prevent," he said.

He also responded to questions about circumventing the court born out of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by conducting surveillance without warrants. Bush said the court is consulted when long-term monitoring is necessary. What? I'm missing something. If some current monitoring was less than "long-term," then how effective is it? Of course, the bigger question is how legal is it. Bush said both the U.S. Constitution and Congress gave him the authority to put the program into action.

"I swore to uphold the laws. Do I have the legal authority to do this? And the answer is: absolutely. As I mentioned in my remarks, the legal authority is derived from the Constitution as well as the authorization of force by the United States Congress," he said.

When pressed for details what powers Bush was exercising, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice didn't go into specific detail about the sources of that power during a visit to NBC's "Meet The Press" Sunday.

She did say FISA was one of those sources. But Rice became vague.

"The president has drawn on additional authorities that he has under the Constitution and under other statutes," Rice said.

When "Meet The Press" moderator Tim Russert asked Rice what those "additional authorities" were, she pleaded a modicum of ignorance.

Takeaways
  • President George W. Bush must have missed history class when Patrick Henry was the man of the hour.
  • Bush's hubris has inspired him to hijack civil liberties for the greater good.
  • Why didn't the government make homeland security a priority after the first attack in 1993?
Did You Know?
Condoleezza Rice was national security adviser when Bush approved the spying program.
Comments
Showing Comment 1 of 1
 
 
I am so ashamed that I wasted my vote on George Bush. What was I thinking? Why did I let my right wing extremist, neo-conservative, neo-evangelical thinking get in the way of exercising sound personal judgment when I entered that voting booth? Growing up, I was led to believe that the Republican Party was a grass roots party of the people & for the people. In retrospect, it is clear that the last 3 presidents produced by the Republican Party were nothing more then the rich man's rich man hiding under the disguise of jingoistic patriotism and the lie of conservative values. The economic dark ages of reagonomics fleeced the middle and lower classes of this county simply to benefit the rich and wealthy and waste money on unnecessary unconstitutional military actions. George Sr. carried that same self-serving torch. George Jr. has quietly shifted this country back to those dark ages. Bush inherited a strong economy and squandered that real quick. And even though 9 -11 did happen, none

Posted on 10/09/2006 at 5:10:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comment 1 of 1
 
Most Commented On