Spying: bypassing FISA once or twice vs. 1,000 times

[ariellyn]

The one thing that is most damning about the spying scandal is that it's based on Bush's contention that there is not enough time to pursue legal means--and obtain warrants.

That theory might hold water if it were only applied for a few, isolated instances. That is not the case. Bush acknowledges and it has been confirmed that he has spied on thousands. He says that he intends to continue to do so.

Who would reasonably believe that there are thousands of emergencies that are so critical the law must be bypassed every time?

The very fact that they have bypassed the law so many times is both damning and telling. They don't need to bypass the law, time is not a factor--they just want to have free power to infringe on Americans' constitutional rights.

I know you know it here, but this is an important part of the case to be made.

[CottonBear]

1. There was and is no excuse for the president or anyone to break the law.

No one is above the law or the constitution.

[ariellyn]

4. I know, there is not excuse. But "in a time of war" would be their

excuse, and there is precedent for changes during times of war. So, taking those precedents into account, the question that I see as relevant is whether they demonstrated that there was a real need because of the lack of time that they claim. Again, it might be reasonable to expect that a few emergencies occurred. It is nonsensical to think that thousands of emergencies warranted bypassing the law.

[CottonBear]

7. No excuse for wartime. No excuse ever. Bush broke the law

because he didn't want the super-secret FISA court to know who he was spying on (most likely Democrats and journalists.)

[Arkansas Granny]

6. The really troubling aspect of this issue, to me, is the fact that

legitimate surveillance could have been carried out legally. The fact that they chose not to do it legally suggests to me that the surveillance they are doing is not legitimate. Is my logic faulty?

[CottonBear]

9. Your logic is perfect. Bush wanted to spy on persons it was illegal

to spy upon. He's a crook and should be impeached. Cheney too.

[sam sarrha]

2. their argument that 911 could have been prevented if the FISA hadn't

denied the warrants is bullshit, ASScroft peronally denied the warrants for 3/4 of the 911 terrorists and ATTA's computer..

the FBI had a F'n agent LIVING WITH THEM..!!!!

the chief of police for NYC found ATTAS passport fluttering down from the burning tower totally undamaged.. and they want us to not ask any more questions..case closed !!??

[boobooday]

3. No excuse for violating FISA even once

They could immediately spy on anyone they wanted, and only needed to give the FISA court notification within 72 hours.

There was no excuse for bypassing it at all.

[ariellyn]

5. I'm playing the devil's advocate. Even if there were an excuse,

their behavior is so out of bounds that it exceeds those excuses is what I'm saying.

[CottonBear]

8. No excuses: never, ever, never. n/t

[Arkansas Granny]

10. The only excuse for bypassing it would have been if their

requests for warrants had been turned down or not issued in a timely manner. Can they prove either scenario? As far as I can tell, they just decided not to even bother trying to get the warrants needed to do the surveillance legally.

[TahitiNut]

11. The Bushistas are advocates of the "Entitlement Class" ...

... hearkening back to Kings, Dukes, Barons, and other titled aristocrats whose privileges were enforced by the state. Their state-enforced privileges place them above the common law and, recognizing no peers among the common people, permitted no review or oversight outside of their privileged social class. Fascism, in this respect, incorporates many characteristics of feudalism with only a very slightly more dynamic social mobility between the "Entitlement Class" and the Commoners.

It completely infuses the very low-capacity 'thinking' of the Fecal Fuhrer. He's quite literally incapable of paying more than lip service (as inept as he at even that) to "equality under the law" of "liberty and justice for all." (They mentally footnote such phrases, exempting themselves from the obligations but amplifying the protections.)

Occupying positions of authority (they ignore the 'delegated' qualifier), they arrogate to themselves the 'mandate' to "free their class from being dragged down the masses" - seeing themselves as especially and righteously empowered to act without further popular referenda, a irritating (and expensive) nuisance at best.