The Bush Administration remains adamant about using warrant less wiretaps on American citizens in the name of National Security. Historically former President Nixon felt much the same way. Nixon went on to order illegal wiretaps, wiretaps he felt he was fully authoritized to do so and the Watergate Scandal was born. Will history repeat itself for President Bush?
Only time will tell if President Bush will live to regret the ordering of warrant less wiretaps on American citizens. The Bush Administration has argued that these powers are granted to him byU.S. Constitution during a time of war and well within the the policies of National Security Agency.
The American public will one day know the truth and judge whether the wiretaps order by President Bush are in fact constitutional and within the presidential powers afforded tom him within our consititution.
At the moment President Bush and the U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez will keep on holding steadfastly to the position that these wiretaps are necessary to ensure our National Security. The also argue that our Constitution grants President Bush these types of powers during a time of war. History will eventually determine if they were right or whether the American public was once again being misled and misguided in the face of patriotism. The facts will eventually bear out and history will once again serve as a cold reminder about how much trust citizens place on our elected officials. The wiretaps ordered by President Bush and their contents will one day serve as a gauge on how effective this administration was on it's ability not only identify our enemies but also how to effectively combat terrorism.
Will this Administration demonstrate to us that these steps were necessary and in fact do not violate the rights of it's citizenry and an effective means of combating terrorism?
Your comments are welcomed.
Only time will tell if President Bush will live to regret the ordering of warrant less wiretaps on American citizens. The Bush Administration has argued that these powers are granted to him byU.S. Constitution during a time of war and well within the the policies of National Security Agency.
The American public will one day know the truth and judge whether the wiretaps order by President Bush are in fact constitutional and within the presidential powers afforded tom him within our consititution.
At the moment President Bush and the U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez will keep on holding steadfastly to the position that these wiretaps are necessary to ensure our National Security. The also argue that our Constitution grants President Bush these types of powers during a time of war. History will eventually determine if they were right or whether the American public was once again being misled and misguided in the face of patriotism. The facts will eventually bear out and history will once again serve as a cold reminder about how much trust citizens place on our elected officials. The wiretaps ordered by President Bush and their contents will one day serve as a gauge on how effective this administration was on it's ability not only identify our enemies but also how to effectively combat terrorism.
Will this Administration demonstrate to us that these steps were necessary and in fact do not violate the rights of it's citizenry and an effective means of combating terrorism?
Your comments are welcomed.
Posts
1 comment:
I think it's a stretch to compare Bush to Nixon on the "wiretapping" issue. Nixon got caught tapping ONLY political opponents, while Bush has been caught ONLY tapping international calls involving suspected terrorists.
It is instructive to note that NONE the Republicans that have criticized Bush on the NSA program were on the intelligence commitee, and as such, were not briefed on it's details.
When the facts do come out in public, I hope that my trust is vindicated, if I'm still alive. This is going to be a long war against worldwide Islamofascism. I don't expect any quick answers to these questions.
One might do better to look back half a century, to the cold war, and how the NY Times had reporters on the Communist payroll. They took advantage of the political weakness of Sen. McCarthy's excesses to help the Soviet Union, THE MOST MURDEROUS BUREAUCRACY OF THE 20TH CENTURY. Sen. McCarthy may have been a blowhard, and infringed on people's civil rights with his political power, but at least his victims were alive to tell about it. The same could not be said for the opponents of Communism in the Soviet Union.
So we have examples of Republicans hurting national security in two different ways: McCarthy with his over-zealousness, and Nixon by using intelligence services to political ends. It seems that you find Bush to be doing a combination of both of these, without any proof.
--Don't get me started on Carter and Clinton. Thanks for the really great comments over at LEAVWORLD. I'll try to keep visiting, because I like what you write.
Post a Comment