Comments on: The End Of Warrantless Wiretaps

By: tarran

tarran — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:06:51 +0000

I hate to dash water on the congratulations, but why suddenly are we protected by intrusion into our private conversations?

On of the criticisms frequently leveled at the administration is that there was no practical reason to avoid going to the FISA court since it acts like a rubber stamp; they give the benefit of the doubt to their coworkers in the executive branch. The cry was that the FISA court would in no way hinder the President.

This is a secret court. It’s proceedings are in no way publicised.

So, instead of a small pool of people whose salaries are paid by the treasury department secretly deciding to eavesdrop on conversations, now there is a larger pool of people whose salaries are paid by the treasury department who are secretly deciding to eavesdrop on conversations.

I feel so much better.

By: willem

willem — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 13:09:28 +0000

I met a young man from Basra named Aysar. I asked him if he would support wiretapping in his homeland if his government demanded it for the sake of security. He answered that it would be acceptable only as a temporary solution to instability. This end to the American wiretapping program may coincide the Bush administration’s exit from Iraq and perhaps may even indicate a more relaxed approach to the so called “war on terror”. Open question: If sectarian violence continues to rise in Iraq, would wiretapping in Iraq by Iraqis or neutral party be appropriate at least in principle if not in practice (leaders are majority Shi’ite etc.) as a means to quell this instability, or is this a fundamental liberty for not only Americans but all people of the world that must never be compromised, even in times such as these?

By: al

al — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 06:47:32 +0000

what surprises me are the comments you got from readers.
don’t these people know that what made the USA great is its constitution and the rule of law, don’t they understand that a secret surveillance program is a KGB style of government . once you abolish the rule of law then you open the door to tyranny , police state and the fall of democracy ( that’s how the terrorists win) .
which former president said “if you sacrifice freedom for security you get neither freedom nor security”
i would chalk one down for : USA , democracy ,and hope for the world.

By: Pablo Lambiano

Pablo Lambiano — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 06:24:48 +0000

So, the people finally win one. What is that we win one out of about a billion. My rights have deterioated so bad that I don’t even like my country any more. Maybe, that is why I don’t spend much time here any more.

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 04:41:14 +0000

TLP>>For the moment, I’ll chalk this one up as a victory for the Constitution

And a LOOOOONG overdue one, at that!

… welcome to my favorites list, TLP.

By: jake

jake — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 04:03:42 +0000

i cant stand this! what is the big deal?! its not like people are sitting on the other line listening, laughing and recording your call to your buddy down the street! they moniter suspected terrorists and people with ties to terrorist groups. unless you call a bagdad resident every other day and have been assosiating with a suspected terrorists you have nothing to worry about, thanks to this very simailar program the british’s scotlan yard (which has much more athourity) was able to capture multiple terrorists, and foil they plans to kill thousands more americans.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 04:02:56 +0000

hey jerry, chalk one up for morons and Jerry’s Kids!!! YOU WIN!!

By: Jerry

Jerry — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 03:59:26 +0000

Hooray – another win for the terrorists!