Posted on 08/20/2006 6:03:04 AM PDT by kellynla
President Bush yesterday strongly defended his administration's terrorist surveillance program, saying those who oppose it "simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."
"This country of ours is at war," the president told reporters at Camp David, a day after a federal judge in Michigan ruled the program unconstitutional. "We must give those whose responsibility it is to protect the United States the tools necessary to protect this country in a time of war."
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor struck down the National Security Agency's wiretapping program, ruling that it infringed on the constitutional rights to privacy and free speech.
"The judge's decision was a -- I strongly disagree with that decision, strongly disagree," Mr. Bush said of the ruling in the case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.
The president said he instructed the Justice Department to immediately appeal the decision.
The program targets international telephone calls and other electronic communications coming into or going out of the United States in which "one of the parties on the call is a suspected al Qaeda or affiliated terrorist," the White House said Thursday.
Democrats pounced on the ruling, saying that it proves Mr. Bush has overstepped his authority and is trampling on the Constitution.
"No one is above the law," said Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who lost to Mr. Bush in the 2004 presidential election. "Now we need an honest debate and constructive steps, not another public relations onslaught from an administration that's good at hiding the truth and spinning the politics and sorely lacking when it comes to making America safe in the world or bringing people together at home."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
interesting that wiretapping would be declared illegal just a few days before the much-ballyhooed "August 22, 2006," supposedly a red-letter-date on the Islamic Calendar of Destruction.
"No one is above the law," said Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts,
ugh...same old, same old.
There was no wiretapping. That is just another of the fraudulent talking points the Democrats scream over and over in their desperation to lie to the American voters about their nonexistent National Security agenda. Data mining has nothing to do with wire tapping.
Bush, if your enemies are dead you don't have to eavesdrop on them. If you want to appease the religion on peacers then you absolutely have to listen to them plot.
An "honest debate"?
So the democrats previous debates weren't honest ?
I knew they were hiding something.
The ACLU urged judge Diggs Taylor to look at an Islamic Calendar.
ok, wiretapping after-the-fact then -- and I appreciate the distinction, I'm glad you made it, but that isn't my point.
Not to mention that Kerry's idea of bringing people together tat home means for everyone to join with the Libs in capitulation to the enemy- so the Dems can come into power and line their pockets with "diplomatic" deals that just create more FOOD FOR OIL scandals that don't interrupt their dinner parties, and let the enemy get stronger under cover- and then their answer to the solution will be to give the BIG DEM LIBS MORE power to "protect us"....viola- the Communist United States.....
No doubt it was part of the plan. The ACLU pukes and this federal judge should be picked up until their country sues for peace and signs a treaty.
"Taylor became active in politics, helping Coleman Young in his 1973 campaign and Jimmy Carter in his 1976 victory. After Young's election, Taylor was named special counsel to the City of Detroit and then in 1975 accepted the full time position as assistant corporation counsel for the city. She successfully defended new city policies that established affirmative action hiring practices and outlawed discrimination in two private yacht clubs located on city-owned Belle Isle.
So naturaly the left jumps all over this without even giving it a cursory look for facts.
Where is Karen Hughes?
By John E. Carey
August 20, 2006
More precisely, “Where is the United States’ campaign of truth and honesty in the Middle East?”
A thug named Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, emerged from the shadows to become, in just over a month, one of the more important political figures of Lebanon and one of the leaders of the Arab world’s radical wing.
Before the war, Hassan Nasrallah was the one who made sure the garbage went out, the aged were cared for, the children had schools.
During the war Hassan Nasrallah, as seen by Arabs, is the man who faced down Israel and the Great Satan.Before this war, few respected moderates in Beirut or in the greater Arab world paid much attention to Nasrallah. Now his stock has soared.
He is the darling of the man on the Arab street for not just keeping his forces in the field for more than thirty days with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) but by apparently winning.
By appearing almost daily on al-Manar ("The Beacon," the name of Hezbollah TV), al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya TV during the conflict saying, "We have not been harmed," Nasrallah made himself the most important face of the war, eclipsing everyone in the governments of Israel and Lebanon.
I keep asking myself, where is Karen Hughes? Or, more correctly, where is the mighty U.S. and its public diplomacy?
Are we to expect that Nasrallah stole a march on the entire U.S. government and that is O.K. ?
I don't generally mind my public servants doing nothing; but when the stakes are so high I get interested.
Didn’t the president hire his Texas friend Karen Hughes, with a salary clearly over $150,000 a year, to do for the U.S. just what Nasrallah is doing in his spare time? I mean, am I the only one outraged?
The degree of lasting political clout Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah have gained remains to be seen. But there is a gain, not a loss.
And Nasrallah's gain is the United States' loss.
The last time we saw Karen Hughes, she was apparently carrying U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s baggage.
We ask the president; “Where is Karen Hughes?”
I am glad that you brought that up because as long as people (including those who understand the true nature of the program) continue to use the same terminology as the radical liberals and the media, the propaganda will most assuredly become the "truth". The fact that the program is centered on data mining and not wiretapping is its key defense.
Having made that bold statement, I have a couple of questions to pose to my fellow Freepers that can help me (and all of us) be better defenders of Bush's national security strategies when we try to explain what the NSA is actually doing to our friends, acquaintances and family members who only get their information from Moveon.org, the MSM and leaders of the Dumbocratic party.
I have gained a lot of good insight from threads on this site but would appreciate it if some of you all could provide links for some supporting information:
1. a source where the distinction between wiretapping and data mining is explained and verified.
2. a source explaining how any wiretapping that does take place is acceptable under current federal laws regarding calls initiated from or made to foreign phone numbers (I think it may have been used for decades in conjunction with drug trafficking - but I can't recall).
3. any other sources that put the lie into the propaganda being spewed by the radical, America-hating left.
Also, if anyone knows why the administration is not putting the wackos in their places by disseminating this information, please post your thoughts.
Thanks, I know the Freepers will be able to help.
3.
Perhaps the usual collect Squeal Like a Pig Freepers might consider the reality that we have to FIND them to kill them. We "listen" to them to identify them and track them down
Once again, see my latest tagline.
It's ok to tap newt's phone but not a terrorist.
Touche!
Freeper Thickman expressed it better then I. The big part of the Conservative Movement's problem is it always lets the Leftist frame the terms of the debate. The Leftists continually create these phony rhetorical tricks to hide their almost nonexistent ability to rationally debate an issue. They know if they continual to scream a lie long enough it becomes "truth". We on the right should make every effort to STOP them from getting away with this tactics.
Well that disqualifies every single Leader in the current Democrat Party from taking part since not one of them has offered even a hint of a single "constructive step" NOR conducted the debate in anything that can even remotely be considered intellectually honest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.