Bush Defends Approving Secretive Eavesdropping
Yesterday, I gave my defense of Bush approving domestic phone taps, and the irresponsible position of the ACLU. There is a fine balance between liberty and life, and when America is at war, we must err on the side of saftey. Today, the President speaks for himself.
He defended his decision to sign the secret order, calling the program a “vital tool in our war against terrorists” and “critical to saving American lives.”
“This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security,” a stern-looking Bush said. “Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends, and allies. . . .And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.”
“I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups,” Bush added.
The disclosure of the program, first reported in yesterday’s editions of the New York Times, raised strong protests from congressional leaders of both parties, and key members of Congress yesterday called for hearings into the president’s action.
Bush today also strongly urged the Senate to pass the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act, an anti-terrorism bill passed overwhelmingly by Congress shortly after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Key provisions of the law are scheduled to expire at the end of the month, but concerns have been raised recently its effect on the possible erosion of Americans’ civil liberties. Yesterday, with the news of the NSA domestic eavesdropping program reverberating around Capitol Hill, opponents of the bill in the Senate blocked efforts to pass renew the Patriot Act.
“That decision is irresponsible, and it endangers the lives of our citizens. The senators who are filibustering must stop their delaying tactics, and the Senate must vote to reauthorize the Patriot Act,” Bush said. “In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment.”
Noting that the act expires in two weeks, he said, “The terrorist threat to our country will not expire in two weeks.”
The president used his weekly Saturday morning address to the country to talk about the growing furor over the NSA secret eavesdropping program. In a sign of the interest in the speech, instead of the usual taped radio speech, the president spoke live this morning and it was carried on television. The speech ran about seven minutes, slightly longer than his usual radio addresses.
He chastised the news accounts, saying, “The existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk.”
Bush said that he authorized the program “using constitutional authority vested in me as commander-in-chief.” He argued that the program is consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, and used “to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations.”
“The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time,” Bush said. “And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.”
I truly believe that many of the libertarians are sincere in their concerns. I also think that many have become too relaxed in a post 9/11 world. We are still living in dangerous times, and America needs to wake up to this fact. Many of the acts done by President Bush have protected us from other terrorist attacks, and too many people do not realize this. They sit comfortably, and lazily watching the world go into chaos on their televisions, and most don’t do anything to stop it. Soldiers are out there doing something about it, and they go underappreciated everyday. The left have completely lost it, and from what I can tell are ready to accept defeat. Meanwhile our President is doing everything he can to preserve and protect America, and we are at the forefront of fighting the forces that wish to take us back to the dark ages. Now the world is at a crossroads, and too many are putting their paranoia ahead of our Nation’s security. Without life, there can be no liberty. Too many are putting trivial things like being patted down at a football game ahead of America’s security. People need to wake up! We are at war.
Others: Blogs for Bush
Email This
Posted by Jay on December 17, 2005 12:45 pm
» Filed Under News, War On Terror
Trackback URL:
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator: Senate GOP fights to sustain Patriot Act
- Thespis Journal: President Bush Scores A Direct Hit!
- Sister Toldjah: Prez essentially says ‘let me do my job’
- SoCalPundit: All National Security Leaks Deserve To Be Investigated
- baldilocks: Desiring Power Over All Else
- The Right Nation: The Real Scandal
- Flopping Aces: We Are At War People
- Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » We Are At War People pinged this post.
- All Things Beautiful: The President's Week From Hell (OPEN THREAD)
- The Strata-Sphere: The Imploding Democrats
Comments
11 Responses to “Bush Defends Approving Secretive Eavesdropping”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
I am not in favor of violating the constitution under the guise or protecting.
Get a warrant if there is sufficient cause for a wire tap.
This issue isn’t about terrorists, it’s about the law. What was wrong with getting a warrant? That secret court approves almost anything within reason, but Bush didn’t feel the law was important enough to follow.
Do you want your president to respect the law?
I admit to being a little worried that the President may have crossed the line’s and violated the Constitution. There’s a reason why we need warrants in investigating civilians. Hopefully, I’m wrong and the President didn’t violate the Constitution. I’m not a lawyer but this seems to violate the Bill of Rights. Maybe there are provisions of the Patriot Act that allow the president to authorize wiretapping’s without a warrant. I would gladly welcome somebody proving me wrong.
I call overseas and I dont care if anyone eve crops as I do not do anything that they hold against me. So WHAT if they do.
This isn’t some silly ACLU issue — this has crossed the line pretty far. That’s why we have these laws — to protect ourselves from leaders that might decide to take too much power.
The incident in question is really about how the President ordered these taps while there will still smoking craters in the ground. At least one person is inside a prison cell on the basis of these taps.
Good enough for me. Who wants to have Brooklyn Bridge destroyed for the ACLU’s tender mercies?
Not only that, but the route that the New York Slimes used to get this information is illegal as hell.
The timing of the release of this story, coinciding with a book deal and on the same day as the stupendously successful elections in Iraq, makes me extremely skeptical
“The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact.”-Justice Robert H. Jackson
I would rather that no one else died. Isn’t that worth the risk of snooping on some international phone calls? Getting the intelligence we needed to roll up additional jihadi cells in the US is very time-sensitive. Getting a warrant for these cases seems like a good thing to me.
And let’s not forget that these calls that were monitored were always teminating or originating overseas.
Yep, the President orders and people accept the orders. Whatever happened to illegal orders being refused? “I vas only obeying orders.” Nice excuse, but it doesn’t wash in the post Nurenburg trials era.
Sad. Ethics are right out the window in the new Amerika. Can’t wait for civil war. It’s coming. It’s gonna be horrible. But it’s coming.
“Many of the acts done by President Bush have protected us from other terrorist attacks, and too many people do not realize this.”
Since you appear to be an insider — what thwarted attacks were these?
Remember how RICO was used to prosecute abortion protesters? I fear that these tactics might get out of hand if given to the wrong people (Hillary).
There was absolutely NO law broken. If you read the law the ONLY time a warrant is needed is when they are tapping domestic to domestic conversations and e-mails.The converations they were montoring were all International.
Also 98% were people aho are NOT citizens so who cares. What was done does not even come close to going against the fourth amendment.Everything was done with in the law and Congress knew about it there was Judical oversite. So basicly it is a non issue
“Many of the acts done by President Bush have protected us from other terrorist attacks, and too many people do not realize this.”
Ungrateful sots is what they are. If you’re not doing anything wrong, why should you care if anyone’s listening to your phone calls or monitoring the books you want to borrow from the library.
Rights are a codeword for allowing people to act outside of the accepted norm of this great Christian nation. The only real rights should be the right to keep our mouths shut and let the government take care of our best interests.