posted on August 17, 2006 01:02:26 PM new
A Federal Judge today ruled that the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first Judge to rule against the program in a case filed by the ACLU. The government has argued that the program is entirely legal, but says they cannot prove as much without exposing state secrets.
In her opinion, Judge Diggs states: "In this case, the President has acted, undisputedly, as FISA forbids. FISA is the expressed statutory policy of our Congress. The presidential power, therefore, was exercised at its lowest ebb and cannot be sustained." The injunction (pdf) prevents the administration from "directly or indirectly utilizing the Terrorist Surveillance Program."
posted on August 17, 2006 01:21:52 PM new
You left a VERY IMPORTANT PART - of course I am sure it was not intentional and surely not bias
Because the terrorist surveillance program is an essential tool for the intelligence community in the war on terror, the Department of Justice has appealed the District Court's order," it said in a statement, adding that the department believes the program is "lawful and protects civil liberties."
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit.
Now here is my opinion-
As a citizen, I have a right to be protected from those that live only to harm America.
Of course along the way it may mean some inconviences , and invasion to an extent of our privacy is to be expected.
In todays' global world , we have very little privacy anyway . No one lives in a coccoon - their life is an open book for those with know-how to open and read .
This case will not change the way things are handled.
posted on August 17, 2006 01:26:45 PM new
You really have to take this one with a grain of salt. District judges are morons. They think they rule the world and in reality, their rulings rarely hold up.
This posting is clearly another in the long line of demomoron terroristic propaganda.
.
.
.
Many misleading tricks in 2006. The new Demomoron slogan.
posted on August 17, 2006 02:02:47 PM newof course I am sure it was not intentional and surely not bias
I'm glad you're sure of it, deur1, because I didn't leave anything out. I posted essentially the entirety of a short news blurb that I noticed on another website. If you'd like to look at it, it''s here: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/77415
It made no mention of the appeal. If it had, I'd have included that also.
This posting is clearly another in the long line of demomoron terroristic propaganda.
stonecold, in what way is a news post either propaganda, or terroristic? I'm guessing you can't justify that statement with anything that resembles a logical argument.
I suspect it's true that this won't change anything. This administration's disregard for the rule of law is becoming so flagrant that I have no doubt they'll keep right on spying.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 17, 2006 02:09:30 PM new
This supposed 'ruling' won't hold up. NO judge is going to be allowed to tie our governments hands so they CAN'T protect us. The USSC would NEVER allow this to stand, imo.
Secondly it is the MAIN function of the federal government to protect our citizens....and they are doing just that. Very well too, I will add.
In part: "White House press secretary Tony Snow said the Bush administration "couldn't disagree more with this ruling."
"United States intelligence officials have confirmed that the program has helped stop terrorist attacks and saved American lives," he said. "The program is carefully administered and only targets international phone calls coming into or out of the United States where one of the parties on the call is a suspected al-Qaida or affiliated terrorist."
"The ruling won't take immediate effect so Taylor can hear a Justice request for a stay pending its appeal. A hearing on the motion was set for Sept. 7, Snow said."
"The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs."
"They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, monitoring phone calls and e-mails between people in the U.S. and people in other countries when a link to terrorism is suspected."
"The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets."
----------
Leave it to the anti-American ACLU to not care about OUR SAFETY....but rather making THEIR JOB easier. ROFLMHO.....how typical of them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 17, 2006 02:24 PM ]
posted on August 17, 2006 02:17:02 PM new
Read the injunction Linda. The judge doesn't want the program wholly shut down, and she doesn't want anybody to stop "protecting us". She just wants the FISA rules followed for getting court orders for wiretaps. The Bush administration claims the court order process is too slow and that they'd miss opportunities if they had to follow the law, yet published histories have shown that the FISA courts are pretty darn lax in the way they hand out orders. They've even given permission for wiretaps as much as 72 hours after the taps began! This sure makes me think the administration is up to some real naughtiness in addition to "protecting us" if it's afraid to ask for orders from the FISA court.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 17, 2006 02:27:42 PM new
profe - the WA Times article ALREADY made that clear.
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
edited to add: THIS subject is NOT a partisan issue for me. It's about ALL Presidents being allowed to use the 'special powers' given to our Presidents in our Constitution. PERIOD. No such POWER was granted to ONE person/judge in our Constitution. I wouldn't care if it were a dem president in the WH....I would still believe that THEY have these special powers to be used in times of war. And that some LIBERAL judge should NEVER be allowed to make National Security decisions like this one has made. Not even an ELECTED judge at that....an appointed one. NOPE....she/no one person has THAT power....the power to decide National Security all by herself.
[Taken from today's WSJ - op ed]
"Last week the Detroit Free Press profiled Judge Taylor, noting that she "is a liberal with Democratic roots" who campaigned for Jimmy Carter in 1976 and was "rewarded" in 1979 with a judicial nomination. The paper adds:
Even if Taylor harpoons the spying program, experts said, the decision likely would be overturned by the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
"Given the composition of the 6th Circuit and its previous rulings in related areas, it seems more likely to favor national security over civil liberties if that issue is squarely presented," said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond in Virginia. "And that's what this case is all about."
posted on August 17, 2006 09:14:18 PM new
There won't be any jail peepa. If you knew much about any of this, you'd know it's not a criminal offense. Failure to follow the injunction will be a criminal offense, but there's already a motion for appeal, and a stay of the injunction is almost guaranteed. Bush and his buddies will go right on spying on you.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 18, 2006 05:43:48 AM new
Read the document for a better understanding of inherent powers.
From the decision....
"We must first note that the Office of the Chief Executive has itself been created,
with its powers, by the Constitution. There are no hereditary Kings in America
and no power not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent power' must derive
from that Constitution."
posted on August 18, 2006 10:28:28 AM new
Linda also has it 100% right on the money. This judge does not have the authority to over-ride national security.
This judge is now on the radar http://www.jail4judges.org/
.
.
.
Many misleading tricks in 2006. The new Demomoron slogan.
posted on August 18, 2006 11:24:54 AM new
I didn't call peepa an idiot stonecold, thanks in advance for not misquoting me. By the way, you have yet to explain why my original post was "terroristic propaganda".
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 18, 2006 11:32:34 AM new
Who reads the WA Times???? All those who want to read the FACTS....and not all that left winged BIAS that the treason times and WA post report. They don't "DO" journalism....they 'do' opinions in most ALL their articles. LOL And so one doesn't have to constantly read their 'corrections' pages where they weeks later actually post the TRUTH rather than whatever lie/misstatements they originally posted.
Oh...and those who also watch Fox News for the same reasons....to get BOTH sides of any story.
Here's a fun site that an old time poster, Irene, posted here years and years ago. [Thank you Irene] ...You can VOTE your mind...and your opinion/position is emailed to the proper sources so they know how you feel. Also....the site allows you to view how the others voted...so you can see for yourself where your opinion stands in comparison to the opinions of others.
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 18, 2006 11:36 AM ]
posted on August 18, 2006 03:05:50 PM newAll those who want to read the FACTS..
Oh yeah, uh-huh, the facts as filtered through the minds of MOONIES. I guess the fact that the self proclaimed new Son of God owns that paper, and that same pretender to the heavenly chair is nothing short of a radical arch conservative couldn't POSSIBLY tinge the content of his newspaper. Naw, only liberals do that, huh Linda?
I won't even mention Fox, what a joke that is.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 18, 2006 06:57:19 PM new
LOL profe - At least they're on OUR side....not like the NYT....who side against our Nation....especially in war times. And maybe 'moonies' as you like to call them actually learned something about how journalism is supposed to be done.....the facts....not their biased, anti-American opinions rather than JUST reporting the NEWS. And NOT stealing stories from others....nor plagerizing the work/words of others....nor mis-stating the facts. Do you even READ the corrections the NYT does ALL THE TIME? LOL LOL That alone will keep you reading for WEEKS.
edited to add: Better yet....read since you can't stand having a paper that reports the news properly.....in an unbiaed manner....try both these sites for a couple of weeks...to learn how falsely both the NYT and the WA Post print half-truths, out and out lies and how well they can TWIST facts.
edited again as the post link appears to have been moved....but there are plenty more sites that also watch the WA post....and show just how biased they are:
clickhere
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 18, 2006 07:13 PM ]
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 18, 2006 07:15 PM ]
posted on August 18, 2006 09:41:54 PM newNow that prof has been called out, he is flip flopping like a fish on shore.
Here's another question you can't answer Stonecold: In what way am I "flip flopping"?
You're great with the one liners and the insults, but you couldn't carry a coherent conversation in a bushel basket.
Now you have two questions I've asked waiting for your erudite response. I'm guessing if you answer at all it'll be with some kind of silly attempt at an insult rather than a reasoned argument.
Linda, I will not argue with you that there is bias in media, of course there is. What's laughable is that you only see it in liberal media. As far as you're concerned, the conservative clarions like Fox, WorldNet and the WT are unbiased, reporting only "facts", while liberal media are unamerican and reporting lies. That's just silly.
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
posted on August 19, 2006 12:11:37 PM new
That's right prof. When it is spelled out clearly, you try and divert attention away from it when it is perfectly clear. Simply another liberal terristic propaganda effert that you and bigdopa are famous for.
.
.
.
Many misleading tricks in 2006. The new Demomoron slogan.
posted on August 19, 2006 01:34:36 PM new
What's spelled out clearly stonecold?
What's perfectly clear?
What's the "it" that you think I'm trying to divert attention from?
Now, that makes SIX questions you won't answer. You won't answer them directly because you are unable to.
Like I said before, you couldn't carry a rational discussion in a basket.
edited to add: my mistake, there are so far only five questions you're incapable of directly addressing. Now you can take some playground cheapshot at my ability to count if you'd like. G'head
____________________________________________
Grow your own Dope. Plant a Republican.
[ edited by profe51 on Aug 19, 2006 01:36 PM ]
