!!!

BHS: "Suspected terrorists with American citizenship"? In another time this could just as easily read "enemies of the revolution". Now this is not to catagorically dismiss the notion that there was/is legitimate grounds for spying (I've no doubt there are radical elements at work inside the U.S.A). But the point here is that no one really knows who was being spied on and why. The fact that the Bushies were willing to ignore the legal requirements for domestic surveillance (when, as we've already discussed, it's not to hard to get a warrant), tells me something's amiss. FISA was enacted in (IIRC) 1978, so we're not talking a product of Clinton, but a longstanding and court-tested piece of legislation designed to check the power of the executive branch. And, again, FISA's provisions are hardly rigorous Again: we. Don't. Know. It could be terrorists. It could also be they were spying on dissidents, anti-war protestors, etc etc. The lack of judicial oversight here is a recipe for abuse. *shrugs* Well, what can you do? I guess there will always be people so goverened by fear of some otehr that they will hand over their freedoms to a benevolant power. But, as a wiser man than I said, "people willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

I'll pick "longtime member with a new identity for reasons I won't bore anybody but the moderator with (if he asks) for 200, Alex." But you admit perjury was involved. Plame was just the MacGuffin. But that's a discussion for another thread. I didn't say it did. In fact, I specifically said it allowed it: Which raises the question (which I already asked): "Why, given the apparatus already in place to authorize spying on Americans, did they forego the process?" And if the "legal advisers" are wrong (which they certainly appear to be)? I don't believe there was any Congressional oversight of this program. In fact, reps from both sides are saying they had no idea this kind of thing was going on. And even if they are lying and simply making the most of Bush's current low popularity, that doesn't mitigate the fact that the President authorized warrantless spying on Americans in violation of the law. If I see you kill someone and opt not to turn you in until a year later, that doesn't make you an innocent man.

Um: The false dichotomy here is, basically, your rehash of the old saw that "you're either with us or you're wih the ter'rists." In this case, the role of "us" is being played by "actual Iraqi citizens", despite the fact that many of those folks also happen to be "the terrorists". Based on high turnout and (temporary) lull in violence, those "actual Iraqis" who support Bush's vision took the time to vote, after which they went back to blowing things and people up.

Yup, that's a F.D. alright. The possibility does exist that Bush et al were labouring under the belief that they're intelligence was bang on. But, given the political interference in the intelligence gathering process, that possibility seems like a small one. None of which changes the fact you're full of crap on this whole domestic surveillance thing. Oh lookee! You didn't try to counter a single point! I look forward to your future scintillating contributions such as "I know you are, but what am I?" and the delightful couplet that begins with "I 'm rubber, you're glue."

Score another one for secularism, then.

BHS, meet false dichotomy. False dichotomy, meet BHS. Oh, I see you've met. Oh, but only in passing? Perhaps you two should get better aquainted.

So both Clinton and Bush were full of crap. No surprise there. Clinton oversaw the illegal bombing of Iraq and allowed Saddam to smuggle billions of dollars worth of oil to help build palaces. Bush invaded in order to work out some long-standing Freudian daddy issues and make the country safe for U.S. oil companies. Using bad policy as a defence for bad policy doesn't really work.

I'll remember that next time you bang on about Valerie Plame's husband being the one who revealed her identity or some such rot designed to obscure the point about administration officials (ahem: allegedly) perjuring themselves... As a matter of fact it does. FISA bars virtually any electronic surveillance conducted without a warrant or court order. Warrantless surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information is only okay provided that the communications to be monitored are exclusively between or among foreign powers and there is no substantial likelihood any ''United States person'' will be overheard. So: spying on Americans without a warrant=illegal. Based on your ridiculous coment asserting that FISA does not prohibit electronic surveillance (omitting the glaring fact that any such surveillance is always conducted with a warrant in hand), you're judgement on this matter cannot really be trusted. Mmmmm....love those right-wing talking points! And from Bush's mouth to your ear, no less!

What makes you think that an armed insurgency and political participation are mutually exclusive?

Swell. Also irrelevant. We're not talking about the PATRIOT Act. We're talking about Bush doing an end run around FISA, which allows the government to conduct the kind of surveillance they were undertaking, provided they had a warrant. So the question is: why did they decide to bypass the courts? FISA makes it a crime to conduct electronic surveillance except as provided for by statute. The only defense is for law government agents engaged in official duties conducting “surveillance authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order." Furthermore, the Supreme Court has, in the past, ruled that compliance with the warrant provisions of the Fourth Amendment is required, even in cases of "domestic subversive investigations". Based on these two pieces of evidence (FISA and the freaking Constitution), Bush's spying program is both illegal and unconstitutional. But hey: at least he didn't get a blowjob, right?

The issue is simply blind partisanship. To some "Democrats" are seated at the left hand of Satan simply by virtue of their political affiliation, whereas Republicans can do no wrong for they are as close to God as is possible for mortals to be. Who could have guessed that salvation or damnation could boil down to which party gets your $15? There's a word for people who see the world in such black-and-white terms: fanatic. Political partisans like MB are cut of the same cloth as Jehovah's Witnesses or suicide bombers: none can be reasoned with and all are best avoided.

Don't let the member status fool ya: I'm an old hand round these parts.

Sharkman proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed bobblehead blonde is queen.

Heh. I wonder if Dick Cheney got that spiel for spilling the beans about the CIA's secret detention facilities. Cerrtainly we can trust the government to perform unauthorized and probably illegal surveilance. No government would ever abuse such powers and only the guilty need fear. Just put your trust in Dear Leader and everything is gonna be alright... How hard is it to get a warrant, anyway?