Can we cut to the chase?
Had this elevated to the front-page at RedState - so I figured I'd put it here, too.
I have previously admitted that I cannot follow the whole FISA/Domestic Spying™ kerfuffle without my head exploding, but I've truly reached the boiling point. So, for those of you ready to impeach George Bush for "spying", I present two scenarios:
Scenario A: A known or suspected terrorist (meaning that said scumbag is on some watch-list somewhere that I assume is updated and reviewed periodically), while outside the borders of the United States places a phone call to another sentient being located somewhere inside the borders of the United States.
Scenario B: The reverse of Scenario A - A sentient being located inside the borders of the United States places a phone call to a known or suspected scumbag located outside the borders of the United States.
Everyone with me?
Good. Read on...
Here's what we know about these two Scenarios:
Still with me? Good. Moving on.
So, here it is. For the people who are ready to jump on the Feingold/Conyers Grand Impeachment Bandwagon, please answer me these questions:
For the record, my answers to these are "No - and if it does mean that the law needs to be changed, immediately" and "Shoot No". If my neighbor is having a phone conversation with a known or suspected terrorist overseas then I darn-well want someone else to be in on that conversation.
The Constitution is not a Suicide Pact.
Thanks for playing.
I have previously admitted that I cannot follow the whole FISA/Domestic Spying™ kerfuffle without my head exploding, but I've truly reached the boiling point. So, for those of you ready to impeach George Bush for "spying", I present two scenarios:
Scenario A: A known or suspected terrorist (meaning that said scumbag is on some watch-list somewhere that I assume is updated and reviewed periodically), while outside the borders of the United States places a phone call to another sentient being located somewhere inside the borders of the United States.
Scenario B: The reverse of Scenario A - A sentient being located inside the borders of the United States places a phone call to a known or suspected scumbag located outside the borders of the United States.
Everyone with me?
Good. Read on...
Here's what we know about these two Scenarios:
- They are international calls.
- They involve a sentient being located inside the United States
- They further involve a known or suspected scumbag located outside the United States.
Still with me? Good. Moving on.
So, here it is. For the people who are ready to jump on the Feingold/Conyers Grand Impeachment Bandwagon, please answer me these questions:
- Is it your interpretation of the FISA that, in either or both of the scenarios laid-out above the fold, the NSA should have to go play "Mother May I" with a judge somewhere before they get to listen-in on that conversation?
- Regardless of your interpretation of the FISA, should the NSA have to go play "Mother May I" with a judge somewhere before they get to listen-in on that conversation?
For the record, my answers to these are "No - and if it does mean that the law needs to be changed, immediately" and "Shoot No". If my neighbor is having a phone conversation with a known or suspected terrorist overseas then I darn-well want someone else to be in on that conversation.
The Constitution is not a Suicide Pact.
Thanks for playing.