Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

No Investigation Needed, Wiretaps legal.

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Calabrio

No investigation needed
By Pat Roberts

Through a criminal leak of highly classified information, the public, and our enemy, learned that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to intercept international communications of people believed to be linked to al-Qaeda. Many in Congress and the media rushed to judgment, decrying the program as illegal and unconstitutional, demanding congressional investigations.

As chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I — along with Vice Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. — have been briefed on the details of this program since 2003. I believe this terrorist surveillance capability is legal and constitutional.

The courts have long recognized that the president has the authority under the Constitution to conduct "warrantless" surveillance for the purposes of collecting foreign intelligence.

While Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to establish procedures for foreign intelligence surveillance, this law did not, indeed cannot, extinguish the president's constitutional powers. FISA provides one way for him to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance, but not the only way.

Until this week, leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees exercised oversight of the program. I recognize the benefit, however, of expanding that role. That's why I began discussing expansion of the committee's role with the White House several weeks ago.

The agreement we reached balances the executive branch's responsibility to protect intelligence sources and methods with Congress' responsibility to oversee intelligence programs.

My committee voted to form a seven-member subcommittee, which has now been briefed on the program. The subcommittee will provide enhanced oversight and will help ensure that any legislation related to the program is based on fact, not speculation.

Those who condemn the formation of the subcommittee want an election-year investigation with the accompanying partisan rancor. An investigation might serve a political purpose, but the subcommittee serves a national security purpose.

It's the constitutional duty of the executive branch to make the tough decisions necessary to win wars. That's not the case for the legislative branch, which has the luxury of criticizing actions with the benefit of hindsight. When it comes to national security, we should fight the enemy, not each other.

Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, is chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...ing-view_x.htm

Posted by: barry2952

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calabrio

No investigation needed
By Pat Roberts
I believe this terrorist surveillance capability is legal and constitutional.

Please acknowledge that this is only his opinion. My opinion is that an investigation is needed. I believe that a third party should look at this to keep it from being swept under the rug.

Posted by: nobodyspecial

Yes, but, with no offense intended toward Barry, the opinion of two gentlemen who have been in the loop for the entire program carries more weight with me than the opinion of someone who only has the premature spewings of the press as 'information', a press that has a history of false/misleading information regarding the current administration and screaming rumors as fact without checking on them (Dan Rather, killing/rape sprees in the Superdome, etc).

While there may need to be some accounting for what is going on, I believe it may not be necessary for the public to be fully informed for security reasons. It should be handled in-house by the elected officials. The theory is that the people elected to office are trusted by the people who voted them in.

The Government has top secret millitary secrets, should they also be spread out in the media to the entire World? These programs are no different. The information gathered would be unusable in a court on non-terrorist activities.