One of the most troubling things to come out in the last few months, is the president's domestic spying program. This confirmed, for every paranoid citizen out there, that the government is in fact spying on you. According to reports, Bush authorized the NSA to spy on American citizens as a means to thwart terrorist plots to attack America. So what is significant?
What this means is that Bush gave the NSA blanket permission to collect information (spy) on anyone they suspected of terrorist activities. These information gathering techniques could include phone tapping. By blanket permission I mean that the NSA would no longer need to obtain court warrants to launch these types of investigations. You know, those things that prevent government agencies from exceeding their power and violating the rights of the citizenry.
So who gave Bush the right to authorize this... well... that's even more entertaining. First, the administration has stated that FISA (the act that regulates this kind of thing) should be considered unconstitutional if it does not allow this kind of domestic surveillance. So if you violate a certain policy, and you don't wish to be punished for it, you just tell everyone that you don't like the policy and poof -- you're off the hook? The second part of this is the Authorization for the Use of Military Force. You remember, that thing that the administration interpreted as "go invade Iraq" -- It also came up a few times during the election. While FISA 'does' allow for unrestricted domestic surveillance, it only allows it to be conducted for 15-days after declaring war -- We're a little beyond that, now.
The obvious issue here is that the President exceeded his power in authorizing this surveillance. Whether the provisions of FISA are too restrictive is a matter for congressional review, not something to be side-stepped. It is for this reason that Samuel Alito's comments about executive power were so important. To those who would say, "but I trust that the President it trying to protect Americans and regardless of the law the intention to do good is there." -- The point of this is not 'intentions' the point is the violation of laws put in place by congressmen and women to protect the rights and privacy of their constituents.
Comments