Zero Hour in Westminster

[Tex]

Interesting read about a case where the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) rejected a FISA application, which was overturned on appeal. It also, though I didn't read all of it, goes into FISA and FISC in extreme detail.

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/082102appeal.html

From the article under "Conclusion" at the very end of the piece.

"It is respectfully submitted that the judgment of the FISC in this case, including its adoption of the opinion and order of May 17, 2002 and its new Rule 11, should be vacated, and the case remanded with directions to the FISC to grant the FISA application as submitted."

So, here we have a case where the FISC rejected a FISA application and later it was shown to have done so in error. Now, is this the slowdown the government is talking about? That may be. I wonder how many other times this has happened.

Or this could be tied into the Patriot Act and a change that was made to FISA, and now it's been resolved. I haven't read enough to know for sure. It's damn long.

But what if this one time the denial of the application cost us thousands of our citizens' lives?

Again, I agree the president should operate within the law. But if the law as it stands now isn't sufficient in today's highly technological world, then the law needs to be changed to where the process is as fast as possible without having to circumvent the law in the process.

[GoodCitizenDan]

But, hey, maybe people are just idiots.

The majority of people ARE idiots, either by choice or by birth. Especially in this day and age, where 80% of americans spend over 4 hours a day watching mindless drivel on TV, the majority of people are predictably reactionary.

Getting people to react how you want is actually pretty easy. It just depends on how far you're willing to take the act.

[GoodCitizenDan]

...the president should operate within the law. But if the law as it stands now isn't sufficient in today's highly technological world, then the law needs to be changed to where the process is as fast as possible without circumventing the law.
It's really that simple.

I agree with you that if the system isn't working up to spec, then it should be modified until it can perform its appointed function.

I DON'T think that removing checks and balances from the system is the correct response, though.

[Tex]

The majority of people ARE idiots, either by choice or by birth. Especially in this day and age, where 80% of americans spend over 4 hours a day watching mindless drivel on TV, the majority of people are predictably reactionary.

Getting people to react how you want is actually pretty easy. It just depends on how far you're willing to take the act.

I hear what you're saying. But my thinking would be an idiot would automatically think it's the president's fault we were attacked, that he didn't protect us enough, etc.

A rational person who's not just "reactionary" would be able to understand it's impossible to forsee everything that might occur and prevent it. There's no way in hell.

That's why I took the position I did. We agree people are idiots, and I see the idiots pointing the finger at the boss, that stooge we call Bush. But we'll see.