Sunday, December 18, 2005

Should The President Protect Us?


The President's enemies have pounced on his decision to authorize eavesdropping on those with known links to Al Queda, as a grave assault on American civil liberties. Before real people buy into the critics' complaints, they should read the following:

The President said on Saturday that he acted in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks because the United States had failed to detect communications that might have tipped them off to the plot. He said that two of the hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf al-Hamzi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, "communicated while they were in the United States to other members of Al Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn't know they were here, until it was too late." As a result, "I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to Al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations," Mr. Bush said. "This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security."

The President, as commander in chief, made a decision to meet his obligations and protect America from those trying to blow us up. This might even be one of the reasons that we've not had another major attack since September 11, 2001. Neither my rights or the rights of other law-abiding citizens are threatened by this decision. Has everyone forgotten what's at stake? The terrorists could destroy New York City or Washington, D.C. in a single day. Should our President just sit back and wait passively for that to happen?

If American conspirators had been in contact with the Empire of Japan in early December, 1941, should President Roosevelt have been doing everything in his power to discover that information? Would our civil liberties have been threatened by the decision to listen in?

President Bush is doing everything he can to protect us from the terrorists, and my civil liberties remain. This policy is not a Hoover-like attack on civil liberties. This is our President doing everything in his power to stave off further attack, with no negative consequences for non-terrorist Americans. What would you do if it was your duty and responsibility to protect the United States of America from attack? A President Gore or Kerry would definitely not have done as much, and the next attack would have probably already taken place.

If the President were truly abusing his power, he'd be listening on on the private conversations of Russ Feingold, Noam Chomsky, and Patrick Leahy. Instead, he's trying to make certain we don't ignore the clear and present dangers that could destroy our civilization. Those who comprehend the grave risk we face should thank President Bush for his aggressive commitment to protecting the lives of American families.

Comments:
For the second or third time, I can actually remember, I agree with your political stance and the harangue you wrote.
 
I am not protected by the subversion of the Constitution.

We need to stand up for the 4th Amendment as strongly as the First or Second.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?