ScottFromWyoming wrote:
So I was just throwing this out for conversation. Interesting that the comments on FP are 100% against. Not one whiff of "I see your point, but:"
scott i appreciate the effort
and people
can read it in full here without any hitches also people should know this about the author:
Stewart Baker is a partner at Steptoe & Johnson in Washington, D.C. He has been general counsel of the National Security Agency and assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security. His book on, among other things, the FISA Court is titled
Skating on Stilts . if i read this correctly, he's making a couple of points:
first, he thinks a reasonable interpretation would find it legal
second, it will help keep you safe from the bad guys and that this is the "easier and better" route to take
my take:
legal doesn't mean legit, moral, ethical and respecting human rights
people often say "we're a nation of laws" and "ignorance of the law is no excuse"
if those are examined objectively, they're both giant fails
some very ugly stuff has been legal before and some years there are approximately 40,000 to 70,000 pages stacked on the fed reg
like the lay person is supposed know and understand that, hell reps don't even know what is in there
the real issues are our military intervention and the consequences, unintended or not (CIA calls it blowback)
of course we (the vulnerable) always pay for the sins of leaders (the invulnerable)
i feel for the next generation, they've been sold out/off for the crimes/financial rape of the here and now
we as a nation should stop killing/murdering innocent people and apologize
dropping hellfires down someone's chimney and wasting entire families isn't going to foster the next evolution of human rights/cooperation
just put the guns and bums down let our reps negotiate
peace
)