Warrantless Wiretapping Again

President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program has once more come under the public eye, this time from a Federal court calling his plan unconstitutional and wanting it closed. The President, while at Camp David, Md. Voiced strong objections. CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reported in his first public comment on the matter, Mr. Bush said he "strongly disagrees" with the judge's ruling and believes the program is needed to protect the nation.

"I would say that those who herald this decision simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live. I strongly disagree with this decision," he told reporters at the presidential retreat in Camp David.

"We strongly believe it's constitutional and if al Qaeda is calling into the United States we want to know why they're calling," he said.

The Justice Department is appealing the ruling.

This warrantless wiretap program is an interesting creature onto itself, which has appeared to take on its own sentient life existence since it was made public by the NY Times amid a mixed outcry from both sides of the left and right. That incident is still under discussion among some camps and some feel it should have been treated as an act of Treason and not the Patriotism umbrella the NY Times is working under. This whole incident reminded me of the 1971 Pentagon Papers in which Daniel Ellsberg met the same media, political and legal fate.

Personally, I do not have any mixed emotions pertaining to the warrantless wiretapping program whatsoever, I am well satisfied as an American taxpaying, voting citizen that if it saves the life of one American citizen, one American military personnel or stops the destruction of one piece of American landscape then damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.

I have read a few comments lately that put this into a better perspective and I have been searching through my constantly growing scrapbook collection of web captures to locate them to quote for you without success, they suggested had the President asked Congress for a Declaration of War against Terrorism, which was offered by that legislative body during the hand-holding and America the Beautiful singing after 9/11 the President would have been acting under a different constitutional law which governed war powers and the program would have been perfectly legal.

That is an interesting analogy and I have heard it mentioned before, but I have no idea if it would withstand the scrutiny of Federal court or not as I am not the familiar with the war powers act. I will post the quotes should I come across them later.

Suffice to say I feel strongly in my statement that the protection of American lives and property should be first in any program enacted to combat terrorism and I feel secure that we have enough checks and balances in place between the executive, legislative and judicial branches to insure our rights are safely protected. It is not we American who should be concerned, but the cowardly, murdering terrorists bent on the destruction of our way of life and very existence upon this earth.