Duncan Black is trying to throw us off his trail by declaring that he is not stupid, but read what he says about the New York Times' report that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the phone conversations of potential terrorists:
So, publishing the fact that Bush has decided he can spy on people without warrants is going to damage national security even though we already had a very public policy which allowed us to do the same by getting a warrant which didn't even have to really be gotten until 72 hours after the spying began?Once again, I must ask: if these search warrants are so easily obtained, then what does that say about the oversight that the FISA courts provide? Isn't it more likely that the President's order to the NSA is a matter of acting in exigent circumstances to protect the American people? That isn't something that depends on retroactive authorizations ---which is a meaningless procedural burden to anyone who thinks about it for five seconds. Instead, Bush's order has been subject to dozens of reviews to guarantee that no civil liberties have been trampled on unnecessarily. What else should matter?
If it makes you feel better, Duncan, I'm sure that no court in the land would admit those eavesdropped recordings at trial without a prior search warrant. So buck up: your instinct to sympathize with and demand the rights of murderers to a fair trial is undiminished.
Bush is a lying criminal.Clearly, Duncan Black is a brave man to test the chilly waters of the Fourth Reich like this. After all, hundreds of bloggers have already been rounded up and concentrated in camps: doesn't he know he could be next?
And a wanker.