The Patriot Act
“The number one tool in defending this country is intelligence. Gathering it, investigating it, and sharing it. If we don’t have the full ability to use the tools of gathering, sharing, and using intelligence, we are putting very important weapons in the war on terror down on the ground and walking away from them. And I don’t think that’s anything we can afford to do. âÂ?¦ Our line of defense is a line with intelligence and investigation. And the PATRIOT Act gives us the ability to do that in a way that respects the Constitution, respects civil liberties, but gets the job done.”
I am going to start my argument against the Patriot Act by drawing your attention to where Bush states that the Patriot Act respects the Constitution and civil liberties. Think very hard on those words and see if you can spot the mixed message. The Constitution strictly prohibits wiring tapping without a court order. How is an act that permits the violation of our Constitution protecting our Constitution?
To paraphrase, a couple of days ago, Bush was asked if he feels he did any thing illegal in wire tapping phones without a court order. Bush’s response was no. Then he was asked about the war time laws that state clearly that wire tapping of phones is by statute (written law) illegal. Bush’s only rebuttal was that it is an outdated law. Murder laws have been on the books a lot longer than wire tapping, are they out dated laws.
I understand that technology is growing faster than our laws can keep up with, but to state that illegal wire tapping is out dated is about the same as stating that our Bill of Rights needs to be done away with. We still use telephones to communicate therefore the law still applies to current day.
Another point Bush made was that the only phones being tapped are of persons that are in communication with terrorist. This does not give me enough information to make an informed decision, but I would really like to know whom they consider to be “known terrorist” and why the government considers them so. Stating that they may be associated with Al-Qaeda does not give me enough to work with. If they produced more proof of the associations, then maybe I could see the need to tap their phones. I understand that such information if made to the general public could prevent the U.S. Inelegance from doing their job, but then again, that is why we have courts to decide these matters.
Bush also stated that the only calls being tapped are made from inside our borders to outside countries. What reassurances has he given us that this is truly the case? How do we, the citizens of this great nation, know for sure that Bush is being completely honest with us? How do we know that every day citizens are not on that suspected terrorist list because of some ridicules comment they may have made out of anger?
Bush’s track record for honesty is not that great. His ignorance in his decsions only makes me worry.
