SitNews - Stories in the News - Ketchikan, Alaska



Response to "Wiretapping Controversy"
By Mark Neckameyer


January 08, 2006

Liberal Democrats are so anxious to sling mud at President Bush that they have no problem twisting the law and facts and even seem ready to sacrifice a few American cities to get their side back into power.  This terrorism threat is getting very serious with Iran having or at he minimum, being on the verge of having the "A-Bomb".   As Iran, Syria and other terrorist sponsoring states despise us and everything we stand for, they will like likely share a few bombs with their Hazbollah friends as soon as they have them.  We must stay very vigilant and extremely tough.  We can't tie the Administration's hands now more than ever.  Say we cut back on monitoring terrorists and those who support them, help them, finance them whether foreigners living here or demented U.S Citizens or whoever.  And suppose we lost Detroit to an atomic bomb attack, near where the good Doctor practices.  Think Ted Kennedy would put down his drink long enough to blame President Bush for not being tough and vigilant enough?
First off, the current administration is doing exactly the same "eavesdropping" the same way as previous administrations did including the Clinton administration.  Guess why left-wing Democrats criticize now and did not when Bill Clinton was in the White House!  Second, The FISA law was passed by Congress authorizing judges to monitor the President.  In our system, the three branches; judiciary, legislative (Congress) and the President, are equals and cannot take away each others' constitutional responsibilities.  The U.S. Constitution charges the president with protecting us in time of war and Doctor Freedland, we are at war!  What if the President learned that terrorists were about to blow up Juneau, took a request to wiretap the perpetrators to a judge who said "no".  What then?  What would the judge know anyway?  He is unlikely to be an international terror expert.  This is executive branch responsibility and not the purview of the courts and that business about asking afterwards is nonsense ... and is unconstitutional. 
We wouldn't do it today but sixty years ago very liberal Franklin Roosevelt interned all Japanese living here, U.S. citizens included, at the outbreak of World War 2.  The Supreme Court ruled that FDR was acting within his authority under the constitution.  The government didn't know which individuals of Japanese extraction or origin might be foreign agents so all were put into camps ... and we probably prevented some attacks here as a result although some suffered.  Don't like the arrangement today?  Take it to the Supreme Court.  You are not going to bully George Bush into dropping his guard and getting us all blown to smithereens.  There is no chance of that happening, thank God!
The President isn't assassinating people who talk to Al Qaeda. We just listen to what they are saying on the phone.  Everybody I have spoken with thinks this is a wonderful idea and I suspect that Dr. Freedland probably agrees also but is taking the opportunity to score some political points.  I think this is a bad idea in this time of war.
Mark Neckameyer
Irvine, California - USA

About: Mark, a frequent contributor to our Opinion section, presently resides in Southern California but has plans to retire to spend Summers on the Alaska coast in two years.  He has been an active volunteer in a variety of civic activities including animal charities and MADD and he has been a volunteer in his local Republican Party during elections.

Related Viewpoint:

letter Wiretapping controversy By Robert Freedland - La Crosse, WI - USA



Note: Comments published on Viewpoints are the opinions of the writer
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.


Write a Letter -------Read Letters

E-mail the Editor

Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska