SPY vs. LIE
It's lunchtime for the Senators who are questioning Mr. Gonzales and why I'd love to do a recap I have to admit that others have done such a good job it's just stupid for me to try. I can give my interpretation of Gonzales' "testimony:"
"This program is legal because of the terrorist attacks of 9/11."
That's it. That pretty much sums up his argument. But if the program is legal:
1. Why did they have to hide it?
2. Why are they referencing Presidents who made such executive decisions as validation, when a majority of them made their decisions before the FISA law?
3. Why don't they change FISA so they can do "surveillance" with no fuss?
4. Why are so many past politicians and legal scholars disagreeing with Gonzales' analysis?
5. And finally: why can't they show some kind of proof that this is working? That this program is catching terrorists, not enemies of the President or people who have dissenting views? Proof would quiet this whole ordeal rather quickly.
Comments