The Obama DOJ released some memos outlining the previously held positions on the limits (or lack thereof) on presidential power:
“Among the documents from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) is a 2001 memo declaring that in terrorism cases the military may conduct searches in the United States without a warrant if approved by the president.”
So what? If you are not a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about. Besides, this happened right after 9-11 (remember that)…The president has an obligation to protect the USA. We had no clue who these people were or how many were still around. Why wait for a piece of paper if we feel that death and destruction is upon us?
It is really scary when people are perfectly fine with civil liberties being suspended as long as it doesn’t affect them. As long as the bad people get caught, who cares? Doesn’t matter who’s rights get trampled as long as they find that one guy who might or might not hurt us. Yay us! We are turning into the goverment we despise.
It is really scary when people are perfectly fine with civil liberties being suspended as long as it doesn’t affect them. As long as the bad people get caught, who cares? Doesn’t matter who’s rights get trampled as long as they find that one guy who might or might not hurt us. Yay us! We are turning into the goverment we despise.
X2
It is really scary when people are perfectly fine with civil liberties being suspended as long as it doesn’t affect them. As long as the bad people get caught, who cares? Doesn’t matter who’s rights get trampled as long as they find that one guy who might or might not hurt us. Yay us! We are turning into the goverment we despise.
unbeknownst to you, the united states never actually left the british empire! we’re now just preparing you for the day we officially bring you back in as the Dominion of Semi-Northerly American Provinces. (D-SNAP)
Before we jump up and down about civil liberties being suspended, let’s at least look at the actual policy and the argument actually made in the memo. The memo is not really about allowing the military to conduct searches. It’s about the President’s authority to deploy military forces to combat or deter terrorism without having to wait for Congress to declare war or authorize the use of force. Allowing the military to conduct searches is not really a focus of the memo, and the memo doesn’t take or give any rights. It’s just a legal interpretation of what the President can do in relation to Sept 11th, given recent Congressional and Judiciary action.
You should read it before jumping to conclusions one way or the other.
Before we jump up and down about civil liberties being suspended, let’s at least look at the actual policy and the argument actually made in the memo. The memo is not really about allowing the military to conduct searches. It’s about the President’s authority to deploy military forces to combat or deter terrorism without having to wait for Congress to declare war or authorize the use of force. Allowing the military to conduct searches is not really a focus of the memo, and the memo doesn’t take or give any rights. It’s just a legal interpretation of what the President can do in relation to Sept 11th, given recent Congressional and Judiciary action.
You should read it before jumping to conclusions one way or the other.
Exactly right. It’s also worth noting that no such action has ever occurred.
My response was to his not caring to wait for a “piece of paper”. That’s what I find the scariest.
Why does that scare you? Remember, these are terrorists we’re talking about. We know they are guilty.
why is that scary? sometimes waiting will get you and others killed. immediate danger requires so called rules, procedures to be set aside.
they dont need search warrants to search lockers at school, or backpacks at events…or to x ray you luggage prior to boarding a flight???
after 9-11, they knew who they needed to watch. there are some bad ass mean head chopping off mo fo’s out there that want to kill every “infidel” they can, including YOU~!
“Thus, for example, we do not think that a military commander carrying out a raid on a terrorist cell would be required to demonstrate probable cause or to obtain a warrant.”
So, the Executive Branch alone decides if it is indeed a terrorist cell and not just some innocent citizens. No Judicial oversight required.
I always thought the purpose of “probable cause” and warrants was to ensure that the Executive Branch couldn’t just search anyone and everyone at their whim. Checks and balances and all that. This memo says that is not the case: the Executive Branch does not need checks and balances to raid (“search”) whoever they deem appropriate.
they dont need search warrants to search lockers at school, or backpacks at events…or to x ray you luggage prior to boarding a flight???
That’s good: compare warrantless searches of adult citizens to kids in schools and people at private events. Nobody makes you have your luggage x-rayed at the airport: you can walk away. Try that to the guys who show up at your door with a battering ram.
lets say for instance, we knew there was a bomb in such and such persons apt, set to go off in 2 hours, and we have good intell that it is going to happen, should we wait for the search warrant to go into this presumed NOT GUILTY persons apt tp search for so called bomb, or do we just go do it?
If we wait and bomb goes off, people would bitch,“why didnt you just go take of it” “why did you wait for a warrant”…
If we didnt wait for warrant and go get bomb, some would argue to set so called non guilty party free due to illegal search and seizure…
sometimes we, you, us have to improvise, adapt and overcome. Believe it or not, we do have enemies out there.
lets say for instance, we knew there was a bomb in such and such persons apt, set to go off in 2 hours, and we have good intell that it is going to happen, should we wait for the search warrant to go into this presumed NOT GUILTY persons apt tp search for so called bomb, or do we just go do it?
If we wait and bomb goes off, people would bitch,“why didnt you just go take of it” “why did you wait for a warrant”…
If we didnt wait for warrant and go get bomb, some would argue to set so called non guilty party free due to illegal search and seizure…
sometimes we, you, us have to improvise, adapt and overcome. Believe it or not, we do have enemies out there.
What if there is no bomb there? “Oh, sorry, never mind”? In any case, I’m pretty sure that police do not need a warrant when there is clear evidence of an imminent crime or destruction of evidence of a crime, or something like that. This memo goes way beyond that.
We have enemies out there? Who knew? How did we manage to survive lo these 230 years?
I think a military commander with specialized training in terrorist cells would be in a better postiion to make the call than some dumbass congress man or judge. besides, read the damn thing, again we didnt know what the hell happened, we didnt know if anything else was going to happen, such as snipers on freeways, gunmen attacking malls or crowded sporting events…we needed the flexibility to conront any danger with quick reaction.
Now the test…Please tell me when any of this was actually done to citizens of the USA??? Such as battering rams battering down doors, military persons raiding homes? Illegal anal cavity searches?
The president wanted this option just incase it was more than a bunch of punks hi-jacking planes…
And dont think some in the senate, repub and dem didnt know about this…The senate intel commitee is breifed on everything!
**why is that scary? sometimes waiting will get you and others killed. immediate danger requires so called rules, procedures to be set aside. **
True enough. But there is no reason to throw out the whole set of rights. There are a lot of clever people who have been working with these concepts for literally hundreds of years. There are procedures (rules) for immediate danger. The problem was that the Bush Administration wanted to (and did) throw them out without demonstrating that they were inadequate for the task. Why your complacency with dispensing with the rules is scary is that you are, logically, good with surrendering what is a searchable emergency to someone else’s whim. You trust that it would be limited to terrorists immediately trying to hurt and kill Americans, your “mean ass head chopping mo fo’s.” The procedure you advocate has no such limitation. That is just a bad idea.
they dont need search warrants to search lockers at school, or backpacks at events…or to x ray you luggage prior to boarding a flight???
The difference with searches in public venues, events and flights, and private residences is the difference between public and private. By going to an event, you make a decision to subject yourself to a search. In you home you have a right to not be subjected to an unreasonable search. What makes it reasonable? An independent judge deciding that there is cause to allow the search, or that the circumstances justify the use of an alternative procedure.
The Obama DOJ released some memos outlining the previously held positions on the limits (or lack thereof) on presidential power:
“Among the documents from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) is a 2001 memo declaring that in terrorism cases the military may conduct searches in the United States without a warrant if approved by the president.”
What’s kind of amazing about it is that in toto it argues for a de facto state of martial law, giving the military rights to do whatever they want within the borders, as well as abrogating such basic rights as habeas corpus and due process.
The irony, of course, is that conservatives will reflexively back them up, without thinking. Consider this, if the takeaway for conservatives is that there’s no problem here and if you’re not a terrorist you have nothing to worry about, why don’t they advocate for “Big Brother”, daily searches of your property, cameras in your house, etc.? If you’re not a criminal, then you have nothing to worry about, right? The same could apply to torture as well - if torture is so great, then why don’t we let every police sergeant in the country use it as well? The irony is that conservatives are always crowing about “freedom” from an oppressive government, to the point of having crazy right-wing militia groups like Posse Comitatus forming to fight this imagined diminution of freedom. However, when a Republican administration invents ways to expand unitary power beyond anything imaginable, they stand and clap. I don’t think you need to be Ron Paul to find that rather odd. “Public safety” is often used as an excuse for all sorts of smothering but safe societies in history; I don’t think we need to name them all to get that point across clearly.
then you apologize and move on…like i said, the military or police officers were not battering down doors with battering rams, this was an OPTION the prez wanted…because we had no clue what was going on on 9-11 and what the extent of the attacks were or were they would end or when they would end!