What Bush Said Then vs. What He Says Now
In his weekly radio address on October 27, 2001 (a full six weeks after Congress passed the AUMF), President Bush told the nation the following:
And for some reason which I cannot begin to fathom, the press simply ignores all of his previous statements to the contrary.
The bill I signed yesterday [the Patriot Act]Within months after making this assurance to the American people, President Bush authorized the NSA to ignore the requirements of the law he had just signed and which he assured the American people would be "enforced to the full." Now that he's been caught, what is his stated reason for disregarding the law? He tells us the law was too "old" and "outdated" and not designed to deal with the realities and dangers posed by the modern terrorist.
gives intelligence and law enforcement officials
additional tools they need to hunt and capture
and punish terrorists. Our enemies operate by
highly sophisticated methods and technologies,
using the latest means of communication and
the new weapon of bioterrorism. When earlier
laws were written [FISA], some of these
methods did not even exist. The new law
[which amends FISA] recognizes the
realities and dangers posed by the
modern terrorist. It will help us to
prosecute terrorist organizations--and also
to detect them before they strike. . . .
Surveillance of communications is another
essential method of law enforcement. But for a
long time, we have been working under laws
[FISA] written in the era of rotary telephones.
Under the new law [which amends FISA],
officials may conduct court-ordered
surveillance of all modern forms of
communication used by terrorists. . . .
These measures were enacted with broad
support in both parties. They reflect a firm
resolve to uphold and respect the civil
liberties guaranteed by the Constitution,
while dealing swiftly and severely with
terrorists.
Now comes the duty of carrying them out.
And I can assure all Americans that
these important new statutes will be
enforced to the full. Thank you for
listening.
And for some reason which I cannot begin to fathom, the press simply ignores all of his previous statements to the contrary.



1 Comments:
And why isn't the liberal blogosphere on the "Bush lied" warpath now? Where are the Democratics? Are they really so inept that not one of them can hold a press conference and highlight what is the most concrete example of Bush lying that will probably ever be discovered? It really is unfathomable from almost any perspective.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home