Originally Posted by DVPGSR
For arguments sake lets say the FISA courts do not approve a warrant to listen to certain conversations. And to continue the argument lets say they are wrong and did not prevent a terrorist attack. Would it not be better to have listened without a warrant?
So what you're saying is that it's better to violate the rights of the people and avoid the due process of law because if we don't a terrorist attack might occur?
Now then... which country will you be protecting with this strategy? Because it won't be the United States of America when we're done implimenting this policy. More like the United States of East Germany. Someone call the Stasi.