Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, July 24, 2008 07:57 PM

  @kd6rxl

  There's nothing 'historic' at all about Bush's supposed shredding of the constitution

  If Bush hasn't quite managed to shred the Constitution yet, it isn't for want of trying. He's explicitly demanded that he have the unchecked personal power to apprehend and detain American citizens, with no authority required other than his signature, or that of one of his "deputized agents."

  Bushco 'constitution-shredding' is about snooping on foreign extremists to avert more 9/11s.

  I'll repeat my challenge to those adhering to this explanation: lay out in detail exactly what the post-9/11 era surveillance-without-warrant powers would have been able to accomplish to prevent the attacks, that ordinary coordination of effort and an average 1990s computer-savvy level of technological competence prior to the present-day Permanent State of Emergency couldn't have accomplished just as easily.

  I've long since grown impatient with the dismal, teevee-level depth of knowledge evinced by the general run of Bush apologists I've encountered. However, I'm not going to go back into my letter archive to hog bandwidth by cutting and pasting the posts laying out the evidence supporting my points. They can be easily perused by anyone, with minimal effort, in about an hour's time. You want to make an argument against my position, refer to them first, along with the references offered in support. I have better things to do than reprint my posts for people with their eyes squeezed shut.

  —cabdriver Read cabdriver's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel