When president bush instituted it and president obama continued it, they didnt have an open discussion about whether the country should have such a program. And actually that seems to run through a little bit of yesterdays opinion by judge lynch. Even dick cheney. This is something that i discovered in writing this book that nobody had ever seen before. When he wrote his dissent in the irancontra matter, he said if you have a hard Foreign Policy or National Security issue, a wise president first would not engage in excessive secrecy, and, second, a wise president would have a full and open democratic discussion in which he would attempt to persuade the public of the need for validity of a broad program. The concept delineating between the number of people affected or how targets are picked, versus the program itself, i think is valuable, and it gets to a question that i would like a from everybody on. There is a trust problem that now exists, for whatever series of reasons. An example
Public of the need for validity of a broad program. The concept delineating between the number of people affected or how targets are picked, versus the program itself, i think is valuable, and it gets to a question that i would like a from everybody on. There is a trust problem that now exists, for whatever series of reasons. An example of a concern that i at least have was revealed through a usa today piece that came out last month that revealed that the dea had been conducting a Metadata Collection Program ten years before 9 11. One of the concerns and maybe this is pessimism or paranoia depending on who you ask, is that stopping a program like the telephone Metadata Collection Program that is ongoing under authority, how do we know it does not show up under another 30 . It is a sincere question that premuch everybody, because theres no reason to hold the community to such a paranoid standard, but how do we get to that point . I think this question is a real challenge because of the