TheRealMafoo on 12 July 2009
| Sqrl said: I vehemently disagree with allowing all of congress to be briefed on every aspect of TS/S affairs. There is certainly an oversight and policy requirement but this is balanced against national security issues. And as much as people like to roll there eyes at the scare phrase "National Security" it is naive to think it is always illegitimately used (thus the need for oversight). As for the article from what I can tell congress was simply not briefed on the program in question right? So why are they claiming th ey were misled (other than their penchant for dramatics)? Not being privy to information is not that same as being given misinformation. |
We have thousands of people with very high level clearances. 535 more would not be that much. Plus, these should be the people you trust the most. If not, why the hell did you elect them?
I do think we, as a nation, should do a lot better job electing people with character, but I also think once we do, they should know all the information needed to do there jobs.
I personal think everyone in Washington cares deeply for the US, and would go out of there way to keep us safe. I just argue about there methods and what they think America stands for, but never there dedication to the country.
