I'm not sure what your point is. Are FISA warrants granted far too freely? I'm sure they are. And yet FISA safeguards were problematic enough for the Bush administration that Cheney and his legal team had to go through contortions to create an end-run around them. Read "Angler", the (excellent) book on Cheney's role in the previous administration, for more on that.

But be that as it may: whether the system is abused in the future or not, it seems to me hard to refute the idea that unfettered connectivity to a network that has been (perhaps negligently) connected to critical infrastructure around the country is something that the executive branch will have to address.

I was responding directly to your attempts to diffuse big brother concerns by implying judicial review would occur.

The requirement of judicial oversight does not preclude big brother attempts at censorship. Particularly when the courts feel they are deciding issues of national security. Your citation of the Bush administration does nothing but affirm this point.

Taking your argument about critical infrastructure at face value (which is still a big leap, as you've yet to define any concrete scenarios other than a power outage), there are better ways of achieving the same end goal without denying american citizens their natural and constitutionally affirmed rights.