Posted on 01/20/2008 9:55:13 PM PST by jdm
Authority to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance comes from the Constitution and is vital to stopping foreign terrorist attacks and spies, says a Republican staff assessment of the revised Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"There is nothing new or aggressive about relying on Article II authority in the context of foreign intelligence surveillance," stated the assessment produced by the office of Sen. Christopher S. Bond, Missouri Republican and vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
The 13-page assessment counters Democrats and other critics of the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) who argued during a Senate filibuster of the legislation last month that electronic spying is illegal, began before the September 11 attacks, and that the program spied improperly on domestic telephone and electronic communications.
"There is no evidence to substantiate claims about warrantless spying on Americans prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks," the report stated. "Nor is there any evidence to substantiate the claim that the TSP covered domestic calls between friends, neighbors and loved ones. As the president has stated, the TSP involved the collection of international calls involving members of al Qaeda."
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, said during the floor debate last month that the surveillance program spied on innocent Americans. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, Connecticut Democrat, also said then that any surveillance without a court order undermines "our democratic society."
But the report stated that "warrantless surveillance for foreign intelligence collection has been an integral part of our nation's foreign intelligence gathering. During World War II, our warrantless surveillance of the German and Japanese militaries and the breaking of their codes preserved our democracy."
The Senate is expected to take up legislation as early as tomorrow on extending legislation governing electronic surveillance aimed at stopping foreign terrorists and spies.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Hmmm.
“Nor is there any evidence...”
Weasel wording. Inappropriate and disappointing.
A”right to privacy” does not appear in the constitution because that would be impossible to define. Does everyone have the right not to be overheard, or looked at even in public? Maybe in your own home, but when you place a phone call, especially out of the country, to some degree you give up that right. “Illegal search and seizure “, the rights of people to be “secure in their persons”, applies to property, which socialism more than anything else violates.
MICKEY KAUS - On page 93 of the new Gerth-Van Natta Hillary Clinton book, a sentence describes how, during the ‘92 campaign, Hillary herself “listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack. The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill. Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions.”
Only after they turned up the radio or ran the shower so she couldn't hear them.
Interesting use of words there. The recording was “secretly” made, no mention of it being “illegally” made.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.