Posted on 12/16/2005 9:14:12 AM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - A key Republican committee chairman put the Bush administration on notice Friday that his panel would hold hearings into a report that the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States.
Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., said he would make oversight hearings by his panel next year "a very, very high priority."
"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Other key bipartisan members of Congress also called on the administration to explain and said a congressional investigation may be necessary.
Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., appeared annoyed that the first he had heard of such a program was through a New York Times story published Friday. He said the report was troubling.
Neither Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice nor White House press secretary Scott McClellan, asked about the story earlier Friday, would confirm or deny that the super-secret NSA had spied on as many as 500 people at any given time since 2002.
That year, following the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds — perhaps thousands — of people inside the United States, the Times reported.
Before the program began, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations. Overseas, 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time.
"We need to look into that," McCain told reporters at the White House after a meeting on Iraq with President Bush. "Theoretically, I obviously wouldn't like it. But I don't know the extent of it and I don't know enough about it to really make an informed comment. Ask me again in about a week."
McCain said it's not clear whether a congressional probe is warranted. He said the topic had not come up in the meeting with Bush.
"We should be informed as to exactly what is going on and then find out whether an investigation is called for," he said.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., also said he needed more information.
"Of course I was concerned about the story," said Lieberman, who also attended the White House Iraq meeting. "I'm going to go back to the office and see if I can find out more about it."
Other Democrats were more harsh.
"This is Big Brother run amok," declared Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass. "We cannot protect our borders if we cannot protect our ideals." Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., called it a "shocking revelation" that he said "ought to send a chill down the spine of every senator and every American."
Administration officials reacted to the report by asserting that the president has respected the Constitution while striving to protect the American people.
Rice said Bush has "acted lawfully in every step that he has taken." And McClellan said Bush "is going to remain fully committed to upholding our Constitution and protect the civil liberties of the American people. And he has done both."
The report surfaced in an untimely fashion as the administration and its GOP allies on Capitol Hill were fighting to save provisions of the expiring USA Patriot Act that they believe are key tools in the fight against terrorism.
The Times said reporters interviewed nearly a dozen current and former administration officials about the program and granted them anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.
Government officials credited the new program with uncovering several terrorist plots, including one by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting al-Qaida by planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, the report said.
Faris' lawyer, David B. Smith, said on Friday the news puzzled him because none of the evidence against Faris appeared to have come from surveillance, other than officials eavesdropping on his cell phone calls while he was in FBI custody.
Some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said. Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions.
Asked about this on NBC's "Today" show, Rice said, "I'm not going to comment on intelligence matters."
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the group's initial reaction to the NSA disclosure was "shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law."
Asked about the administration's contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn't comment until it sees some evidence. "They've veiled these powers in secrecy so there's no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight."
Earlier this week, the Pentagon said it was reviewing its use of a classified database of information about suspicious people and activity inside the United States after a report by NBC News said the database listed activities of anti-war groups that were not a security threat to Pentagon property or personnel.
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that while it appears that some information may have been left in the database longer than it should have been, it was not clear yet whether mistakes were made. A written statement issued by the department implied — but did not explicitly acknowledge — that some information had been handled improperly.
The administration had briefed congressional leaders about the NSA program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.
Aides to National Intelligence Director John Negroponte and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to comment Thursday night.
The Times said it delayed publication of the report for a year because the White House said it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. The Times said it omitted information from the story that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists.
Isn't spying completely legal under 'Scottish Law'???
Hasn't the NSA been monitoring international calls for years? Remember people's "distress" that after 9/11 intercepted calls from the terrs had not been looked at only stored?
Mountain, meet molehill.
Yup..
and the BARRETT Report
And to shove the Alito confirmation hearings back indefinitely to give the Dims' smear campaign more time to work.
So you suggest conducting electronic surveillance within our borders for the purpose of making our country secure and safer has absolutely nothing to do with the on-going, widespread security breach of our borders?
If this is the case, why do banks spend many millions on secured vaults to hold valuables? Would you suggest banks just leave their vault doors open for all, and just install listening devises?
That would be like you installing microphones in your home for security purposes, and then leaving your doors wide open, unlocked.
I am all for domestic intelligence and security, as I stated in my first post, but the above is exactly what is occurring in the United States.
Huh?
Sen Kennedy was later quoted as saying, "I have three pair of black shoes, a snowblower and some left over chicken in the fridge. Given that, I believe our borders are too open."
Spector call Rockefeller, he obviously didn't read the actual article before reacting. Tell me once again why Bush supported this joker.
I agree with that. However, during that period of our history we did not have thousands entering this country illegally every week. I don't think they would have put up with that in the 1940s, during wartime. Do you?
Let's not forget, we're talking about America (the good guys!) - in it's effort to stop future terrorist attacks. I'm sure they are looking at potential terrorist suspects only. Do you, or your profile, come anywhere near that. No? Then...not to worry, my friend.
Excuse me...Then, what is the evil intent of the NSA? It's kinda hard to visualize the danger they pose to me, while they conduct investigations of terrorist suspects.
I am saying that you can't use the latter as a basis for your being for or against the former, because there's no necessary connection between them.
Yes, they're both security issues; however, they're not the same security issue -- you can be for or against one, and for or against the other, and still be able to build a consistent argument for whatever combination of opinions you happen to hold.
Strip him of his chairmanship.
Alas, you would be incorrect, sir. According to this site:
The onset of World War II led Mexican migration to rebound, as Uncle Sam again faced a domestic labor shortage. Corporate recruiters flocked across the border afresh, looking for temporary farm workers, and Washington, D.C. and Mexico City searched for creative solutions to the lack of workers. These efforts culminated in the Emergency Farm Labor Act of 1942--better known as the bracero program.Under the bracero program U.S. officials could hire Mexican workers selected by the Mexican government and then, after guaranteeing transportation and a minimum wage, subcontract them to major agricultural interests. By the late 1950s, more than 400,000 seasonal braceros--the word is derived from the Spanish brazo, or "arm"--toiled legally on farms and orchards in Texas and other states. Their vulnerability to abuse by employers troubled the Mexican government, but the money they sent home was sufficiently valuable to their nation's economy that the program continued until 1964, when the American civil rights and farm worker movements, as well as the continuing mechanization of harvests, led Washington, D.C., to unilaterally call it off.
Interestingly, the program looks quite similar to the guest worker program proposed by the Bush Administration.
"These so called Americans (Republicans) in the US senate are scum bags. They want their names in the NYTs and the Washington Post more than they want to protect the nation."
Why not give it to "so called Americans (Republicans) in the US senate" to further their reelections?
Well of course they are both security issues. I never said they were exactly the same. You are the one that stated conducting warrantless electronic surveillance within our borders for the purpose of making our country secure and safer was (apples and oranges) compared to securing our borders.
Both are national security issues. However, our borders and immigration policies are our critical first line of defense, which should, without question, make them paramount and the number one priority in so far as national security is concerned.
Would you not agree?
Nothing at all to do with the NSA. My response had to do with the timing of this information and the zeal the Dems and RINOs received it. Just in time to push Able Danger further out of sight and get the Iraqi elections out of the public eye.
'nyslimes dictates policy again'
not only will this push able danger out of the limelight, but, the huge turn out of Iraqi voters will be ignored.
The paper should rename itself to the New York Democrat's Times. What is really frightening is the collaboration between the national main stream media and the Democratic Party.
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.