ACLU Shocked at Bush Use of National Security Agency for Domestic Spying...

ACLU ^ | 12/15/2005

[Jay777]

WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed shock about revelations reported in the New York Times that President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on conversations of Americans and others in the United States. According to the report, this spying occurred without any court order and was focused on telephone and e-mail communications of "hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States" with persons abroad. Electronic surveillance law generally prohibits non-consensual eavesdropping in the U.S. without a court order based on probable cause.

The following can be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:

"Eavesdropping on conversations of U.S citizens and others in the United States without a court order and without complying with the procedures of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is both illegal and unconstitutional. The administration is claiming extraordinary presidential powers at the expense of civil liberties and is putting the president above the law. Congress must investigate this report thoroughly. We also call upon Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to appoint a special prosecutor to independently investigate whether crimes have been committed.

[skimask]

Well said. Donald Rumsfield and Porter Goss MUST find these leakers and expose them for what they are. Seditious traitors.

[oceanview]

what is also amazing about this, is how the adminisrtation is totally blind sided by this.

this was obviously well planned to be released this week during the iraqi elections and the Patriot Act revote, well orchestrated with the various leftist groups, and even McCain and Spector seem to have been tipped to do their thing and instantly call for investigations.

yet, the administration is once again not prepared with any rebuttal. is anyone at the white house plugged in to the political machinations inside the Beltway, before they break?

[Waco]

"Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool." Didn't anyone tell the queer-baits??

[frankjr]

The ACLU supports terrorists, so of course they would be upset about policies that negatively impact their "friends".

[Jay777]

If you think the ACLU really cares about your privacy, You Need To Read This.

[golfisnr1]

ACLU = Anti Christian Lawyers Union

[mnehring]

"No President is Above the Law." What happened?

Simple, no laws were broken.. the NSA can legally tap international calls, that falls within their jurisdiction. The story is being spun to make it appear it was domestic spying, but the very first 'breaking news' on this clearly stated they were international calls and e-mails.

The real law breakers are those who leak national secrets and those who falsely report the news.

[golfisnr1]

The President has followed the law on this matter.

[oceanview]

did you even read the original article? even the Times piece itself mentions how many justice department reviews took place during each use of this. what the hell do you want the president to do, ask the ACLU and the NYT their opinion on this matter before exercising this?

[Victoria Delsoul]

I signed the petition.

[popdonnelly]

If the notion of a special prosecutor hasn't been thoroughly discredited by now, I vote that it should be. To be as blunt as possible, special prosecutors are a waste of time and money, and only serve to trash the reputations of otherwise worthy individuals.

[Jay777]

Thanks!

[muawiyah]

We are not particularly interested in whether or not "W" broke the law ~ we are confident he didn't.

On the other hand, we are very interested in bringing the New York Times and their running dog lackeys before the bar of justice and sending them all to prison for a very long time.

[AmishDude]

Welcome to FreeRepublic. How'd ya find your way here?

[oldfart]

Admittedly, I have not read the law in question. I doubt any of you have either since it's probably pretty dry reading. I did receive a thumbnail description of it though.
The NSA can eavesdrop on anything it wants, but there are restrictions on what it can record. On a conversation between an American citizen and a citizen of any other country only that portion of the conversation spoken by the foreign citizen can be recorded without a warrant issued by a court.
As was pointed out earlier this evening, that leaves the government in the possible position of recording "What do you plan to attack," from the alien and being unable to record the answer from the American. While I admit such a situation is not very good, I still say it's better than trashing the Fourth Amendment.

[FunkyZero]

Ummm... can the ACLU come up with a single person who has suffered unjustly becasue of this?



I didn't think so...

[oceanview]

watch the opening segment of OReilly on the replay (Tony Snow hosts) and listen to some informed people talking about this. that's all I can tell you.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Someone broke the law alright - the Official Secrets Act.

They signed it. Promised, under penalty of a world of hurt dropping on their head, to uphold it, for America.

Then somebody didn't. They should go to jail.

Simple.

[oceanview]

and no, its not "better then trashing the 4th amendment". the constitution is not a suicide pact.