Posted on 12/19/2005 1:53:38 PM PST by Cinnamon
In order to justify a warrantless surveillance under FISA, the argument boils down to converting a person from "United States person" as defined in subsection (i) to being a "Foreign power" as defined in either (a)(1), (2) or (3).
I don't buy that argument, and believe the power for the warrantless surveillance under discussion will be found elsewhere.
Of course, your mileage may vary.
According to FISA (which you still refuse to read the actual subclauses of the law) if an association cannot be wiretapped without a warrant if an American citizen will be included in that wiretap. Please, please, please, please, please read the law before commenting on it!
Recall that, according to the Constitution itself, national security while in a state of war supersedes some elements of the Bill of Rights (e.g., 4th amendment).
That defense might make sense if not for items like this:
"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.", George W. Bush, 2004
(taken from the White House website.)
This cannot be reconciled with what we now know. Even under the most Klintonic parsing of the language, he's lying.
You are using a specious argument. Since when does a President get to just declare an American citizen a terrorist and then be done with it? What if Hillary Clinton gets into office and declares you a terrorist and conducts a warentless wiretap on you, just because she can?
The Bill of Rights applies to American Citizens.
I dont know why I am wasting my time with you (and I shall no longer respond, so do not bother replying):
If the US Citizen joins Al quada or works with the some other foreign power, he or she forfeits her protection as a United States person.
One more time:
(i) ''United States person'' means a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as defined in section 1101(a)(20) of title 8), an unincorporated association a substantial number of members of which are citizens of the United States or aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or a corporation which is incorporated in the United States, BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE a corporation or an association which is a foreign power, as defined in subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section.
(a) ''Foreign power'' means - (1) a foreign government or any component thereof, whether or not recognized by the United States; (2) a faction of a foreign nation or nations, not substantially composed of United States persons; (3) an entity that is openly acknowledged by a foreign government or governments to be directed and controlled by such foreign government or governments.
Al Quada, the Iraqi Bathists, etc. are all foreign powers. If you work for them, you can be wiretapped.
The Courts have repeatedly agreed with the above interpretation. If you dont like it go talk to the judges.
Who determines if these American citizens are part of terrorist organizations? When do you start taking away their right to face their accuser and use the courts to defend their innocence? If they can be accused of terrorism, so can you. Not because you are a terrorist, but because you are an individual in this country and subject to whatever categorization the President wishes to put you in, criminal or otherwise, for reasons that need be justified only in his mind.
The Bill of Rights was put in place PRECISELY to protect against the "what ifs." That's why it is part of the CONSTITUTION of this country and placed there by the framers; it is not some sunset provision in an appropriations bill. You may or may not like what George Bush is doing as President, but he is only President. That is, someone else will be in power after him, and then someone else after that. The nation doesn't switch dictators every four years, and the Bill of Rights wasn't put in the Constitution for grins.
You present no proof that the courts have sided with your quite unique interpretation.
Nobody is arguing that an assocation is an American person and therefore protected from warentless wiretapping. What is obvious is that an American citizen is an American citizen, regardless of assocation, unless their citizenship is forfeited or taken away. And one does not forfeit their citizenship, and therefore designation as "United States person," by joining an organization, terrorist or otherwise. And as long as they are a United States citizen, they cannot be wiretapped without a court warrant in accordance with subclause B of FISA.
I will hand it to you though, you are quite creative. And the world needs creative lawyer types to do things like sue fast food restaurants for "causing" obesity.
And I would add, for emphasis, that ALL of the subclauses must be satisfied, not just one (that is, you cannot pay attention to the part about foreign power while ignoring the part about subclause B) unless it said "OR" not "AND" following each caveat.
Read the law carefully and you will see that's not the case.
And who determines all of that?
The argument you are making would apply to a foreign group with members that claim that they are American persons based on arguments OTHER than those found in subsection B (i.e. American citizenship, and I believe legal residence) perhaps by making claims of ties to American relatives, or working for an American company.
There may be reasons for doing it, but if it doesn't jibe with the Bill of Rights it is unconstitutional.
"There may be reasons for doing it, but if it doesn't jibe with the Bill of Rights it is unconstitutional."
There is NO Right in the Bill of Rights that gives terrorists freedom to be terrorists. Now you want to talk civil rights then maybe you got an inch of cover calling this unconstitutional. But of course lawyers can and do make the law say what ever they want it to say.
Which is the precise reason we have a secret FISA court.
Of course not. But there IS a right in the Bill of Rights that gives SUSPECTED terrorists the right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure.
The only way to send a message is to put people in prison for leaking this.
It is time to send a REAL message.
The republicans forced a vote of Mutha's pork barrel "return home" outrage.
This is right for action too.
Catch them, but do not watch them!..
Spying on al Qaida in America by
Walid Phares
"Use their systems, passports, citizenship, laws, traditions, books and media, create internal divisions among them, and inflict defeat on the kuffars [infidels], for in the current balance of power, all we need to do is to use their weaknesses as our strength."
Abul ala - Al-Ansar chat room, September 2005.
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.