My 
just pegged.
search for 'Clinton wiretapped on U S citizens'
Posted on 12/19/2005 1:53:38 PM PST by Cinnamon
Unwarranted Outrage The Times blew our cover.
I have no doubt that revelations in the New York Times that the NSA has been conducting selective and limited surveillance of terrorist communications crossing into or out of the United States will be immensely valuable to our enemies. I also have no doubt that these and similar actions can be legal, even when conducted without warrants.
How could that be? From the sound and fury of the last few days from politicians and pundits, you would think this is a development as scandalous as Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy's authorization to wiretap Martin Luther King Jr. But the legality of the acts can be demonstrated with a look through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). For example, check out section 1802, "Electronic Surveillance Authorization Without Court Order." It is most instructive. There you will learn that "Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year" (emphasis mine).
Naturally, there are conditions. For example, the surveillance must be aimed at "the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers." Wait, is a terrorist group considered a foreign power? Yes, as defined in section 1801, subsection (a), "foreign power" can mean "a group engaged in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefore," though the statue language would explicitly apply to "a faction of a foreign nation or nations."
But isn't international terrorism that which takes place abroad, as opposed to homegrown domestic terrorism? Not exactly: Section 1801 subsection (c) defines international terrorism as, among other things, terrorist actions that "occur totally outside the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum." So if you are hiding, making plans, facilitating, attacking, or intending to spread fear inside the US, and have a link abroad, you are an international terrorist. Quite sensible.
O.K. fine, but what about the condition that there be "no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party?" Doesn't that necessarily cut out any and all communication that is domestic in origin or destination? Well, not quite. Return to section 1801, subsection (i): "United States person," which includes citizens, legal aliens, and businesses, explicitly "does not include a corporation or an association which is a foreign power."
Well sure, but does that mean that even if you are a citizen you cash in your abovementioned rights by collaborating with terrorists? Yes you do. You have then become an "Agent of a foreign power" as defined under subsection (b)(2)(C). Such agents include anyone who "knowingly engages in sabotage or international terrorism, or activities that are in preparation therefor, for or on behalf of a foreign power," and even includes those who aid and abet or knowingly conspire with those engaged in such behavior.
Wait, that includes anyone, even citizens? Yes — subsection (b)(1) is the part that applies to foreigners; (b)(2) covers everybody. And the whole point of the act is to collect "foreign intelligence information," which is defined under section 1801 subsection (e)(1)(B) as "information that relates to, and if concerning a United States person is necessary to, the ability of the United States to protect against sabotage or international terrorism by a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power."
Whoa, you say, that is way too much power for the president to wield without checks and balances! Well, true, and since Congress wrote this law, they included reporting requirements. The attorney general must report to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence 30 days prior to the surveillance, except in cases of emergency, when he must report immediately. He must furthermore "fully inform" those committees on a semiannual basis thereafter, per section 1808 subsection (a). He must also send a copy of the surveillance authorization under seal to the so-called FISA Court as established in section 1803; not for a warrant, but to remain under seal unless certification is necessary under future court actions from aggrieved parties under section 1806 (f).
This is significant, because it means that some of the same politicians who have been charging abuse of power may also have been briefed on what was going on long ago. The White House should get ahead of the story by noting which congressmen were informed of these activities, instead of allowing them to grandstand so shamelessly. It would also help if the White House released some information on how the surveillance has helped keep the country safe. What attacks were disrupted, what terrorists were taken down, how many people saved? A few declassified examples would be very useful to ground the discussion in reality rather than rhetoric.
So how do the revelations in the Times help the terrorists? Think it through — if you were a terrorist and you believed (as most people seem to) that the NSA would ignore your communications if they crossed U.S. borders, your best move would be to set up communications relay stations inside the U.S. Terrorists are well known for their ability to find and exploit loopholes in our laws, and this would be a natural. For all we know our intelligence agencies have been exploiting these types of communications for years without the terrorists knowing it. Now they will fall silent, because now the bad guys know better. So New York Times writer James Risen will sell his book, the Times will increase circulation, politicians will beat their breasts and send out fundraising letters, and who will pay in the end?
You can answer that one.
You mean before or after Robert Kennedy authorized wiretaps of people working in conjunction with our enemies?
Or FDR's wiretaps?
Not to mention all they did to round up Nazis in America during WWII.
The wiretap protections are creatures of LAW, not Constitution, especially when the proceedings are not uses in Court, as no "life, liberty, or property" is taken --- it is merely looked at.
There is no controversy other than the NYT being upset that the war in Iraq is well on its way to being won.
"That is because citizens of the United States have not been spied on before (at least to our knowledge) in a legal context. Hence the controversy!"
Well actually abuses by government led to the law being passed in the first place.
We knew who the Clintons were after. And if Bush did ANYTHING the Clintons got away with, we'd know. Heck GWs getting slammed for doing what's right and legal. He'd never get away with what you're suggesting especially since congress was briefed on NSAs activities. The Dems have known all along. They're just politically milking the story.
My just pegged.
search for 'Clinton wiretapped on U S citizens'
MY Troll meter has been screaming!
The Constitution was written to protect us, but not be a suicide pact......We have to protect ourselves from our enemies.....That is what is paramount....
I'm beginning to see that, as more and more facts come out and the whole thing is starting to smell.
Remember the kids and grandkids. These are the ones the NYT etal feel free to desroy the future of as they attemp on their own to bring down this Nation!!! And bet yer ass they consider it LEGAL, yes LEGAL. Think about it!!!!
MY outrage is not "unwarranted."
The slimes who did this should hang.
This law (FISA) has been on the books since 1978..Jimmy Carter issued an executive order allowing the AG to OK such wire taps without warrants.....I would guess he had a reason besides filling up a piece of paper for issuing the order....
snip
Judgments on who to monitor are made at the NSA, approved by an NSA shift supervisor and carefully recorded, Hayden said. "The reason I emphasize that this is done at the operational level is to remove any question in your mind that this is in any way politically influenced," he said.
_On the importance of the intelligence, Hayden said, "There are probably no communications more important to what it is we're trying to do to defend the nation ... than those communications that involve al-Qaida and one end of which is inside the homeland."
snip
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/domestic_spying_box_2
Hmm.. seems your hysteria is on the wrong track as information and history don't back you up.
You aren't from FR are you.
Got zot?
Love that meter!
MY troll meter is on CRITICAL ALERT!
"blew our cover"?
Any Art Bell listener knew about Echelon since 1997...
http://www.rviewer.com/main/AB03-25-1997Transcript.html
And if you search the old FR logs, you will find discussions of it...
The NYTimes is merely behind the times in covering conspiracy theories...wait til they find out about BigFoot...
;-)
No doubt he or she is a troll, but I figure the rare troll might actually learn something.
Here, presumably, the troll has learned the NYT has lied, at great cost to the country, for political gain and to sell a book.
Further, the troll may have learned that the controversy is made from whole cloth -- the actions are permitted by law (FISA 1802), and similar actions were done by Clinton and basically every president before Bush.
This may lead the troll from the darkness.
Probably not, but all it takes is a mustard seed.
Except "in time of war". Recall that FDR interned 110,000 Americans citizens of Japanese descent during WW II. Recall that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War.
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).
"The United States Constitution is not a suicide pact", Abraham Lincoln, 1863.
The Robbins article cites section 1801:
§ 1801. DefinitionsSo far, so good. The warrantless search provision will be a lock if it refers to 1801(a)(4).
Release date: 2005-03-17As used in this subchapter:
(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;
(4) a group engaged in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefor;
(5) a foreign-based political organization, not substantially composed of United States persons; or
(6) an entity that is directed and controlled by a foreign government or governments.
§ 1802. Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court
Release date: 2005-03-17(a)
(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that--
(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at--
(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or
(ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title;
(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party; and
(C) the proposed minimization procedures with respect to such surveillance meet the definition of minimization procedures under section 1801 (h) of this title; and if the Attorney General reports such minimization procedures and any changes thereto to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence at least thirty days prior to their effective date, unless the Attorney General determines immediate action is required and notifies the committees immediately of such minimization procedures and the reason for their becoming effective immediately.
We get the truth eventually but most Americans only get the initial headline. *sigh*
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.