Replies

It appears that a terrorist is not a criminal but an enemy soldier operating outside the law of war as well as the criminal codes. He may be operating inside or outside the U.S. Is he protected by the Bill of Rights? If so, then the war on terror is a law enforcement issue and we are full circle back to Sept 10, 2001. If not, then he is subject to surveillance and reconnaissance to determine his capabilities and intentions and to provide targetable intelligence to engage him without a court order. Since he may strike with surprise against unprotected civilians as a method of engagement there is an inherent sense of urgency every time new information is developed to determine what his intentions are.

The problem is that there are Americans inside the U.S. making contact electronically with these individuals. Some may be innocent. Some may be traitors (yes there may be Americans selling out their fellows for profit - drug smugglers and dealers do it all the time, but we accept that as a law enforcement problem). Whoever the individuals are they become suspect. It is a judgment call as to when and how to apply FISA to them and the lawyers will argue about this forever.

There is a risk/reward dilemma here. The risk of delaying surveillance is that a terrorist will be able to use the window of opportunity created by a delay to execute his operation. The reward is that we are assured that no one's 4th Amendment rights are violated. On the other hand, acting as we are now, the risk is that our executive department acting through its agents in the FBI and CIA will act not just on terrorist but also against political opponents. The reward is that actionable intelligence, if properly handled, will be available to possibly preempt terrorist without any administrative delay.

Isn't it ironic that the Barrert Report, which apparently makes the case that the previous administration was doing just that (acting illegally against its political opponents)with the IRS, is being suppressed by the very same people who are denouncing the methods used on the war on terror as being being extralegal?