Posted on 08/17/2006 9:49:00 AM PDT by neverdem
Only to those with no knowledge of history, nor a good grasp of the Constitution. This is foreign intelligence (i.e. delegated specifically to the CinC), not law enforcement. FISA is where things go the other way - domestic cases which drift into national security. You did notice that this is by the NSA, and not the FBI, right?
they can if they want...but the Constitution obliges the President (and the President alone) to protect the nation against foreign powers, and authorizes the executive to make war. The Congressional role you are suggesting was specifically REMOVED from the Articles of Confederation when the Constitution was made.
Ummm. In cases like this...they didn't.
The problem is the UNWARRENTED taps on domestic sources.
That's not even the issue, much less the problem...and that's where you're getting all screwed up. The taps are on foreign sources, without regard for who they are talking to. The court ruling is that these foreign sources speech is protected from monitoring if they talk to domestic sources...and that's just silly.
I vote for a CounterTerrorist group that never hits the radar and wiretaps all they want. This Federal Judge is useless.
Yeah and while FISA is out having chai with the local Imam, the NYT can be warning our sleeper cells not to use their phones, cool.
I stand corrected; thanks for the link. :-)
these foreign intercepts have been a routine practice for decades - no warrants.
True - foreign, this ruling protects Americans Domestic calls
The taps are on foreign sources, without regard for who they are talking to. The court ruling is that these foreign sources speech is protected from monitoring if they talk to domestic sources...and that's just silly.
Cite your source, that's not what I understood.
This has actually happened before. It's well known in SIGINT circles that US Secretary of State Henry Stimson shut down the State Department’s cryptanalytic office, the post WWI era equivalent of the NSA. He's famously quoted as saying,“Gentlemen don’t read each other people’s mail.”
Not that there was any interesting diplomatic communications we should have been trying to intercept in the 1930s or anything...
Where did you come up with that whopper. There is nothing in FISA that limits it to the FBI. It's called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for a reason.
I think the point he's trying to make is that the Terrorist Surveillance Program is an NSA one because of the foriegn national security angle. FISA, naturally, applies to FBI, NSA, and any branch that collects applicable intelligence. But as far as turf goes, since it's a foriegn threat of a paramilitary, not criminal nature, directed at the United States, it's more naturally in the arena of the NSA.
Yep.
Well, it is monitored by oversight already. The program as it exists was run by FISA judges for legality, and Dems in Congress were briefed on it as well. There apparently was a point in 2002 when some of the judges and a couple of the Dems raised concerns. The program was suspended temporarily while changes were made to assuage those concerns, then reinstituted as modified. So its not like the Administration was running rampant -- not even close.
If the Dems who were briefed still had real objections, they had the legal right and responsibility to bring it to the attention of Congress as a whole. They chose not to do so.
I understand your point about an Executive running wild, but I think that's a myth in the context of this program. Judges did vet the program, and members of the opposition were briefed on it. They raised concerns, were listened to, and the program was modified by the Administration as requested. That's hardly as executive running wild. But somehow, those facts have gotten lost in the hyperbole.
That's the problem...the media is trying to confuse you into thinking these taps are on domestic sources by calling it "domestic wiretapping".
If you'll note in this ruling, that the plaintiffs aren't arguing that their calls to each other are being monitored...just international calls to terrorists, or people who they think probably would be classified as such.
The NYT articles never said anything different, they just named it in a way that you'd be confused.
Ummm what whopper? The accusations are against the NSA - an organization associated with the collection of military and diplomatic intelligence, not the FBI, which is associated with criminal prosecutions.
There is nothing in FISA that limits it to the FBI.
Agreed, but irrelevant. The NSA isn't allowed to spy on Americans within the U.S. That is the responsibility of the FBI.
It's called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for a reason.
yes. Think about the ENTIRE name...
Well I hope your immenently reasonable description of events is indeed what's going on. I'll wait and see how this does indeed 'shake out.' Thanks.
no it doesn't - these are foreign calls, inbound or outbound to the US.
no it doesn't - these are foreign calls, inbound or outbound to the US.
Cite your source. I welcome accurate information!
these are calls into and out of the united states - to pakistan, etc. that's the basis of the whole operation.
these are calls into and out of the united states - to pakistan, etc. that's the basis of the whole operation.
Cite your source. I welcome accurate information!
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.