Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sandy
The article's discussion of 218 is just garbage. Just garbage.

No mention that probable cause to believe the subject is an agent of a foreign power is required. The author strains to avoid that fact.

Again, see the FISA appeals court ruling I linked above.

72 posted on 09/10/2003 10:55:54 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mrsmith
probable cause to believe the subject is an agent of a foreign power is required.

I've always understood "probable cause" to mean specifically, probable cause to believe that the subject has done (or, I suppose, is about to do) something illegal. Is there any kind of official word on what that phrase actually means?

74 posted on 09/10/2003 11:18:58 AM PDT by inquest (We are NOT the world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

To: mrsmith
The article's discussion of 218 is just garbage. Just garbage. No mention that probable cause to believe the subject is an agent of a foreign power is required. The author strains to avoid that fact.

But they do say, "the target had to be 'linked to foreign espionage.' In theory, American citizens were safe unless they were suspected 'agents of a foreign power.'" That's close.

The article is certainly an improvement over what's been written about the Patriot Act.

I agree. I like the way they explain the law in a before/after format. And I think they're really trying to be objective about the thing. Parts 3 and 4 aren't out yet; I'll post them when they are.

80 posted on 09/10/2003 12:12:35 PM PDT by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson