Skip to comments.ACLU Shocked at Bush Use of National Security Agency for Domestic Spying...
Posted on 12/16/2005 6:31:55 PM PST by Jay777
WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed shock about revelations reported in the New York Times that President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on conversations of Americans and others in the United States. According to the report, this spying occurred without any court order and was focused on telephone and e-mail communications of "hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States" with persons abroad. Electronic surveillance law generally prohibits non-consensual eavesdropping in the U.S. without a court order based on probable cause.
The following can be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:
"Eavesdropping on conversations of U.S citizens and others in the United States without a court order and without complying with the procedures of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is both illegal and unconstitutional. The administration is claiming extraordinary presidential powers at the expense of civil liberties and is putting the president above the law. Congress must investigate this report thoroughly. We also call upon Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to appoint a special prosecutor to independently investigate whether crimes have been committed.
(Excerpt) Read more at aclu.org ...
Jeeez Louise...is that Zibignew's littel boy I see on the TV?
ACLU shocked by Bush/NSC domestic surveillance?? How can ANYONE be shocked? As soon as Echelon was invented, it was going to be used domestically, anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
My concern also. The Bush White House must learn to go on the offensive QUICKLY, and not give in to those who seek to destroy them.
Speaking of destroying, they need to politically destroy Sen. Specter-make an example of him.
We are war; not just in Iraq; but right here at home. . .the 'grass roots' is going to have to respond en masse here. . .
Where in the constitution does it mention electronic evesdropping? I can tell you that anything you say on a radio is fair game.
Not as pretty, but this works as well:
American Communist Lawyers Union. . .
Hey silly little lib, I worked with the NSA for twenty years doing special ops in the Navy, and yes during the Clinton years we did the exact same thing, only we were looking for drug traffickers. INTERNATIONAL CALLS and EMAILS is the key (and yes that does include electronic transmissions between CONUS and OUTUS, not just OUTUS to OUTUS) The NSA has been doing this since day one, it's their job, it's their charter. ONLY the CIA is prohibited from spying on U.S. citizens, the other 12 agencies have dispensation to investigate within the U.S. as per their charters.
To all the idiot libs:
Catch a clue, bother to learn to read while your at college.
hmmm, just four years after the bolshevik revolution. Damn, Stalin moved fast or was it Berria that set up the ACLU?
You are an idiot and probably a dim(U)wit. No reposible conservative on FR would adhere to that position.
Well then, according to your post, leaks are perfectly ok and legal.
I think leaks are counterproductive and nigh on treason...
I just don't think you can stop them unless you literally duct tape peoples mouths shut.
Your idea of killing them is just not practical.
I hope they were spying on ACLU's New York headquarters.
Good citizens and patriots have nothing to fear.
I think you replied to the wrong person.
I'm well aware of Marx and Engels historically & of the ideas of the previous 3 centuries of writers whom or envisioned classless societies and/or utopias.
My comment was was partially injest and partially a rhetorical question in that the Soviet communist party probably had some influence (though not the primary driving force) in the founding of the ACLU.
I'm not a Constitutional lawyer but I'll wager that a president has the authority in time of war or if there is a threat to national security to order surveillance operations without court orders.