President Bush Takes Questions on Secret Wiretaps

CNSN News.com ^ | December 19, 2005 | Susan Jones

[yoe]

The sordid Bill Clinton used his power to listen in on private phone conversations and read e-mail being made by Americans through out his time in the White House. President Bush is protecting America during a WAR, something Clinton wouldn't think of....ever protecting America from anyone. We need to protect this President - call your elected and demand the Patriot Act not be tampered with and to resume it in tact. Also demand the Tax Cuts President Bush has in place be made permanent.

The Democrats have really done it this time – Pelosi is all over the map back peddling – Reid is doing the same. E-mail your thanks to Joe Lieberman for standing with the President and the United States – he understands VICTORY whereas his party is for losing, they are for the terrorists!

[Bayou Dittohead]

The Night Before Jihad

Twas the night before jihad and all through the mosque
Not a terrorist was stirring not even Abu Al-Zarasq
The suicide belts were arranged neatly on the floor
The written fatwah from Imam was taped to the door
The mullahs were delighted with news on CNN
That the Democrats were repeating how Bush lied again
The Times and DNC continually sing our notes
Yet, when we take over we'll still slit their throats
An infidel so friendly we could not recall
But, Burkett, Sheehan & Wilson weren't working at all
The Stupid Cowboy they called him was still all the news
Kerry was our man but destined to lose
When outside our haven arose such a clatter
The GIs were upon us to settle the matter
Allah would reward us with our virgins tonight
Not as we planned but for us it was all right
From our glorious heaven we heard news that we like
The American press spoke of this US terrorist strike
On Murtha On Pelosi On Kennedy and Reid
The Democrat Stooges always say as we need
The infidel liberals don't learn from their past
Merry jihad to all and to all a good blast

[jimfrommaine]

I was so down on the President a couple of months ago. But now that he's fighting back forcefully he's my leader again. God bless him.

[goldstategop]

Yep. The Democrats and McCain are willing to side with Al Qaeda for political gain. Four years after 9/11 we've apparently learned nothing - and then again, we've never witnessed a political party invested in the defeat of our country before in our history.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[yoe]

willing to side with Al Qaeda for political gain

The only thing I can think of is that McCain and the other turncoats actually believe the MSM or have ties with terrorist companies i.e., money. They sure haven't a clue as to what the people think of them - vote for real Americans who would fight this war as it should be fought - to WIN! Any serious thought about McCain for POTUS is as dangerous as voting for that woman (?).

[silverleaf]

Robert F. Kennedy wire-tapped Martin Luther King. Now, back the scene of the Kennedy clan celebrating MLK day standing next to Coretta and the kids....

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200207/garrow

[FLCowboy,]

Yep. The Democrats and McCain are willing to side with Al Qaeda for political gain. Four years after 9/11 we've apparently learned nothing - and then again, we've never witnessed a political party invested in the defeat of our country before in our history.

The country learned nothing after the first World Trade Center blast, why do you think the same people would learn after the second blast?

[bobsunshine]

Here is the Link to the Law that ALLOWS the President to use the NSA without court order:

http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/usc/ttl50/ch36/subchI/sec1802.html

Sec. 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.

This was also reported in the NY Sun.

[lugsoul]

Jeez, did you even READ that statute once? It plainly is not applicable to what we are talking about here, since it states on its face that it does not apply to communications involving US citizens.

The amount of disinfo being spread here in support of this obviously illegal program is staggering.

[bobsunshine]

Go to this thread to debate.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1543216/posts

And you need to read the entire statue. Now I don't know how you can believe that this was an illegal act, but I'm not going to debate you. One final note: the term US Citizens does not apply to people with temporary visas. That was what the "wall" was all about and how Able Danger was stopped.

[lugsoul]

I read the entire statue. And it is plainly obvious that it does not create the exception you claim. And most folks on the thread you pointed out were able to discern that as well.

But, since you are not going to debate the point you yourself raised here, there's not much point in asking you what part of this statute allows warrantless surveillance of US citizens. But, there wouldn't be much point anyway, because it ain't in there.

[lugsoul]

bobsunshine's statute is plainly not applicable to surveillance of US citizens. Posts justifying this program under section 1802 are DISINFORMATION, and nothing more.

[bobsunshine]

And this is from the NY SUN;

This "without court order" was so clear that even President Carter, a Democrat not known for his vigilance in the war on terror, issued an executive order on May 23, 1979, stating, "Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order." He said, "without a court order."

Now, Section 1802 does impose some conditions, including that "there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party." But the law defines "United States person" somewhat narrowly, so that it would not include illegal aliens or, arguably, those who fraudulently obtained legal status.

And if Section 1802 isn't enough, regard section 1811 of the same subchapter of the United States Code, "Authorization during time of war." It states, "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 a period not to exceed fifteen calendar days following a declaration of war by the Congress." Again, mark the phrase, "without a court order."

[lugsoul]

Have you heard the Administration claim that it is NOT using this surveillance program against US citizens or permanent residents?

You are just shilling disinformation. It is really sad.

[Peach]

lugsoul - section 1802, "Electronic Surveillance Authorization Without Court Order." "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"

What part of this do you disagree with?

[Peach]

President Bush also stressed that the NSA surveillance program is "limited" to those with "known al Qaeda ties and their affiliates." And he noted that one party in the wiretapped phone calls must be outside the country.

[Peach]

It is a falsity on the left to claim that FISA warrants are acted on quickly. Even the 9/11 Commission recognized this and talked with Congress about it.

In 2002, when the president made his decision, there was widespread, bipartisan frustration with the slowness and inefficiency of the bureaucracy involved in seeking warrants from the special intelligence court, known as the FISA court. Even later, after the provisions of the Patriot Act had had time to take effect, there were still problems with the FISA court — problems examined by members of the September 11 Commission — and questions about whether the court can deal effectively with the fastest-changing cases in the war on terror.

People familiar with the process say the problem is not so much with the court itself as with the process required to bring a case before the court. "It takes days, sometimes weeks, to get the application for FISA together," says one source. "It's not so much that the court doesn't grant them quickly, it's that it takes a long time to get to the court. Even after the Patriot Act, it's still a very cumbersome process. It is not built for speed, it is not built to be efficient. It is built with an eye to keeping [investigators] in check." And even though the attorney general has the authority in some cases to undertake surveillance immediately, and then seek an emergency warrant, that process is just as cumbersome as the normal way of doing things.

Lawmakers of both parties recognized the problem in the months after the September 11 terrorist attacks. They pointed to the case of Coleen Rowley, the FBI agent who ran up against a number roadblocks in her effort to secure a FISA warrant in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, the al Qaeda operative who had taken flight training in preparation for the hijackings. Investigators wanted to study the contents of Moussaoui's laptop computer, but the FBI bureaucracy involved in applying for a FISA warrant was stifling, and there were real questions about whether investigators could meet the FISA court's probable-cause standard for granting a warrant. FBI agents became so frustrated that they considered flying Moussaoui to France, where his computer could be examined. But then the attacks came, and it was too late.

Rowley wrote up her concerns in a famous 13-page memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller, and then elaborated on them in testimony to Congress. "Rowley depicted the legal mechanism for security warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, as burdensome and restrictive, a virtual roadblock to effective law enforcement," Legal Times reported in September 2002.

The Patriot Act included some provisions, supported by lawmakers of both parties, to make securing such warrants easier. But it did not fix the problem. In April 2004, when members of the September 11 Commission briefed the press on some of their preliminary findings, they reported that significant problems remained.

"Many agents in the field told us that although there is now less hesitancy in seeking approval for electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, the application process nonetheless continues to be long and slow," the commission said. "Requests for such approvals are overwhelming the ability of the system to process them and to conduct the surveillance. The Department of Justice and FBI are attempting to address bottlenecks in the process."

It was in the context of such bureaucratic bottlenecks that the president first authorized, and then renewed, the program to bypass the FISA court in cases of international communications of people with known al Qaeda links.

There were other reasons for the president to act, as well. In short, it appears that he was trying to shake the bureaucracy into action. The September 11 Commission report pointed to a deeply entrenched it's-not-my-job mentality within the National Security Agency that led the organization to shy away from aggressive antiterrorism surveillance. "The law requires the NSA to not deliberately collect data on U.S. citizens or on persons in the United States without a warrant based on foreign intelligence requirements," the 9/11 commission report wrote,

While the NSA had the technical capability to report on communications with suspected terrorist facilities in the Middle East, the NSA did not seek FISA Court warrants to collect communications between individuals in the United States and foreign countries, because it believed that this was an FBI role. It also did not want to be viewed as targeting persons in the United States and possibly violating laws that governed NSA's collection of foreign intelligence. An almost obsessive protection of sources and methods by the NSA, and its focus on foreign intelligence, and its avoidance of anything domestic would...be important elements in the story of 9/11.

Bush's order, it appears, was an attempt to change that situation. Especially before, and even after, passage of the Patriot Act, the FISA bureaucracy and the agencies that dealt with it were too unwieldy to handle some fast-moving intelligence cases. And now, a group of 43 Democrats and four Republicans is trying to undo even those improvements brought by the Patriot Act; after the effort to renew the law was filibustered last week, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid exulted, "We killed the Patriot Act." Put all those factors together, and they explain the president's impassioned argument that he has to act to keep the pressure on al Qaeda — especially at a time when others, for whatever reasons, are trying to stop him.

[lugsoul]

The part that explicitly says it doesn't apply to communications involving US citizens and permanent residents.

[lugsoul]

Why do you keep ducking the question? Are you that committed to confusing the issue? Are you getting paid to do this?

The provisions YOU cite say explicitly that they are not to be applied to the communications of "US persons" - US citizens and permanent residents. Period.

Yet somehow you want to argue that this law creates an exception that allows surveillance of US persons? Why? Under what provision?

[Peach]

(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person [e.g. citizen or perm. resident

What makes you think that has been violated? There's no evidence of that.