[Sandy]

According to you, terrorists do not meet the definition of a "foreign power" set forth in section 1801(a)(1-3).

I don't think I said that, either. The six meanings of foreign power defined in 1801(a) aren't all mutually exclusive. For example, "a foreign government or any component thereof" could also be a "a group engaged in international terrorism".

Are you then saying that it is a violation of FISA to conduct warantless electronic surveillance against terrorists?

No. I'm saying that if a terrorist isn't a foreign power as defined in 1801(a)(1-3), then section 1802(a) wouldn't be applicable. 1804 would be the applicable section.

My original and main point, however, was to correct your assertion that a U.S. person is not a U.S. person if he's an agent of a foreign power.

[joseph20]

I don't think I said that, either. The six meanings of foreign power defined in 1801(a) aren't all mutually exclusive. For example, "a foreign government or any component thereof" could also be a "a group engaged in international terrorism".

Yes, but a group engaged in international terrorism could also not be a foreign government or any component thereof. In this case, it would be illegal to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance! This is your position, no?

No. I'm saying that if a terrorist isn't a foreign power as defined in 1801(a)(1-3), then section 1802(a) wouldn't be applicable. 1804 would be the applicable section.

You are saying that, under FISA, we cannot conduct warantless electronic surveillance against terrorists that don't fit the definition from 1801(a)(1-3)!