Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Why do you think the Founding Fathers put the Bill of Rights in the Constitution to begin with? It was because they knew it was the tendency of the federal government to trample the freedoms and rights of individuals.
and one more time.
It's really difficult for me to hear this from the political party that has such a solid history of constitutinal law over party politics. Sad, really, really sad.

The USSC knows what is in the Bill of Rights. When this matter comes up, they will adjudicate.

whew, for a minute there gatos I thought you were going to say that Bush etal know what is in the bill of rights. Nearly gave me a heart attack.

There are a lot of people who know what the Bill of Rights contain.

But of course you know that the Bill of Rights refers only to the First Ten Amendments of the Constitution and not to the Constitution itself or the subsequent 16 amendments( some of which, I would argue, are just as important as the original ten

Not so sure about that. I looked up that decision and, though it was difficult to read for someone with no legal background, one point was clear about the Truong decision, and that is that it was decided using pre-FISA standards because it involved intelligence gathered before FISA was enacted. Seems to me that once legislation establishes a process for conducting warrantless searches (on US persons) that to disregard it would be illegal. That 2002 decision is pretty interesting though. I'm going to try to figure out what it actually means.

Whoops. Turns out I was actually looking at a Justice Department brief for the 2002 case and not a decision. Now I have something else to hunt down. Ah well, still useful information re: Truong.

The other thing Kay Bailey Hutchinson commented on this morning was the issue of temporary and throw away phones. When you're dealing with terrorists and need to intercept a call,it is not practical to call a judge for a warrant when the immediacy for action is within minutes, and a few minutes later not only will the call have been completed but the phone discarded.

If you buy the premise that the United States is at war, and many if not most Americans do, then there is a long, clear precedent of the United States taking certain wartime privileges in order to fulfill the Constiuttional requirement to provide for the national defense. It has been done with every single administration, including Carter, since at least Roosevelt.

EXERCISE OF CERTAIN AUTHORITY RESPECTING ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE
EO 12139
23 May 1979

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By the authority vested in me as President by Sections 102 and
104 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
1802 and 1804), in order to provide as set forth in that Act (this
chapter) for the authorization of electronic surveillance for
foreign intelligence purposes, it is hereby ordered as follows:

1-101. 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, but only if the
Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

1-102. Pursuant to Section 102(b) of the Foreign Intelligence Act
of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(b)), the Attorney General is authorized to
approve applications to the court having jurisdiction under Section
103 of that Act (50 U.S.C. 1803) to obtain orders for electronic
surveillance for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence
information.

1-103. Pursuant to Section 104(a)(7) of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)), the following
officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national
security or defense, is designated to make the certifications
required by Section 104(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications
to conduct electronic surveillance:

(a) Secretary of State.

(b) Secretary of Defense.

(c) Director of Central Intelligence.

(d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

(e) Deputy Secretary of State.

(f) Deputy Secretary of Defense.

(g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that
capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above
certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the
President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

1-104. Section 2-202 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at
the end of that section: ''Any electronic surveillance, as defined
in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, shall be
conducted in accordance with that Act as well as this Order.''.

1-105. Section 2-203 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at
the end of that section: ''Any monitoring which constitutes
electronic surveillance as defined in the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be conducted in accordance with that
Act as well as this Order.''.

Jimmy Carter.

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release February 9, 1995


EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949

- - - - - - -
FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801,
et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for
the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes
as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the
Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a
court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of
up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications
required by that section.

Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney
General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain
orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign
intelligence information.

Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following
officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or
defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section
303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical
searches:

(a) Secretary of State;

(b) Secretary of Defense;

(c) Director of Central Intelligence;

(d) Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation;

(e) Deputy Secretary of State;

(f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and

(g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that
capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications,
unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate.


WILLIAM J. CLINTON


THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 9, 1995
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12949.htm

April 20, 2004

President Bush: Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security
Remarks by the President in a Conversation on the USA Patriot Act
Kleinshans Music Hall
Buffalo, New York




President's Remarks





9:49 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for coming. I think you're going to find this to be a really interesting discussion about how federal, state and local authorities are working hard to prevent a terrorist attack. That's what we're here to talk about -- and why it's important for those of us in positions of authority to give federal, state and local authorities all the tools necessary to do the job we expect of them. That's what we're here to talk about. But I've got some things I want to say before we start talking about it.

First, I am glad to be at the home of the mighty Buffalo Bills. (Applause.) I traveled today with Congressman Quinn and Congressman Reynolds, two fine members of the United States Congress from this area, who assured me this is the year. (Laughter.) I want to thank Jack and Tom for coming today. Thank you for your strong leadership. Thanks for caring a lot about the people of the Buffalo, New York area. Thanks for your steadfast concern about the security of our country. I appreciate your service.

I also appreciate the service of the really fine Governor of the state of New York, George Pataki. Thanks for coming. (Applause.) I know we've got state and local authorities who are here. I appreciate your service. For the local authorities, my only advice is make sure you fill the potholes. (Laughter.) Empty the garbage. (Laughter.) Answer the phone calls.

But thanks for coming today. This message today is aimed as much at you as it is anybody else. Today, we have got an interesting -- a lot of families with us, but one that struck me as worthy of note, and that's the Conroy family. Where's Peggy Conroy? Somewhere. There she is. Good. Hi, Peggy. Thanks. The reason I brought up Peggy is I want you to know that Peggy's husband is a Staff Sergeant in the National Guard, the 105th Military Police Unit in Karbala, Iraq. She represents many of the families of this area and the country who are sacrificing to see to it that the world is more free and more peaceful.

I appreciate so very much your steadfast love for your husband. You honor us with your presence today, and I'm really glad you brought Billy and Jeff and Tyler. Billy and Jeff really represent the greatest spirit of our country. Not only do they love their dad, and pray for their dad, but they're collecting school supplies for the Iraqi children. In other words, they're going to their own schoolmates and saying, how best can we not only help secure Iraq, so it can become a free country, how best can we show the compassion of America. And I want to thank you guys for honoring your dad and honoring our country. (Applause.)

I also met a fellow named Frank Brusino. Where are you, Frank? There he is. Frank is an interesting character. (Laughter.) He is a retired brigadier general in the Army Reserves, a paratrooper, who is now very much involved with the Senior Corps, the Citizen Corps Council. In other words, their job is to help provide law enforcement with additional volunteers so law enforcement can better do its job. For the first responders who are here, I think you know the valuable addition that Citizen Corps Councils have made, so you can do your work better.

The reason I bring up Frank is, a lot of times they talk about the strength of America as being in our military. That's part of our strength and we're going to keep the military strong, by the way, so the world will be more peaceful. (Applause.) They talk about the strength of our country being the fact that we're a prosperous nation, and we need to make sure we continue to expand prosperity so people can find work. But the true strength of the country lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens. See, Frank represents the strength of America because he volunteers to make the community in which he lives a better place. He sets such a great example for other citizens in this area. That's why I wanted to herald Frank's accomplishments. He is a soldier in the army of compassion. He takes time out of his life to see what he can do to make the Buffalo area more secure.

My call to people in this area is see what you can do to make Buffalo a more compassionate, decent place. See, societies change one conscience, one soul a time. All it takes is for citizens to hear that universal call to love a neighbor just like you'd like to be loved yourself, and mentor a child, or feed the hungry, or provide shelter for the homeless, or love the lonely. And by doing so, you serve our nation, and you really show the world the true compassion of a great nation.

Thank you for your service, sir. I'm proud that you're here. Thanks for coming. (Applause.)

September the 11th was a horrible day for our nation, and we must never forget the lessons of September the 11th. I appreciate so very much the Governor's steadfast determination and compassion during those difficult times for the citizens of New York City and New York state and New Jersey and Connecticut. It's a time that really changed our perspective about the world. See, we never really thought America would be a battlefield. We thought oceans would protect us. That was kind of the conventional wisdom of the time. And therefore, our defenses were aligned that way, our offenses were aligned that way.

As Larry mentioned, there were threats, but most of those threats were overseas, and they attacked us overseas. But never did we dream that they would use our own airplanes as weapons to fly, and mercilessly kill thousands of our citizens. From that day forward, we have changed our attitude, and we've got to make sure the laws reflect the realities of the generation -- of the new generation, of the generation of those of us involved with being responsible for the security of the country.

See, we're now facing the first war of the 21st century. It's a different kind of war. Frank was a paratrooper. In those days you could measure the enemy by the number of battalions and number of tanks and number of airplanes. Now the enemy hides in caves. They lurch (sio) in the shadows of the world. They will strike and kill innocent citizens without any conscience, because they have no conscience.

So the fundamental charge before us all in positions of responsibility is, how do we deal with the threat? The first thing we do is we stay on the offense. The first thing we do is we find killers before they kill us. We rally the world, which have done and will continue to do, to cut off money, to share intelligence, to put brave troops and security personnel after these people, to find them, to rout them out. The message should be clear to them, there is no cave or hole deep enough to hide from the justice of the United States of America and our coalition partners. It's essential -- (applause.)

September the 11th -- when the President says something, he better mean it. See, in order to make the world more peaceful, it's essential that those of us in positions of high responsibility speak clearly and mean what we say. And so when I say that if you harbor a terrorist you're just as guilty as a terrorist, I meant it. And we acted upon that, in order to make the world more peaceful and more secure. The Taliban found out what we meant. Remember, those were the leaders in Afghanistan that provided safe haven and training camps for al Qaeda. And fortunately, thanks to our coalition, thanks to brave soldiers from America, and others, the Taliban no longer is in power. We enforced the doctrine. The world is more peaceful because the Taliban is gone. And at the same time, please remember, the women and children in Afghanistan have a much brighter future because we removed a barbaric regime that refused to even educate young girls.

When the President speaks, he better mean it. And when I went in front of the United Nations Security Council, in the fall of 2002, I said, listen, we all have seen a threat. One of the lessons of September the 11th, was when you see a threat overseas, you must act before it materializes. September the 11th said, we can't wait and hope on the good intentions of terrorists who will kill innocent men and women. We've got to act. We can't hope for the best anymore. The United States must use our prestige and influence and diplomatic power and military power to protect us and others who love freedom.

I went in front of the United Nations Security Council, having looked at intelligence that said Saddam Hussein was a threat. The Congress looked at the same intelligence, by the way, and concluded Saddam was a threat. The United Nations Security Council looked at the intelligence and said Saddam was a threat. No wonder we thought he was a threat; after all, he had used weapons of mass destruction on his own people. Not only the intelligence lead us to believe that, but his actions led us to believe it. He paid for suiciders; he harbored terrorists; he was paying for terrorists to kill.

And so we saw a threat. September the 11th changed the equation. So I was given a choice: Either trust the word of a madman, hope for the best with somebody who was a tyrant, or take action to defend our country. Given that choice, I will defend America every time. (Applause.)

It's hard work to go from a system where there was torture and rape rooms and mass graves to freedom. That's hard work. But it is necessary work. That's why I want to herald the work and sacrifice of your husband. It's important work for our future. Free societies are peaceful societies. The way to defeat terror in the long run is to provide hope, to provide hope for families, to provide hope for children, to say that there's a bright future for you. That won't happen, so long as there's tyranny in a part of the world that tends to breed hatred. It will happen when societies become democratic and free.

And so what we're doing right now is we're defeating the enemy there so we won't have to fight them here. But, as well, we're working for freedom in the heart of a part of the world that needs freedom. You know, I can't tell you how strongly I believe that -- about the power of freedom. After all, it's been a part of our national soul. We have proven how powerful freedom can be. We bring people from diverse backgrounds together under the mantel of a free society. We're such a beacon.

I believe freedom is not America's gift to the world; I believe freedom is the almighty God's gift to each man and women in this world. And therefore, as we work to not only make the homeland more secure, we work to spread freedom, which will make the world more peaceful. The enemy can't stand the thought of free societies. That's why they attacked us, see. And we're not going to change. That's what they don't understand. There's nothing they can do to intimidate, to make us change our deepest belief.

They're trying to kill to shake our will; we're too tough, too strong, too resolute, and too determined to ever have our will shaken by thugs and terrorists. (Applause.)

So the first thing I want you to think about is, when you hear Patriot Act, is that we changed the law and the bureaucratic mind-set to allow for the sharing of information. It's vital. And others will describe what that means.

Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.

Could you post a link,or tell me where you found this?
I might wanna use this on another forum,and would like to read it myself.
I would greatly appreciate it.

Sealed Case No. 02-001, U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, November 18, 2002, p. 34, available at http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/newsroom/02-001.pdf

Thanx Walter,but I cant get that link to work.

But FISA allows for this, giving them the power to listen first and notify the court within 72 hours. The immediacy argument doesn't hold.



This is certainly what they are arguing -- that we are at war, and that the president has these powers because of it. But can we be at war? We are not at war with Iraq or Afghanistan, apparently. We are told we are at war with "terrorists", an elusive term, and there's no clearly defined end to this struggle. With no treaties to be signed, how do we know when it ends. So in essence, if we believe we are at war now, then we are in a perpetual state of war, and any powers granted the president will be essentially permanent. I don't quite think that our forefathers would be ok with this.

You can perhaps find more infos here

Freeduck writes


I disagree. I think the Founders would be more than okay with the government rooting out and dealing with any and all who are committed to creating as much murder and mayhem as the can possibly accomplish and who are committed to deny Americans the very freedoms that our Constitution provides. The two immediately preceding presidents certainly thought so based on the excecutive orders I posted. As I have previously posted (somewhere), I myself was probably under surveillance during the Reagan administration.

To extend constitutional privileges to foreign subversives or any who would abet them inside our own country makes absolutely no sense to me and I 100% support the government in whatever it needs to do to identify, apprehend, and get rid of them.

"I 100% support the government in whatever it needs to do to identify, apprehend, and get rid of them."
Scariest statement I have read this year.

Odd thing for a libertarian to say, too. Whatever happened to mantras such as this? "In this current crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." They just don't make Republicans like Reagan anmore ...

Not only for a libertarian.

But such behaviour still was quite common with rural European population in 17th and early 18th century. :wink:

What gives you this impression about our forefathers?



The two preceding presidents' orders are in line with FISA. As far as I can tell, the current one is not.



The current issue is regarding US persons. The constitution says that we have the right to be secure in our posessions and papers against unreasonable search and seizure. I don't agree that any president can usurp the constitution. If you could convince me otherwise I would immediately be left with the question of what makes this country so great after all.