America... Spying on Americans

cicerone imposter wrote:

My comprehension of the English language is pretty decent; after all, I worked in management most of my working career. I think that's one of the prime requisite to be a "manager."

Congratulations.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

c.i.: My comment wasn't about your intelligence or lack thereof. It was about civility between posters on this board.

Ticomaya wrote:

[
<sigh> Again, c.i., the main point of my comment wasn't about your lack of intelligence ... it was about civility between posters on this board. Your comment about the "calcification" of my brain lead to it, and your comment about your intelligence reveals your apparent lack of understanding of what I was trying to say.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
c.i.: My comment wasn't about your intelligence or lack thereof. It was about civility between posters on this board.

Ticomaya wrote:
[
<sigh> Again, c.i., the main point of my comment wasn't about your lack of intelligence ... it was about civility between posters on this board. Your comment about the "calcification" of my brain lead to it, and your comment about your intelligence reveals your apparent lack of understanding of what I was trying to say.

Thank you, Walter. You do try hard to be helpful.

Perhaps your highlighting those portions of my posts will assist c.i. in understanding what I wrote.

0 Replies

One positive and one negative; it's a matter of which one I choose to put more weight on - isn't it? After all, it was directed at me - as mine are directed at you.

0 Replies

If the Democrats want to try to censor or impeach Bush over wiretapping potential terrorist suspects, I say go for it. If that is truly the top priority of the Democratic Party, I would advise them to take their stand, stand up and be counted. I would like them to take a stand on something, just once, for sure, so that we all know what they are for.

0 Replies

okie, Good point; but from the non-performance from democrats for the past five years, I don't give it much hope.

0 Replies

For Tico:

Bush says he signed NSA wiretap order
Adds he OK'd program more than 30 times, will continue to do so
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In acknowledging the message was true, President Bush took aim at the messenger Saturday, saying that a newspaper jeopardized national security by revealing that he authorized wiretaps on U.S. citizens after September 11.

Schneier on Security

December 20, 2005
NSA and Bush's Illegal Eavesdropping
When President Bush directed the National Security Agency to secretly eavesdrop on American citizens, he transferred an authority previously under the purview of the Justice Department to the Defense Department and bypassed the very laws put in place to protect Americans against widespread government eavesdropping. The reason may have been to tap the NSA's capability for data-mining and widespread surveillance.
Illegal wiretapping of Americans is nothing new. In the 1950s and '60s, in a program called "Project Shamrock," the NSA intercepted every single telegram coming into or going out of the United States. It conducted eavesdropping without a warrant on behalf of the CIA and other agencies. Much of this became public during the 1975 Church Committee hearings and resulted in the now famous Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978.
The purpose of this law was to protect the American people by regulating government eavesdropping. Like many laws limiting the power of government, it relies on checks and balances: one branch of the government watching the other. The law established a secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and empowered it to approve national-security-related eavesdropping warrants. The Justice Department can request FISA warrants to monitor foreign communications as well as communications by American citizens, provided that they meet certain minimal criteria.

Bush simple broke the FISA law, and by doing so has taken away Americans rights to privacy established in the Constitution.

0 Replies

Quote:

okie, Good point; but from the non-performance from democrats for the past five years, I don't give it much hope.

Hey, I'm surprised at the agreement there.

Sorry to be a drive by poster, kind of like drive by news reporting these days. But frankly, we could filter out alot of political grandstanding by Democrats by simply getting them to commit to something, anything, whatever it is they believe in.

0 Replies

Quote:

Now, if you are referring to the government abridging your rights, please give me the details because I was not aware of this, and maybe you can educate me further.

The Fourth amendment:

Quote:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Bush's spying program, as described by Alberto Gonzales, clearly violates this amendment. You are undoubtedly aware of the 'net' nature of this electronic surveilance program; there have been many, many people spied upon for whom there is no probable cause, there is no connection to terrorism known at the time.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Bush simple broke the FISA law, and by doing so has taken away Americans rights to privacy established in the Constitution.

For c.i. & Cyclops:

As you may (or may not) recall, this is from a per curiam opinion of the FISCR court (In re Sealed Case, 310 F.3d 717):

Quote:

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided this issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information[/u]. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.

The President's implied Article II authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes is bolstered by the AUMF from 2001. The ability to conduct foreign intelligence searches has long been the purview of the Executive branch, and every President since Franklin D. Roosevelt has asserted and used the authority to authorize warrantless surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. While the Supreme Court has said that warrants are generally required in cases involving purely domestic threats, it has expressly distinguished foreign threats. In its 1972 Keith opinion, in ruling that in a case concerning intelligence gathering involving purely domestic surveillance, the Court ruled that prior judicial approval was required, but it also noted that it's opinion "required no judgment on the scope of the President's surveillance power with respect to the activities of foreign powers, within or without the country."

0 Replies

Tico, Do you understand anything about the Constitution and the balance of power?

"Foreign intelligence" is not the same as "American citizen." The Constitution protects American citizens, not foreign intelligence.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Bush simple broke the FISA law, and by doing so has taken away Americans rights to privacy established in the Constitution.

Oh, and c.i., where is the word "privacy" in the Constitution, and how does the Constitution "establish" this right?

(Note: this is a question for c.i., not Debra_Law or other aspiring Constitutional scholars. :wink: )

0 Replies

They also swore to uphold the Consititution. No infringement of the Constitution is allowed by the president, congress, or the SC. Nobody has the authority to supercede the guarantees delineated in the Constitution.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

"Foreign intelligence" is not the same as "American citizen."

That's good ... because otherwise the FISCR court says the President has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain American citizen, and that wouldn't make any sense.

0 Replies

By "court approval." See the difference yet?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

They also swore to uphold the Consititution. No infringement of the Constitution is allowed by the president, congress, or the SC. Nobody has the authority to supercede the guarantees delineated in the Constitution.

And, as you know by your understanding of the FISCR ruling, the President has done nothing of the kind ... only exercised the inherent Constitutional authority given to the Executive.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

By "court approval." See the difference yet?

No, I don't. Please explain what you are talking about.

0 Replies

Why don't you just study the Constitution, tico?

The Ninth Amendment was sited rarely until 1965 in the Supreme Court case of Griswold vs. Connecticut, it was not until then we were provided with a Right to Privacy in a 7 to 2 decision by the Supreme Court.

0 Replies

The problem with your argument, Tico, is that it does not have the force of law behind it; while FISA most certainly does.

Arguments that FISA cannot encroach on the President's constitutional power are, in fact, countered by the FISA law itself; FISA does limit the president's power, specifically, and was signed into law by a President. It is not a 'tool' for law enforcement, as the Administration has said. It is a bind upon law enforcement, specifically put in place to keep this exact situation from coming up.

The opinion that FISA doesn't bind the President has no force of law behind it, while the legally passed and signed law certainly does. Until FISA is successfully challenged by the Administration or others, it remains binding law the the Administration cannot break without being in violation of both the FISA laws and their oath of office.

The AUMF argument is ridiculous and has been shown to be false. Do you need links to prove this?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

And the Keith opinion pre-dates FISA; immaterial to the discussion.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

America... Spying on Americans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know