America... Spying on Americans

"Now in re-reading, he was probably talking about the president's insistence that the authorization to use force in response to 9/11 was authorization to spy."

Yes, that is what I was referring to.

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either

(A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or

(B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution (meaning, using the armed forces against Iraq) is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --


(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS

(a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).

(b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.

(c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.

More likely the Patriot Act.

Gotta love it when you hear it from the man himself:

"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."

George W Bush
April 20, 2004

Drew,
The claim was made that warrantless searches are illegal.
I just showed that they arent illegal.

Something they you may not realize. In some states, wire tapping and/or recording voice messages are not illigeal. In ALL states wire tapping is not admissible in court and it cannot lead to the arrest and/or conviction of the person/people recorded.
If there is no arrest then is the wire tap against the law?
and, the further question would be if a terrorist threat is made can it be used against the person who made it? An interesting Supreme court case is Kane v Wyoming Vallet West School board.

Something they you may not realize. In some states, wire tapping and/or recording voice messages are not illigeal.

Fine, Debra. Why are you quoting from that resolution, when woiyo was obviously talking about a different one?

Now analyze the Joint Resolution passed by Congress on Sept. 14, 2001, which authorized Bush to "use all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for 9/11 in order to prevent further attacks.

lets see,the police already have the power to search without a warrant.

Did you actually see the bullet leave the gun and enter the body thus killing him?

You may need to do some additional research. certain states permit unauthorized recording of communication. Whether we view it as legal or illegal is the reason we are so involved with this thread.

Fine, Debra. Why are you quoting from that resolution, when woiyo was obviously talking about a different one?

Now analyze the Joint Resolution passed by Congress on Sept. 14, 2001, which authorized Bush to "use all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for 9/11 in order to prevent further attacks.

. Material set out in a whereas clause is purely precatory. It may be relevant for the purpose of clarifying ambiguities in a statute's legally operative terms, but in and of itself such a provision can confer no legal right or obligation.
To determine the breadth of authority conferred upon the President by this statute, therefore, it is necessary to examine the legally operative provisions, which are set forth in section 2(a) thereof. That section provides as follows:



The statute confers no authority unrelated to those events.