Domestic spying without a warrant

[Phoenix44]

The president has admitted to directing the NSA to wiretap phone calls originating in the United States without obtaining a warrant. Domestic spying without obtaining a warrant is a crime, violating the fourth amendment of the Constitution.

Most of us would not argue that wiretapping is a useful tool against terrorism. This is not the issue of this thread. The issue is failure to obtain a warrant.

The Patriot Act gives the president the ability to get a warrant for domestic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). This is a secret court--its files and proceedings are not required to be released except in special circumstances. Wiretapping may begin immediately, and the president has 72 hours to obtain a warrant retroactively. This court, which has been in existence for about 25 years, has only refused a warrant 4 times.

I can't think of a single legitimate reason for the president's failure to obtain warrants from the FISA court. It certainly seems like grounds for impeachment.

Comments?

 

[Flying Crane]

I think I have made my political position pretty clear in previous threads. I am all for exposing the crimes of the current regime. They are an infuriating bunch.

 

[MA-Caver]

That a warrant is needed to legally post a wire tap on a suspect is among the basic rights... Of course one wonder should these rights apply to those who are not sworn in immigrants and they have known ties to terrorist organizations is another matter.
True they're working hard to prevent another 9-11 and the fact that since that terrible day there has not been any significant (or even insignificant... if there is such a thing) terrorist activity/attack on American soil, shows that they must be doing something right.
It's almost as if they're (those who are raising a stink about it all) wanting to grant the same basic civil rights to those that wish to create another 9-11.
Where to draw the line? For me it would be for those who have taken the oath to become American citizens that they are granted these protections, such as warrants. Otherwise the hell with the rest if all they're interested in is getting on American television by murdering Americans on our own soil.


But.... That's just me.

 

[sgtmac_46]

That a warrant is needed to legally post a wire tap on a suspect is among the basic rights... Of course one wonder should these rights apply to those who are not sworn in immigrants and they have known ties to terrorist organizations is another matter.
True they're working hard to prevent another 9-11 and the fact that since that terrible day there has not been any significant (or even insignificant... if there is such a thing) terrorist activity/attack on American soil, shows that they must be doing something right.
It's almost as if they're (those who are raising a stink about it all) wanting to grant the same basic civil rights to those that wish to create another 9-11.
Where to draw the line? For me it would be for those who have taken the oath to become American citizens that they are granted these protections, such as warrants. Otherwise the hell with the rest if all they're interested in is getting on American television by murdering Americans on our own soil.


But.... That's just me.

I agree. Of course there are those who believe every person on the planet should be protected by the US constitution. What makes sense is far removed from that absolutist position.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Isnt there that eschillon (spelling has to be wrong) program thats the same thing? I think that has been going on for a while. Isnt the idea of getting a warrant have to do with using what you fing against a person in court later? I would think that if it was solely for military {or war on terror} intelligence that it wouldnt matter. Afetr 911 it was all 'how come our CIA wasnt watching these people'. Now its all 'the governments watching us'. I think this is more about getting Bush than anything else. I think Clinton, Carter and all other kinds of presidents were doing the exact same thing.

 

[michaeledward]

True they're working hard to prevent another 9-11

On Saturday morning, the President made the claim that two of the 911 hijackers were in this country before 911, and communicating to others overseas. The President claimed that we didn't know that until too late.

However, the communications overseas were going to an al-Qaeda safe house in Yemen, and the NSA was monitoring this site. The Yemen site had been connected with the Cole bombing.

The NSA could have sought a FISA warrant to monitor the house in California, and communicated with the FBI, but didn't.

and the fact that since that terrible day there has not been any significant (or even insignificant... if there is such a thing) terrorist activity/attack on American soil, shows that they must be doing something right.

This claim is often made, but never substantiated. I certainly hope that the appropriate resources are taking appropriate action. But, we don't know. It could be that the terrorist organizations have not planned or attempted any further attacks on our soil.

The New Caliphate plan is a 100 year long war plan. We are just in the first decade of the agenda laid out by bin Laden and Zawahiri.

Since 9/11/2001, al Qaeda has achived many of their goals. They have deposed a non-believing head of state (Saddam Hussein). They have given rise to a new Shi'ite Nation (Iraq). They have gotten the United States to change its way of life (been on a plane recently) - (What's the current threat level). And now they have us ignoring our Bill of Rights.

It saddens me.

 

[Cryozombie]

I think that this was wrong. I think that somewhere in the minds of the people who did this, they were justified, but that doesnt make it right.

 

[Makalakumu]

AND,,,,

While the nation and media focuses on the NSA listening to terrorists, CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS cut 46.2 billion dollars from the budget. These cuts are mostly in programs that aid the poor...with the bulk in, of all things, education.

I hope ya'll don't have to send a kid to college anytime soon...

 

[Cryozombie]

.
But, we don't know. It could be that the terrorist organizations have not planned or attempted any further attacks on our soil.

I'd like to hope that was the case, however, I think it's dangerous thinking. If you feel so safe that you dont feel the need for saftey precautions, you are setting yourself up to be victimized.

That doesn't justify the methods our government used, its just an observation that we can't just assume "they" wont do it again.

 

[Cryozombie]

CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS cut 46.2 billion dollars from the budget.

See? We can't leave THOSE EVIL republicans out of a conversation can we?

And it starts all over again. The Liberals are bound and determined to undermine every one of their own causes by alienating everyone else.

Im done here.

 

[Makalakumu]

See? We can't leave THOSE EVIL republicans out of a conversation can we?

And it starts all over again. The Liberals are bound and determined to undermine every one of their own causes by alienating everyone else.

Im done here.

Techno

With this issue...do you agree that we should cut our budget so that peoples educational opportunities are degraded?

This vote went down party lines...and that is telling about priorities...actions speak louder then words, my friend. All this talk about "evil" only clouds the issue.

The bottom line is this...do you think it is right to cut people's educational opportunities?

If you answer "No" you are in agreement with the majority of americans.

Which brings up another question, how in the heck did cuts like this pass...because people are paying attention to this latest political soap opera.

Take a look, this is MO for the current batch.

 

[michaeledward]

I'd like to hope that was the case, however, I think it's dangerous thinking. If you feel so safe that you dont feel the need for saftey precautions, you are setting yourself up to be victimized.

I do not accept a binary choice.

I think the 'safety precautions' are out of proportion with the threat. There are reasonable safety measure that can and should be taken. But many of the actions taken are not reasonable.

It seems that some feel it is the Federal Governments responsibility to keep us all safe from every possible danger; for example knitting needles on airplane flights.

It's a big world. There are dangers out there. We need to a) watch for them b)take reasonable precautions against them, and c) be sure to not make the dangers more plentiful, and more dangerous than they already are.

I think, we are failing on all accounts.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Here's something special to chew on:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179441,00.html

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans Wednesday evening tentatively signed onto an agreement that will fully reauthorize the Patriot Act in its current form but also allows lawmakers to revisit controversial parts of the act that are subject to extensive opposition.

Let's hope that a review of domestic action under the Patriot Act is completed.

 

[Flying Crane]

I do not accept a binary choice.

I think the 'safety precautions' are out of proportion with the threat. There are reasonable safety measure that can and should be taken. But many of the actions taken are not reasonable.

It seems that some feel it is the Federal Governments responsibility to keep us all safe from every possible danger; for example knitting needles on airplane flights.

It's a big world. There are dangers out there. We need to a) watch for them b)take reasonable precautions against them, and c) be sure to not make the dangers more plentiful, and more dangerous than they already are.

I think, we are failing on all accounts.

I do believe that the current regime wants all Americans to feel afraid all the time. It is what gives them the freedom to do whatever they want, and whenever we begin to shift away from being afraid, they manage to remind us of 9/11 again and the fact that we are still supposed to be afraid.

While 9/11 was a terrible event, there is no reason for us to all live in perpetual fear. I agree, there are reasonable steps that the government and we citizens need to take to prevent another attack such as what happened on 9/11. However, I also agree that the actions of the government are out of proportion to the threat, and there is no reason to resign ourselves to being forever and constantly afraid, like the government wants us to be.

 

[Marginal]

True they're working hard to prevent another 9-11 and the fact that since that terrible day there has not been any significant (or even insignificant... if there is such a thing) terrorist activity/attack on American soil, shows that they must be doing something right.

This argument always bugs me. Was the US prone to regular terrorist acts prior to 9/11? Was 9/11 one of those clockwork terrorist acts?

 

[Makalakumu]

Is the government spying on the terrorists or is it spying on the "terrorists"? That is the question. "Terrorist" is a subjective label. Heck, the government was just caught spying on a bunch of peace loving quakers...are they terrorists?

Do I think that I'm being spied on? Do you?

upnorthkyosa

ps - I hope you don't have to send your kids to college...

 

[MA-Caver]

This argument always bugs me. Was the US prone to regular terrorist acts prior to 9/11? Was 9/11 one of those clockwork terrorist acts?

This is the type of thinking that had conspiracy theorists turning cartwheels and writing "I told you so's" for days on end after that terrible day. Hundreds of websites popped up and made for either amusing or interesting or crazy reading.
One of the worst things I read was the idea that the NSA/CIA/White House and so forth knew the terrorists plans to hijack the planes and turn them into WMDs, so that current evennts can take place. True?? C'mon ya'll are intelligent right? I'd loke to think ya'll are.
But we were in fact caught with our pants down. Okay, so now we're more vigilant right? Just like we got vigilant after the WTC bombing a few years before.
But either way we were vunerable and particularly because the (relatively simple) idea of taking a plane load of people and smashing them into the side of a tall building was just... Inconceivable at the time. Hijacking the plane and going to another country... Sure, but to turn them into a weapon?? Sooo, lesson learned ... at a terrible price.
Were we prone? Against something like this... I think so.

As to the arguments which doubts the effectiveness of the new vigalance and protective measures in effect today; I've spoken with someone who works for homeland security about this, was told that of course they're not going to announce the arrest and seizure of a terrorist cell and disrupted their newest plot to kill more Americans, because that'll just let the other cells (inactive and/or activated) know that we're on to them and thus possibly up their time tables or shut back down and hide so deeply that all the intelligence work on them is wasted. Kinda like telegraphing or announcing your punches/kicks to your opponent at a tournament.
But the fact remains that we well know that once successful a terrorist (group) isn't going to stop after one successful day... They'll be (and probably were) totally inspired to mimic their comrades. But as of late there hasn't been another (successful) attack on American soil since 9-11. Maybe I'm being gullible and naive but I think homeland security has been pretty successful.

BUT! I do agree that they need to be watched by John Q. to ensure they don't do more than they're supposed to do and follow the letter of the law.

 

[michaeledward]

It looks like Newsweek has an article this week about how the 'Department of Homeland Security' has been more forcused on turf wars between its 22 departments, than protecting us from anything. I think Hurricane Katrina demonstrated that fact clearly.

Is anyone else tired of living in a 'Homeland'. I want my country back.

Flying planes into buildings was not inconceivable to Richard Clarke. And he couldn't get a briefing with President Bush. And the, there was that August 6th, Presidential Brief that spelled out what would happen two fortnights later. As for caught with our pants down, some has said, "The system was blinking red."

Lastly, I don't think I want to live in a country where the State can take citizens off the street, accuse them of a crime, bring them before a court, sentence them and imprison them in private. Our system of jurisprudence has always been public. Anyone can go and sit in the courtroom and watch the proceedings.

Have we willingly given up that much of what made this country great? That we aren't mad as hell at the suggestion of secret courts.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I heard on the radio today that this wasnt "spying" on specific people. Like taps on your and my personal phones. This was computerized scanning of all communications and its then analyzed by the spy guys later and all they get are phone numbers and computer accounts that I would think they would then have to get a warrant for to dig into. That was what I heard at least I havet read any exact details of what this spying was supposed to be. Thats what In thought the eschillon {spellings gotta be wrong again} program that I headr about was. And thats old stuff. I agree with MACaver. Just after 911 it was all "how come we didnt know". Now its "big brother is spying on me personally". Unless you are making calls to Yemen or Iraq all the time I dont think you have anything to worry about.

 

[Ray]

I heard on the radio today that this wasnt "spying" on specific people....This was computerized scanning of all communications and its then analyzed by the spy guys later....

I've heard about that! I think it's called SETI or something like that?