They have been saying ONLY domestic to international. Sounds like more bullshit.

Quote :

" Secret spying captured some domestic calls: report WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A program U.S. President George W. Bush ordered allowing warrantless spying on Americans with suspected terrorist ties unintentionally captured a small number of purely domestic communications, The New York Times reported on Tuesday. The newspaper, citing unidentified officials, said the calls were snagged despite a White House requirement that one end of the intercepted conversations take place on foreign soil. The officials were cited as saying that the National Security Agency's interception of communications between people within the United States was apparently accidental, caused by technical glitches in determining whether a communication was in fact "international." There was no immediate comment from the White House. Bush and senior administration officials have argued that the policy of authorizing -- without court orders -- eavesdropping on international phone calls and e-mails by Americans suspected of links to terrorism was legal and necessary to help defend the country after the September 11 attacks. The White House has sought to play down the impact on civil liberties, arguing the program was narrow in scope and that key congressional leaders were briefed about it. A 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, makes it illegal to spy on U.S. citizens in the United States without court approval. Officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, would not discuss the number of accidental intercepts but the total was thought to represent a very small fraction of the total number of wiretaps authorized without court approval, The Times said. National security and telecommunications experts said that even if the NSA stuck closely to the rules set by the White House, the logistics of the program may make it difficult to ensure that the rules are being followed, the newspaper reported. With roaming cell phones, internationally routed e-mail and voice-over Internet technology, "it's often tough to find out where a call started and ended," Robert Morris, a former NSA official, told the newspaper. "The NSA is good at it but it's difficult even for them. Where a call actually came from is often a mystery." "

12/21/2005 1:09:36 AM

by domestic they mean terrorist?

12/21/2005 1:20:37 AM

inside US

12/21/2005 2:00:16 AM

i'm about to march on the white house with a burning cross or something

12/21/2005 7:30:39 AM

Quote :

"Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that - (A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at - (i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or (ii) the acquisition of technical intelligence, other than the spoken communications of individuals, from property or premises under the open and exclusive control of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; (B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party;"

12/21/2005 7:36:56 AM

Not to rehash talking points or anything, but Carter did something very similar. So did Clinton. His administration seized printed documents without a warrant (for national security purposes).

In 100 years, we'll look at this in the same light we look at Lincoln suspending Habeas Corpus.... it'll be viewed as something necessary.

But when speaking of leaks... they suck, don't they White House?

12/21/2005 8:14:30 AM

*ahem*

Here's what clinton signed
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/drudge-fact-check/

Quote :

"Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) [50 U.S.C. 1822(a)] of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] 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."

if and only if the AG followed section 302(a)(1). What does section 1822(a) require?

* the "physical search is solely directed at premises, information, material, or property used exclusively by, or under the open and exclusive control of, a foreign power or powers." Translation: You can't search American citizens.
* and there is "no substantial likelihood that the physical search will involve the premises, information, material, or property of a United States person." Translation: You can't search American citizens.

Moreover, Clinton's warrant waiver consistent with FISA refers only to physical searches. "Physical searches," as defined by 1821(5), exclude electronic surveillance.

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

Quote :

"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."

Carter limits the warrantless surveillance to the requirements of Section 1802(a). That section requires:

* the electronic surveillance is solely directed at communications exclusively between or among foreign powers. Translation: You can't spy on American citizens.
* there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party. Translation: You can't spy on American citizens.

Section 1803(a)(2) requires that the Attorney General report to Congress (specifically, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees) about whether any American citizens were involved, what minimization procedures were undertaken to avoid it and protect their identities, and whether his actions comply with the law.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/21/8157/6595

12/21/2005 9:04:29 AM

Surely even you think that the problem here is a multiplied version of what both clinton and carter did. I understand the need for the administration to want to wiretap Americans in that terrorism really doesn't have a single home country. I'm not saying that I approve, but I can at least understand. It makes me a bit nervous knowing that that's what the government is doing. It requires a little more trust in the gov. than I or an average citizen would be willing to give.

DG, you should look at that incorporate thread. Evidently, we do have constitutional scholars running around this place.

12/21/2005 9:16:18 AM

i wouldn't really say it's a "multiplied version" of what clinton and carter did, because both clinton and carter specifically restricted this activity to non-citizens. it becomes totally different when you're spying on your OWN citizens.

and I can "understand" why they'd want to spy on citizens to protect us as well. I just don't approve of it. I'd rather die free than live under a watchful, big brother government

12/21/2005 9:18:57 AM

what I meant was the situation (world events) that we're dealing with is a multiplied version of what clinton and carter had to deal with.

Now, looking at this from the same angle, you would've been on here yellin and screamin to impeach lincoln for suspending habeaus corpus... that is a much more severe action that what bush is doing. However, I can understand why lincoln did what he did. And it sure helped things a long as well.

12/21/2005 9:21:39 AM

I really, sincerely, honestly think that the "terrorist threat" is badly overblown. Terrorists exist, and they've attacked us once, but I still say that there are tons of things that can kill us more easily and in greater numbers than terrorists, and we should be more worried about them.

The threat is a multiplied version of what clinton and carter were dealing with, but it's not as bad as he wants it to be.

12/21/2005 9:26:13 AM

i'm sure you'll agree that what you said is coming from unsubstantiated sources from a citizen without any sort of security clearance. The claim could be made that because of the patriot act et. al. that we have prevented more terrorists attacks. Of course, that would be just as unsubstantiated.

Yeah, there are a billion things that could kill us. But being killed by a foreign enemy is something that is horrendous enough to cause citizens to give up rights to prevent.

Habeaus corpus, prime example.

12/21/2005 9:29:03 AM

Quote :

"that we're dealing with is a multiplied version of what clinton and carter had to deal with."

i disagree

the only difference i see is that carter's terrorists denied him a second term; while bush's second term was ensured by terrorism

12/21/2005 9:38:37 AM

I don't know enough about the suspension of H.C. to act like I can debate that. I do, however, know that cancer and hunger kill more people than terrorism ever could

12/21/2005 9:41:26 AM

point taken. But hunger doesn't cause the mass hysteria that could cripple an entire nation like terrorism could. I hate saying "the stakes are higher" because it sounds like I removing value from human life. But in the long term, terrorism could cripple a nation.

Look how the Israelis live... you go into a pizza parlor and you're not sure if the woman standing next to you has a bomb up her dress or not. That's no way to live.

12/21/2005 10:10:06 AM

you go into a house of prostitution and you're not sure if the woman standing next to you has AIDS up her dress or not. That's no way to live. We should wiretap doctors offices. </sarcasm>

12/21/2005 6:00:52 PM

^^ well building your house on quicksand is pretty stupid

[Edited on December 21, 2005 at 6:32 PM. Reason : if that shit makes sense]

12/21/2005 6:32:37 PM

ECHELON

12/21/2005 8:52:32 PM