Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 22

• 0%

  pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

  FTA

  "Obama and the Democrats are in a no-win situation, no matter how their mainstream media parses it. If they vote against it, they appear even weaker on national security than they already are. If they vote for it, their words and rhetoric are once again proven to be meaningless.

  As for the Independents on whom it appears Election 2008 will hinge, words matter. Promises matter. And it's becoming more and more apparent that the words and the promises of the Democrats', and in particular Barack Obama's, mean nothing."

  Reply
• 0%

  jimdoze2 months, 2 weeks ago

  Very succinctly stated!

  On this issue, and on energy policy, Obama and a goodly number of the dems, are in a hole in which they are forced to continue digging.

  Reply
• 0%

  NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

  FTA: "It acknowledges that FISA warrants were never before required for eavesdropping suspects overseas, but that with new systems that routes world-wide communications through the United States, it was time to allow for FISA to be updated to reflect the realities of the latest technologies."

  true. FISA warrants are not required to eavesdrop.

  but what is required, if a FISA warrant is not obtained, is a written certification of each eavesdrop. and that certification has to be written by the Attorney General.

  Gonzo and the Bush Administration did not do this when it came to those wiretaps that took place without FISA warrants.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/19508/...

    NSA Wiretaps - Inherent Constitutional Authority

    Actions Under Article II of the Constitution

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

      http://marklevinfan.com/?p=982

      A panel of former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges yesterday told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that President Bush did not act illegally when he created by executive order a wiretapping program conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA).

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

        The President may authorize, through the AG, electronic surveillance without a court order for one year provided it is only for foreign intelligence information, targeting foreign powers as defined by 50 U.S.C. 1801(a)(1),(2),(3); and there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party.

        THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS REQUIRED TO MAKE A CERTIFICATION OF THESE CONDITIONS UNDER SEAL to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and report on their compliance to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

        so...as your article points out, the President, as Commander-in-Chief, is authorized to conduct warrantless wiretaps as per Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution. But as 50 U.S.C. 1801-1811 point out, those wiretaps need to be certified by the AG.

        http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50...

        Reply
• 0%

  Emmanuel702 months, 2 weeks ago

  Patrick Casey: "So I guess that means that Obama will be voting against this bill. Which would put him at odds with the vast majority of Americans, who supported this so-called 'domestic spying.'"

  Majority of American like to be spied on in their private, personal lives?

  Spin away, guys.

  Reply

  7 Replies

  • 0%

    pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

    a majority of americans also like not to be attacked in their home country.......you spin away......if you are making calls or receiving calls from a hostile country in a time of war you don't have a right to privacy........they just don't decide to listen to joe smith from trenton for no reason.........

    Reply
  • 0%

    pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

    http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives...

    Court Reverses Anna Diggs Taylor

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070706-a...

    ACLU's legal challenge to NSA wiretapping rebuffed

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080220-s...

    Supreme Court declines to hear NSA wiretap case

    "because the NSA program is secret, and protected to some extent by the state secrets privilege"

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

      "because the NSA program is secret, and protected to some extent by the state secrets privilege"

      That and the ACLU couldn't find one single "victim."

      Reply
  • 0%

    libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

    "Majority of American like to be spied on in their private, personal lives?"

    The extremely vast majority of Americans AREN'T and WON'T be "spied on" in their private lives.

    Spin away, liberals.

    Reply
  • 0%

    pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

    the actions of the NYTIMES in divulging this information were dangerous, treasonous and put the country at risk......

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

      http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/new-york-...

      New York Times May ad revenue down 11.9%

      http://www.forbes.com/2007/10/24/nytimes-buyout...

      Buyout Alert: Could The New York Times Be Next?

      Reply
  • 0%

    pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

    Barack Obama show up for a vote on this I doubt it......his response will probably be

    "Let me eat my waffle, can't I just eat my waffle?"

    and you didn't finish the quote from the article

    'Which would put him at odds with the vast majority of Americans, who supported this so-called "domestic spying" -- even after the New York Times first exposed it. In fact, Americans were supporting the Bush Administration on this issue even in the New York Times' own poll'

    Reply
• 0%

  pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

  and the beauty of this is

  FTA

  "Sen. Barack Obama will have to decide whether to support it and risk the wrath of his party's left wing, or vote against it and risk losing support from independents. One top Democratic lawmaker said the Democrats delayed the announcement by a couple of days, in part to give the presumptive nominee time to assess his position."

  Reply
• 0%

  icono12 months, 2 weeks ago

  Due to the nature of this war; small cells spread over the globe using electronic technology, mostly cell phones and computers, to communicate between the cells, the 'wiretapping system' implemented by the govt was a necessity to provide for the relative security of the United States and it's citizens.

  However, due to the nature of the sensitive information intercepted, there cannot be transparency or full disclosure as to the information obtained, from who the info originated from and the process(s) used to obtain the information at this time.

  This is the real nature of the times we live in after 9/11.

  Will this affect the average Joe talking on the phone to anybody USA about whatever? Probably never.

  Is it legal? The courts have answered that question.

  Reply
• 0%

  pc252 months, 2 weeks ago

  meanwhile

  Under Clinton, NY Times called surveillance "a necessity"

  http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/01/under_cl...

  Reply
• 0%

  CRYMTYPHON2 months, 2 weeks ago

  Those poor foolish democrats are in a no-win situation now!

  Soon, soon, the last supporters will drop their flags in weary disbelief, leaving the field to cheering crowds of Republicans invigorated by the new membership!

  The partying, the champaigns, the songs! While the last liberals are left gnashing their teeth in the dark.

  But back to reality: spying on your fellow americans, without even the secret permision of a judge; its not just wrong, its stupid.

  It's the kind of thing governments do when they get old and tired and scared of their own people.

  If you ever had any real affection for your country or its principles, don't support domestic spying.

  It doesn't catch terrorists; it distracts from catching terrorists.

  Reply
• 0%

  Wolfie20072 months, 2 weeks ago

  Good one,pc, thanks for posting and sending.

  The saddest thing is that the RICO laws have far more power to intrude upon domestic privacy. Just ask the ACLU about the abuses from RICO.

  Reply
• 0%

  Wolfie20072 months, 2 weeks ago

  ..

  Reply
• 0%

  Wolfie20072 months, 2 weeks ago

  ...

  Reply
• 0%

  aniokly2 months, 2 weeks ago

  The Democrats are so slick. They pretended to be against FISA so the telecoms would fill their pockets with campaign donations. Now that they can't hold them up for another penny they will give them what they wanted all along. Immunity. Clever those slimey Democrats.

  Reply