Report of NSA Spying Prompts Call for Probe

[Hardrock69]

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer 57 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A key Republican committee chairman put the Bush administration on notice Friday that his panel would hold hearings into a report that the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States.
ADVERTISEMENT

Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., said he would make oversight hearings by his panel next year "a very, very high priority."

"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Other key bipartisan members of Congress also called on the administration to explain and said a congressional investigation may be necessary.

Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., appeared annoyed that the first he had heard of such a program was through a New York Times story published Friday. He said the report was troubling.

Neither Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice nor White House press secretary Scott McClellan, asked about the story earlier Friday, would confirm or deny that the super-secret NSA had spied on as many as 500 people at any given time since 2002.

That year, following the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds $B!=(B perhaps thousands $B!=(B of people inside the United States, the Times reported.

Before the program began, the NSA typically limited its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtained court orders for such investigations. Overseas, 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time.

"We need to look into that," McCain told reporters at the White House after a meeting on
Iraq with
President Bush. "Theoretically, I obviously wouldn't like it. But I don't know the extent of it and I don't know enough about it to really make an informed comment. Ask me again in about a week."

McCain said it's not clear whether a congressional probe is warranted. He said the topic had not come up in the meeting with Bush.

"We should be informed as to exactly what is going on and then find out whether an investigation is called for," he said.

Sen.
Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., also said he needed more information.

"Of course I was concerned about the story," said Lieberman, who also attended the White House Iraq meeting. "I'm going to go back to the office and see if I can find out more about it."

Other Democrats were more harsh.

"This is Big Brother run amok," declared Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass. "We cannot protect our borders if we cannot protect our ideals." Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., called it a "shocking revelation" that he said "ought to send a chill down the spine of every senator and every American."

Administration officials reacted to the report by asserting that the president has respected the Constitution while striving to protect the American people.

Rice said Bush has "acted lawfully in every step that he has taken." And McClellan said Bush "is going to remain fully committed to upholding our Constitution and protect the civil liberties of the American people. And he has done both."

The report surfaced in an untimely fashion as the administration and its GOP allies on Capitol Hill were fighting to save provisions of the expiring USA Patriot Act that they believe are key tools in the fight against terrorism.

The Times said reporters interviewed nearly a dozen current and former administration officials about the program and granted them anonymity because of the classified nature of the program.

Government officials credited the new program with uncovering several terrorist plots, including one by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting al-Qaida by planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge, the report said.

Faris' lawyer, David B. Smith, said on Friday the news puzzled him because none of the evidence against Faris appeared to have come from surveillance, other than officials eavesdropping on his cell phone calls while he was in
FBI custody.

Some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said. Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions.

Asked about this on NBC's "Today" show, Rice said, "I'm not going to comment on intelligence matters."

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the
American Civil Liberties Union, said the group's initial reaction to the NSA disclosure was "shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law."

Asked about the administration's contention that the eavesdropping has disrupted terrorist attacks, Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn't comment until it sees some evidence. "They've veiled these powers in secrecy so there's no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight."

Earlier this week, the
Pentagon said it was reviewing its use of a classified database of information about suspicious people and activity inside the United States after a report by NBC News said the database listed activities of anti-war groups that were not a security threat to Pentagon property or personnel.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that while it appears that some information may have been left in the database longer than it should have been, it was not clear yet whether mistakes were made. A written statement issued by the department implied $B!=(B but did not explicitly acknowledge $B!=(B that some information had been handled improperly.

The administration had briefed congressional leaders about the NSA program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that handles national security issues.

Aides to National Intelligence Director John Negroponte and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to comment Thursday night.

The Times said it delayed publication of the report for a year because the White House said it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. The Times said it omitted information from the story that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051216/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_nsa_11;_ylt=ApMwC0qwG0DXiNMvRDWg7J3B4FkB;_ylu =X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

[Nickdfresh]

This is very scary indeed!

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer 57 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A key Republican committee chairman put the Bush administration on notice Friday that his panel would hold hearings into a report that the National Security Agency eavesdropped without warrants on people inside the United States.

Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., said he would make oversight hearings by his panel next year "a very, very high priority."



Does anyone here actually think that this hasn't occurred for decades?

Hmm?

:gulp:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Does anyone here actually think that this hasn't occurred for decades?

Hmm?

:gulp:

Actually, the last time it occurred was during the early 70's under Herr NIXON's paranoia...

After that, a special National Security court was created which would virtually always grant a warrant, but there was judicial review and guardianship of civil liberties...

This is bullshit on two levels:

1.) The bar was extremely low to get a warrant (I heard on NPR that only ONE was ever refused).

2.) The BUSH Administration willfully broke the law for no real reason...

[Hardrock69]

True.

They are required by law to UPHOLD THE LAW, but instead they spend all their time figuring out ways to break laws.

CHIMPEACHMENT!!!

NOW!!!

:mad:

[DrMaddVibe]

Anti-Bush article
tied to book release
Times reporter claims NSA spy story
delayed 1 year for additional reporting
Posted: December 16, 2005
5:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

The New York Times neglected to tell its readers that the publishing of a major story today, claiming President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans, coincided with the release of a book by the article's writer.

Times reporter James Risen says the paper delayed publication of the story for a year to conduct additional reporting, according to the Drudge Report.

The story hit the front page one day after the Iraqi parliamentary election, widely seen as a success for the Bush administration.

In the article, Risen claims "months after the September 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States ... without the court approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."

The NSA typically limits its domestic surveillance to foreign embassies and missions and obtains court orders for such investigations.

Risen claims the White House asked the Times not to publish the article because it could alert would-be terrorists and jeopardize continuing investigations, the Drudge Report said.

His book, "STATE OF WAR: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration," will be published by Free Press in the coming weeks.

President Bush declined to respond to the allegations while congressional leaders condemned the practice and promised an investigation.

"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to the Associated Press.

Specter said hearings would be held early in the year, and they will have "a very, very high priority."

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the report troubling.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., stated: "This is Big Brother run amok."

Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., said it was a "shocking revelation" that "ought to send a chill down the spine of every senator and every American."

Bush said in an interview with PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer to be aired tonight that "we do not discuss ongoing intelligence operations to protect the country. And the reason why is that there's an enemy that lurks, that would like to know exactly what we're trying to do to stop them.

"I will make this point," Bush said. "That whatever I do to protect the American people – and I have an obligation to do so - that we will uphold the law, and decisions made are made understanding we have an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the American people."

Bush downplayed the importance of the story.

"It's not the main story of the day," the president said. "The main story of the day is the Iraqi elections" for parliament which took place on Thursday.

In an interview today with ABC's "Good Morning America," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Bush has "acted lawfully in every step that he has taken" while seeking to protect the American people.

Lawyer John Hinderaker of the popular weblog Powerline believes intelligence officials who leaked the story to the Times "should be identified, criminally prosecuted, and sent to prison."

Hinderaker says intelligence officials hostile to the Bush administration leaked the information, citing the Times story, which says, "Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight."

[Warham]

How interesting, Vibe.

[Nickdfresh]

Oh geez, they waited a year? Oh, just forget about the story then. I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh geez, they waited a year? Oh, just forget about the story then. I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

You don't see the conflict of interest?

C'mon!

If the shoe was on the other foot I can just imagine the screaming you libs would be screeching. You'd make Dean palatable to the ears!

[DLR'sCock]

You're right, they should have released the story before the 2004 elections. ;)


Of course let's not get off track here, Bush broke the law.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
You're right, they should have released the story before the 2004 elections. ;)


Of course let's not get off track here, Bush broke the law.

No, Dubya was saving American lives! The Bush/Orwell administration does it again with more Newspeak...

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2005/12/17/ap2399433.html

Update 7: Bush: Eavesdropping Helps Save U.S. Lives
12.17.2005, 03:28 PM

Facing angry criticism and challenges to his authority in Congress, President Bush on Saturday unapologetically defended his administration's right to conduct secret post-Sept. 11 spying in the U.S. as "critical to saving American lives."

One Democrat said Bush was acting more like a king than a democratically elected leader.

Bush's willingness to publicly acknowledge some of the government's most classified activities was a stunning development for a president known to dislike disclosure of even the most mundane inner workings of his White House.

Since October 2001, the super-secret National Security Agency has monitored, without court-approved warrants, the international phone calls and e-mails of people inside the United States.

News of the program comes at a particularly damaging and delicate time.

Already, the Bush administration is under fire for allegedly operating secret prisons in Eastern Europe and shipping suspected terrorists to other countries for harsh interrogations.

The NSA program's existence surfaced as the administration and its GOP allies on Capitol Hill were fighting to save the expiring provisions of the USA Patriot Act, the domestic anti-terrorism law enacted after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In a stinging failure to Bush, Democrats and a few Republicans who say this law gives so much latitude to law enforcement officials that it threatens Americans' constitutional liberties succeeded Friday in stalling its renewal.

So Bush scrapped the version of his weekly radio address that he had already taped - on the recent elections in Iraq - and delivered a live speech from the White House's Roosevelt Room on the Patriot Act and the NSA program.

The gravity with which the White House regarded the situation was evident by the presence in the West Wing on a normally quiet Saturday of many of Bush's closest aides.

Often appearing angry in his eight-minute address, the president lashed out at the senators who blocked the Patriot Act's renewal, branding them as irresponsible.

He also made clear that he has no intention of halting his authorizations of the NSA's monitoring activities and said the public disclosure of the spy operation endangered Americans.

Bush said his authority to approve what he called a "vital tool in our war against the terrorists" came from his constitutional powers as commander in chief. He said that he has personally signed off on reauthorizations more than 30 times since the Sept. 11 attacks.

"The American people expect me to do everything in my power under our laws and Constitution to protect them and their civil liberties," Bush said. "And that is exactly what I will continue to do, so long as I'm the president of the United States."

James Bamford, author of two books on the National Security Agency, said the program could be problematic because it bypasses a special court set up by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to authorize eavesdropping on suspected terrorists.

"I didn't hear him specify any legal right, except his right as president, which in a democracy doesn't make much sense," Bamford said in an interview. "Today, what Bush said is he went around the law, which is a violation of the law - which is illegal."

Susan Low Bloch, a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University Law Center, said the president needs authorization from Congress for this kind of activity.

"He's taking a hugely expansive interpretation of the Constitution and the president's powers under the Constitution," she said.

"It's consistent with everything the White House has been doing since 9/11. And every time that any of these measures have been challenged in the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has ruled against the administration. The administration just doesn't seem to learn from that."

That view was echoed by congressional Democrats.

"I tell you, he's President George Bush, not King George Bush. This is not the system of government we have and that we fought for," Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., told The Associated Press.

Added Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.: "The Bush administration seems to believe it is above the law."

Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Friday said the NSA program was inappropriate and he promised hearings soon.

Bush defended the monitoring program as narrowly designed and used "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." He said it is employed only to intercept the international communications of people inside the U.S. who have been determined to have "a clear link" to al-Qaida or related terrorist organizations.

Government officials have refused to provide details, including defining the standards used to establish such a link or saying how many people are being monitored.

The program is reviewed every 45 days, using fresh threat assessments, legal reviews, and information from previous activities under the program, the president said. Intelligence officials involved in the monitoring receive extensive training to make sure civil liberties are not violated, he said.

Bush also said members of the congressional leadership have been briefed more than a dozen times on the activities.

The program through the nation's largest spy agency is designed in part to fix problems revealed by the 2001 attacks, in which it came to be learned that two of the suicide hijackers were communicating from San Diego with al-Qaida operatives overseas.

"The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9-11 hijackers will be identified and located in time," Bush said. "The activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.

The president had harsh words for those who revealed the program to the media, saying they acted improperly and illegally. The surveillance, was first disclosed in Friday's New York Times.

"As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have," Bush said. "The unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk."

Bush has more to worry about on Capitol Hill than his difficulties with the Patriot Act. Lawmakers have begun challenging Bush on his Iraq policy, reflecting polling that shows half of the country is not behind him on the war.

On Sunday, the president was continuing his effort to reverse that by giving his fifth major speech in less than three weeks on Iraq. This latest one was a 15-minute address, set in prime time from the Oval Office, that was to focus on his vision for Iraq for 2006.

One bright spot for the White House was a new poll showing that a strong majority of Americans oppose, as does Bush and most lawmakers, an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. The AP-Ipsos poll found 57 percent of those surveyed said the U.S. military should stay until Iraq is stabilized.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Actually, the last time it occurred was during the early 70's under Herr NIXON's paranoia...



Bullshit. You people are NAIVE.

:cool:

[blueturk]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Bullshit. You people are NAIVE.

:cool:

NAIVE is re-electing an arrogant spoiled brat who uses 9/11 as a tool to further the Bush/Orwell agenda. While I agree that eavesdropping on US citizens has probably occured during many presidencies, Bush has no qualms about carrying things a little farther under the ever larger umbrella of fighting terrorism. How many US citizens who were spied on were convicted (or even tried) for any crimes? Maybe The Ministry Of Truth knows...

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Bullshit. You people are NAIVE.

:cool:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

That is hysterical coming from you who live in Denial.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Bullshit. You people are NAIVE.

:cool:

Oh yeah?' COINTEL-PRO (http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm)




SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILED STAFF REPORTS
ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES AND THE
RIGHTS OF AMERICANS

_______

BOOK III
_______


FINAL REPORT

OF THE

SELECT COMMITTEE
TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS

WITH RESPECT TO

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
UNITED STATES SENATE



APRIL 23 (under authority of the order of April 14), 1976






WARRANTLESS FBI ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE


I. INTRODUCTION


Technological developments in this century have rendered the most private conversations of American citizens vulnerable to interception and monitoring by government agents. The electronic means by which the Government can extend its "antennae" are varied: microphones may be secretly planted in private locations or on mobile informants; so-called "spike mikes" may be inserted into the wall of an adjoining room; and parabolic microphones may be directed at speakers far away to register the sound waves they emit. Telephone conversations may be overheard without the necessity of attaching electronic devices to the telephone itself or to the lines connecting the telephone with the telephone company. An ordinary telephone may also be turned into an open microphone -- a "miketel" capable of intercepting all conversations within hearing range even when the telephone is not in use.

Even more sophisticated technology permits the Government to intercept any telephone, telegram, or telex communication which is transmitted at least partially through the air, as most such communications now are. This type of interception is virtually undetectable and does not require the cooperation of private communications companies.

Techniques such as these have been used, and continue to be used, by intelligence agencies in their intelligence operations. Since the early part of this century the FBI has utilized wiretapping and "bugging" techniques in both criminal and intelligence investigations. In a single year alone (1945), the Bureau conducted 519 wiretaps and 186 microphone surveillances (excluding those conducted by means of microphones planted on informants). 1 Until 1972, the Bureau used wiretaps and bugs against both American citizens and foreigners within the United States -- without judicial warrant -- to collect foreign intelligence, intelligence and counterintelligence information, to monitor "subversive" and violent activity, and to determine the sources of leaks of classified information. The FBI still uses these techniques without a warrant in foreign intelligence and counterintelligence investigations.

The CIA and NSA have similarly used electronic surveillance techniques for intelligence purposes. The CIA's Office of Security, for example, records a total of fifty-seven individuals who were targeted by telephone wiretaps or microphones within the United States between the years 1947 and 1968. 2 Of these, thirty were employees or former employees of the CIA or of another federal agency who were presumably targeted for security reasons; four were United States citizens unconnected with the CIA or any federal agency. 3 One of the primary responsibilities of the National Security Agency (NSA) is to collect foreign "communications intelligence." To fulfill this responsibility, it has electronically intercepted an enormous number of international telephone, telegram, and telex communications since its inception in the early 1950's. 4

Electronic surveillance techniques have understandably enabled these agencies to obtain valuable information relevant to their legitimate intelligence missions. Use of these techniques has provided the Government with vital intelligence, which would be difficult to acquire through other means, about the activities and intentions of foreign powers, and has provided important leads in counterespionage cases.

By their very nature, however, electronic surveillance techniques also provide the means by which the Government can collect vast amounts of information, unrelated to any legitimate governmental interest, about large numbers of American citizens. Because electronic monitoring is surreptitious, it allows Government agents to eavesdrop on the conversations of individuals in unguarded moments, when they believe they are speaking in confidence. Once in operation, electronic surveillance techniques record not merely conversations about criminal, treasonable, or espionage-related activities, but all conversations about the full range of human events. Neither the most mundane nor the most personal nor the most political expressions of the speakers are immune from interception. Nor are these techniques sufficiently precise to limit the conversations overheard to those of the intended subject of the surveillance: anyone who speaks in a bugged room and anyone who talks over a tapped telephone is also overheard and recorded.

Cont'd (http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIe.htm)


Now who's "NAIVE," huh bitch?:D

[Hardrock69]

Come on BRIAN.

Let us see you provide us with another one of your "non-answers".

You never fail to try to explain away stuff with some kind of diversionary tactic or lame unbelievable excuse.

Why stop now?
;)

[Nickdfresh]

BUSH admits it on yesterday's radio show...

December 18, 2005

Bush Defends Eavesdropping as Defense Against Terrorism
He vows to continue the newly acknowledged domestic program despite mounting criticism, even from within his own party.

By Rick Schmitt and Mary Curtius, Times Staff Writers (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bush18dec18,0,3041442,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

WASHINGTON — President Bush, facing fresh criticism about how he has waged the war on terrorism, acknowledged Saturday that after the Sept. 11 attacks he authorized a secret eavesdropping program in the U.S. that operates without court warrants.

He said the program was vital to saving American lives and that he had no intention of stopping it.

ADVERTISEMENT
In an unusual live radio broadcast from the White House, he detailed what he described as a "highly classified" program to root out terrorists. He defended the surveillance plan as legal, saying his authority to approve it came from his constitutional powers as commander in chief.

"In the weeks following the terrorist attacks on our nation, I authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, to intercept the international communications of people with known links to Al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations," the president said.

"Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies," he said.

Bush said that top officials at the Justice Department and the National Security Agency reviewed the program about every 45 days and that he had personally signed off on reauthorizations of surveillance activities more than 30 times.

But questions mounted about the legality of the program, and some members of Congress said the plan was an abuse of power.

Bush's acknowledgment that he authorized the wiretaps was a "shocking admission," Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis) said.

"The president does not get to pick and choose which laws he wants to follow. He is a president, not a king," Feingold said.

In his address, Bush said he kept congressional leaders informed about the plan, and on Saturday some said they had known about it.

Still, members of Congress, including Republicans, began to call for congressional hearings to learn more.

Bush's speech followed a story in Friday's New York Times — confirmed by other media outlets — that described how he had authorized the National Security Agency to monitor the international telephone calls and e-mails of hundreds of people in the U.S. without court approval in an effort to identify links with terrorists abroad.

The surveillance is of concern because Bush bypassed a special court that Congress established in the 1970s as the exclusive arbiter of requests to conduct domestic intelligence-gathering.

The periodic review of the program involves only members of the executive branch, such as Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales and White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers.

Bush's disclosure of the program was striking for an administration with a reputation for reticence regarding its inner workings.

In the radio address, Bush said sternly that information about the program had been "improperly provided to news organizations."

"As a result," he said, "our enemies have learned information they should not have."

Bush's discussion of the program was a dramatic turnabout for a president who tends to stick to his plan: On Friday, he told a television interviewer that speaking out could jeopardize national security.

A senior administration official, who required anonymity to discuss White House planning, said the president decided to address the public because officials believed that "improper disclosure" of the program "is harmful to our nation's security and puts us at greater risk."

"We discussed carefully — now that information had been disclosed — what could be said," the official said Saturday. "We are directly taking on critics."

The program adds fuel to an ongoing debate over presidential powers in dealing with the terrorist threat.

News of the eavesdropping followed media reports about a month ago that the U.S. government used secret prisons in Eastern Europe. Also, the administration had been under fire for refusing to back legislation that would ban cruel and inhumane treatment of detainees by any U.S. agency; last week, the White House reversed course and agreed to the measure.

Adding to the administration's woes, senators Friday blocked renewal of the Patriot Act, the signature law that the administration has used in fighting alleged terrorists in the courts. The law had been passed overwhelmingly shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, but critics have said that some of its provisions allow the federal government to trample on civil liberties.

Bush began his address Saturday by lashing out at the Senate opponents of the act's renewal, calling their filibustering "irresponsible."

The measure's key sections expire Dec. 31. Bush said: "In the war on terror, we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment."

Some Republicans staunchly defended Bush's authorization of the eavesdropping program and his decision not to seek warrants from the court established by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) knew of the program and considers it essential, according to the committee's communications director, Jamal Ware.

"He also believes it has been helpful in keeping America safe from terrorists," Ware said.

But Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the program's authority to intercept communications in the U.S. needed to be clarified. She said she was asking the National Security Agency for a "full briefing" on the matter.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), who was the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee when Bush first authorized the wiretapping program, said she had been informed of it shortly after it was created and had expressed concern about it.

Pelosi said that although the president "must have the best possible intelligence to protect the American people … intelligence must be produced in a manner consistent with the United States Constitution and our laws."

She said Bush's radio address raised "serious questions as to what the activities were and whether the activities were lawful."

Among the lawmakers who acknowledged they had known about the program was House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

And Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), asked at a Capitol Hill news conference whether he had been briefed on the wiretapping, replied: "I have been kept abreast of programs that it is appropriate for the majority leader to be briefed on."

Bush said in his speech that the surveillance had "helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad." He did not provide specifics.

The director of Syracuse University's Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism, law professor William C. Banks, said spying of the sort that Bush authorized should have been reviewed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Banks also considered it cold comfort that Bush had said the surveillance program was regularly reviewed by administration lawyers.

"That review is nice. But what are the standards? What are they measuring against? Some concept of executive power not written down anywhere? Not endorsed by any court? It is what you want it to be," he said.

In remarks on the Senate floor Saturday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) attacked the New York Times for publishing the story the day the Senate was considering renewing much of the Patriot Act. He noted that two senators had cited the report as a factor in deciding to vote against renewing the law.

Times staff writer Peter G. Gosselin contributed to this report.

[Nickdfresh]

December 18, 2005

Legality of Wiretaps Remains in Question
By David G. Savage and Bob Drogin, Times Staff Writers (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-legal18dec18,0,4928162.story?track=tottext)

WASHINGTON — Is it legal for the president, acting on his own authority and without a court warrant, to order federal officials to eavesdrop on people within the United States?

President Bush gave one answer to that question Saturday, saying he was justified in ordering the National Security Agency to spy on "people with known links to Al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations."

But a Supreme Court decision more than 30 years ago raises questions about Bush's position. And several legal experts note that a special court exists that could rule on the surveillance requests.

As a result, the controversy over the program Bush approved is not likely to end quickly.

In making his case, Bush argued that the program was targeted, not an open-ended one that encompassed a group of people, such as Muslim men. Moreover, the NSA was listening to "international communications" made by possible terrorists, he said.

And the purpose of the spying was clear: "to detect and prevent terrorist attacks" by intercepting the calls of plotters, the president said.

But Bush did not explain why he chose to bypass the procedure established in a 1978 law for such operations. That measure requires the approval of a special court before conversations can be intercepted and recorded. The court may authorize warrants to obtain "foreign intelligence" information if the target is linked to "international terrorism."

Throughout his administration — and especially since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks — Bush has been aggressive in asserting executive powers. And part of his explanation for approving the spying program fits this pattern.

Bush said his decision was "fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities." And the president's lawyers have maintained that the commander in chief has the "inherent" authority to act in the interest of national security, even if he overrides the law.

But the Supreme Court did not accept that claim when it was tested in the past.

In 1972, the justices unanimously rejected President Nixon's contention that he had the power to order wiretapping without a warrant to protect national security. The decision came in the case of three men who had allegedly plotted to bomb a CIA facility in Michigan. After the ruling, charges in the case were dismissed.

The 4th Amendment protects Americans from "unreasonable searches and seizures" by the government, said then-Justice Lewis F. Powell, a Nixon appointee, delivering the court's ruling, and such freedoms "cannot be properly guaranteed if domestic security surveillances are conducted solely within the discretion of the executive branch."

He said Nixon's lawyer should have obtained a search warrant from a judge before the government tapped the telephones of the alleged plotters.

"We recognize, as we have before, the constitutional basis of the president's domestic security role, but we think it must be exercised in a manner compatible with the 4th Amendment," Powell said.

But in the decision, Powell said the court was not ruling on the "president's surveillance power with respect to the activities of foreign powers, within or without this country."

Bush on Saturday said the spying by the NSA that he authorized was reviewed thoroughly by the Justice Department and the NSA's top legal officials.

But some legal experts said Saturday that they did not understand why Bush did not rely on the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, and seek a warrant for the spying from the special court that operates within the Justice Department.

Jeffrey H. Smith, former general counsel to the CIA, said the FISA process "should have permitted, or enabled, the president to conduct this surveillance." Smith said the court sometimes was slow to act in the past but became "much more responsive" after the Sept. 11 attacks.

One senior U.S. counterterrorism official familiar with both the intelligence and law enforcement aspects of the controversy said FISA warrants — even under emergency conditions — can take 24 to 48 hours to be approved.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity when discussing classified operations, said that not long after the Sept. 11 attacks, the administration's use of wiretaps without warrants was applauded within the counterterrorism community. But potential problems arose when it continued long after "chatter" among possible terrorists of large-scale attacks had died down.

Kenneth C. Bass III, another expert on FISA, said the administration might have thought it did not have enough evidence to obtain a warrant. Bass, a Washington lawyer who worked on intelligence matters during the Carter administration, speculated that U.S. authorities might have seized a computer or a phone that was used by an Al Qaeda operative.

"The scuttlebutt is they were then using all the links or phone numbers they found," Bass said. "It certainly sounds reasonable to say, 'We are targeting people with links to Al Qaeda,' but it may be just a list of phone numbers," he said. "That probably wouldn't satisfy the FISA court."

The law says the government must show probable cause to believe the targeted person is involved in a terrorist group.

The simple explanation may be that the president's lawyers believed he had the power, regardless of the law or the past court rulings. Three years ago, then-Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft asserted that the president could order wiretapping on his own.

"The Constitution vests in the president inherent authority to conduct warrantless intelligence surveillance [electronic or otherwise] of foreign powers or their agents, and Congress cannot by statute extinguish that constitutional authority," Ashcroft said in a legal brief filed in September 2002. Ashcroft was appealing a decision by the FISA court on surveillance activity.

Civil libertarians say the president is claiming he is above the law in matters of national security.

"The president simply cannot pick and choose which laws he will or will not follow," Lisa Graves, senior counsel for the ACLU, said Saturday. "This approach … leads our nation into the wilderness of lawlessness."

Times staff writer Josh Meyer contributed to this report.

[ODShowtime]

So now gw is down with just flat out admitting his illegal actions? Good times.

This country is in a bad spot.

[DrMaddVibe]

I think they're making hay.






Sunday, Dec. 18, 2005 12:58 p.m. EST

Nancy Pelosi: I Was Briefed on NSA Program

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi confessed late Saturday that she signed off on President Bush's decision to have a top intelligence agency conduct "unspecified activities" to gather intelligence on possible terrorists operating inside the U.S. in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

"I was advised of President Bush's decision to provide authority to the National Security Agency to conduct unspecified activities shortly after he made it and have been provided with updates on several occasions," Pelosi admitted.

The San Francisco Democrat claimed she expressed "strong concerns" about the "unspecified activities" at the time, but offered no evidence to that effect.

Pelosi declined to explain why she didn't make public her concerns about the authorization, which Democrats now say was an outrageous abuse of civil rights.

Instead, Pelosi admitted keeping silent about the "unspecified activities" even though she now believes they may have been illegal, saying Bush's acknowledgment of the NSA program on Saturday "raises serious questions as to what the activities were and whether the activities were lawful."

On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid also admitted he kept silent about the controversial program, even though he was briefed on its existence "a couple of months ago."

Still, he insisted that it made no difference that Democratic congressional leaders knew about the NSA program, telling Fox News Sunday: "This is something that's [the responsibility of] the president and the vice president and there's no way he can pass the buck."



So why hold on to THAT nugget?

[frets5150]

"That year, following the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds $B!=(B perhaps thousands $B!=(B of people inside the United States, the Times reported."

Did The CHIMP monitor his own phone calls .:rolleyes:

[DrMaddVibe]

After 9-11 what would you have them do?

The report doesn't say who/m was monitored and for what reasons.

Best to have ALL of the facts before making a decision for or against this.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
After 9-11 what would you have them do?

The report doesn't say who/m was monitored and for what reasons.

Best to have ALL of the facts before making a decision for or against this.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe they could just get a warrant from the court specially set up for this instead of ignoring whatever laws they choose...

[HELLVIS]

I'm a spy
in the house of love.
I know the things
that you're dreamin' of.

[DrMaddVibe]

John McCain: Bush Right to Use NSA

Sen. John McCain disappointed Democrats on Capitol Hill on Sunday by defending the Bush administration's decision to use the National Security Agency to monitor a limited number of domestic phone calls in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Saying that Sept. 11 "changed everything," McCain told ABC's "This Week": "The president, I think, has the right to do this."

"We all know that since Sept. 11 we have new challenges with enemies that exist within the United States of America - so the equation has changed."

McCain said that while the administration needs to explain why it didn't first seek approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, he suggested that the Patriot Act might have superseded the 1978 FISA Act, allowing "additional powers for the president."

McCain said the fact that congressional leaders - including top Democrats - were consulted on the NSA authorization "is a very important part of this equation." He suggested that any congressional hearings into the Bush decision focus on that aspect.

"I'd like to hear from the leaders of Congress, both Republican and Democrat, who, according to reports, we're briefed on this and agreed to it," he told "This Week." "They didn't raise any objection, apparently, to [whether] there was a, quote, violation of law."

Asked about House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's claim that she "raised concerns" about granting the NSA new powers during one meeting with White House officials, McCain said: "I don't know about any meetings, but I certainly never heard complaints from anyone on either side of the aisle.

"When this process was being carried out I would imagine that the leaders of Congress would be very concerned about any violation of law as well," he said. "Apparently [those concerns have] not been raised until it was published in the New York Times."

McCain also warned that any congressional investigation should take care not to force additional disclosures from the White House that could help the enemy, saying: "I don't see anything wrong with congressional hearings but what kind of information are you going to put into the public arena that might help the al Qaida people in going undetected."

[Nickdfresh]

Democrats call for investigation of NSA wiretaps

Sunday, December 18, 2005; Posted: 1:23 p.m. EST (18:23 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/18/bush.nsa/index.html)) -- Democratic House leaders called Sunday for an independent panel to investigate the legality of a program President Bush authorized that allows warrantless wiretaps on U.S. citizens, according to a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

"We believe that the President must have the best possible intelligence to protect the American people, but that intelligence must be produced in a manner consistent with our Constitution and our laws, and in a manner that reflects our values as a nation," the letter says.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi; Minority Whip Steny Hoyer; Rep. John Conyers, the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee; and Rep. Henry Waxman, the ranking member on the House Committee on Government Reform, signed the letter.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice defended Bush's actions, telling "Fox News Sunday" the president had authorized the National Security Agency "to collect information on a limited number of people with connections to al Qaeda."

On Saturday, Bush acknowledged he authorized the NSA to intercept international communications of people in the United States "with known links" to terror groups, and criticized the media for divulging the program.

He said he has re-authorized the NSA wiretap program about 30 times "and I intend to continue doing so as long as we have terror threats."

While the NSA is barred from domestic spying, it can get warrants issued with the permission of a special judicial body called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court. Bush's action eliminated the need to get a warrant from the court.

Asked why the president authorized skipping the FISA court, Rice said the war on terrorism was a "different type of war" that gives the commander in chief "additional authorities."

"I'm not a lawyer, but the president has gone to great lengths to make certain that he is both living under his obligations to protect Americans from another attack but also to protect their civil liberties," Rice said on "Meet The Press."

"And that's why this program is very carefully controlled. It has to be reauthorized every 45 days. People are specially trained to participate in it. And it has been briefed to leadership of the Congress, including the leadership of the intelligence committees."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said "Congress was never involved" in Bush's decision.

"I think all you need to know is look at former Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Bob Graham -- he was never informed of domestic eavesdropping," the Nevada Democrat said on "Fox News Sunday." "There should be committees investigating this."

Top Republicans also called for hearings.

"We have to resolve the issue to show Americans we are nation of law not outcomes," Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said on CBS' "Face The Nation." "I would like to see the intelligence committee look into it."

"There is a theme here that is a bit disturbing," the Judiciary Committee member said.

"If you allow him [Bush] to make findings, he becomes the court. You can't allow him or others to play the role of the court because then others adopt that model when they hold our troops."

Sen. John McCain also said that if the matter goes to a congressional panel that the intelligence community should investigate.

"You've got to be very careful about putting into the open situation" sensitive information "that would be helpful to al Qaeda," he said.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, told "CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer" there were many questions but cautioned against politicizing the matter.

"I'd like to inquire why they didn't go to the Federal Intelligence Security Act," [FISA] which sets up a special court to authorize national security wiretaps," the senator said. "That's a real question they have to answer."

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, said he believes Bush's action violated the law.

"FISA law says it's the exclusive law to authorize wiretaps," he said. "This administration is playing fast and loose with the law in national security. The issue here is whether the president of the United States is putting himself above the law, and I believe he has done so."

Specter, however, said Feingold "is rushing to judgment."

"The president did notify key members of Congress," he said, but he added that the matters of how much those members of Congress were told -- and what they should have done about it -- were unsettled.

Sen. Carl Levin, a member of the Intelligence Committee, said it is possible the president's action was illegal, but that should be determined through hearings.

"But I don't want to prejudge whether the president broke the law," the Michigan Democrat said on "Meet The Press." "We need an explanation. We need it fast. The American public is entitled to the protections of the law."

CNN has not confirmed the exact wording of the president's order.

[Hardrock69]

WASHINGTON -
President Bush brushed aside criticism over his decision to spy on suspected terrorists without court warrants Monday and said he will keep it up "for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens."

"As president of the United States and commander in chief I have the constitutional responsibility and the constitutional authority to protect our country," he said at a year-end White House news conference.

Bush also called on Congress to renew the anti-terror Patriot Act before it expires at the end of the year. "In a war on terror we cannot afford to be without this law for a single moment," he said.

The legislation has cleared the House but Senate Democrats have blocked final passage and its prospects are uncertain in the final days of the congressional session.

The president stood at a podium in the East Room of the White House, hours after a prime-time nationwide speech from the Oval Office in which he renewed his resolve to prosecute the war in
Iraq to a successful conclusion.

In opening news conference remarks, Bush said the warrantless spying, conducted by the National Security Agency, was an essential element in the same war on terror.

"It was a shameful act for someone to disclose this important program in a time of war. The fact that we're discussing this program is discussing the enemy," he said.

The existence of the program was disclosed last week, triggering an outpouring of criticism in Congress, but an unflinching defense from Bush and senior officials of his administration.

The president spoke not long after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Congress had given Bush authority to spy on suspected terrorists in this country in legislation passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Bush and other officials have said the program involved monitoring phone calls and e-mails of individuals in this country believed to be plotting with terrorists overseas.

Normally, no wiretapping is permitted in the United States without a court warrant. But Bush said he approved the action without such orders "because it enables us to move faster and quicker. We've got to be fast on our feet.

"It is legal to do so. I swore to uphold the laws. Legal authority is derived from the Constitution," he added.

Despite the weighty issues Bush addressed, the president bantered with reporters at times.

"So many questions, so little time," said one, and the president had a ready quip. "Ask a short question," he said.

But the session was dominated by national security issues $B!=(B specifically the newly disclosed spying program by the NSA.

Bush emphasized that only international calls were monitored without court order $B!=(B those originating in the United States or those placed from overseas to individuals living in this country.

He stressed that calls placed and received within the United States would be monitored as has long been the case, after an order is granted by a secret court under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

One of the principal provisions of the Patriot Act permitted the government to gain warrants in cases involving investigations into suspected terrorists in the United States $B!=(B an expansion of powers previously limited to intelligence cases.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush


See?

Chimpy thinks he is SO powerful, that he can openly admit breaking the law.


"It was a shameful act for someone to disclose this important program in a time of war. The fact that we're discussing this program is discussing the enemy,"

Yes, Bush and his Pack Of Criminals are "the enemy". So he is correct.

:rolleyes: