CaliNORML said:From an interview in the Jim Lehrer New Hour.
The full reports on the NSA the following quote is from the first link of Dec 29th, 2005.
Link to the index of reports.
JAMES BAMFORD: Well, actually, you know, if you read the FISA Act it actually takes that into consideration. It says in a time of war, you can have an extra 15 days to present the information to the FISA court for a warrant. But it's very clear the whole idea of the FISA Act was to keep presidential power from getting out of control and using an agency like NSA to spy on American citizens.
One of the things that was said when they created the law was that this bill specifically states that the protections in the bill are the exclusive means by which the government can get permission to eavesdrop. And it said that the --it recognizes no inherent power of the president to conduct electronic surveillance. That's what the law says and the law provides the penalty of five years in jail if you go around the law, which was done.
Now if they have a problem with that law, the place to solve that problem is by creating new laws or fixing this law in Congress. And I saw no effort by the administration to try to do that.
JOHN McLAUGHLIN: Gwen, I just want to add there that Jim and I aren't going to be able to settle these complex legal issues here today. People are making arguments on both sides of it. I think in the end the president's action will be shown to be legal. But I say that as a non-lawyer.
I just saw two men in some very hot seats during this discussion, it was funny and sad at the same time.
KMS
I like that sentence you made red...CaliNORML said:From an interview in the Jim Lehrer New Hour.
The full reports on the NSA the following quote is from the first link of Dec 29th, 2005.
Link to the index of reports.
JAMES BAMFORD: Well, actually, you know, if you read the FISA Act it actually takes that into consideration. It says in a time of war, you can have an extra 15 days to present the information to the FISA court for a warrant. But it's very clear the whole idea of the FISA Act was to keep presidential power from getting out of control and using an agency like NSA to spy on American citizens.
One of the things that was said when they created the law was that this bill specifically states that the protections in the bill are the exclusive means by which the government can get permission to eavesdrop. And it said that the --it recognizes no inherent power of the president to conduct electronic surveillance. That's what the law says and the law provides the penalty of five years in jail if you go around the law, which was done.
Now if they have a problem with that law, the place to solve that problem is by creating new laws or fixing this law in Congress. And I saw no effort by the administration to try to do that.
JOHN McLAUGHLIN: Gwen, I just want to add there that Jim and I aren't going to be able to settle these complex legal issues here today. People are making arguments on both sides of it. I think in the end the president's action will be shown to be legal. But I say that as a non-lawyer.
I just saw two men in some very hot seats during this discussion, it was funny and sad at the same time.
KMS
cnredd said:I like that sentence you made red...
It's nice when we don't need an indictment...we don't need a grand jury...we don't need a procsecution...we don't need a trial...we don't need a conviction...
Why go through all of that legal crap when we just ask someone named James Bamford...a visiting professor and book writer at Berkeley?...:roll:
CaliNORML said:As this interview was given in December 2005, when was this law "fixed"?
It was still in place in the NSA, and those laws were never addressed as they should have been, if the President wanted this type of power.
It addressed those issues in the interviews as well.
KMS
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Fifth Column - Fifth column refers to any clandestine group of people which works covertly inside a nation to undermine its strength (psychological warfare) while the nation is simultaneously suffering an overt attack by a foreign power or another faction in a civil war.
synonyms may include Democrats and Liberals.
CaliNORML said:As I have said there are more interviews and the legal opinions of a brave few, as this story broke less than a week ago, I am waiting to see how far it shall go.
However it turns out, is a matter of view that proper channels were not followed is obvious.
The CIA a Presidential organization has shown the same type of operations, leaving 22 wanted criminals in the EU from among the ranks of the Presidents men.
Home or abroad no difference seems to be made about the use of their tactic.
Do as we please we will "fix" it later.
KMS
Handcuff the government til people die, then you can blame the Republican President for it...CaliNORML said:Do as we please we will "fix" it later.
KMS
cnredd said:Handcuff the government til people die, then you can blame the Republican President for it...
cnredd said:Handcuff the government til people die, then you can blame the Republican President for it...
Trajan Octavian Titus said:But terrorism is only a myth. :roll:
Caine said:LOL..
The more you spout out junk from Michael Savage the less credibility you have.
Secondly....
Wouldn't we have to be under attack right now according to your little Michael Savage definition? It says SIMULTANEOUSLY, meaning, at the same time, I see nobody attacking us right now.
4 years ago is hardly simultaneous.
Caine said:Really??? Wow, thats news to me!
Trajan Octavian Titus said:They tryed to hit us again, they've been trying to hit us again, and they will continue to try to hit us again, the only thing that's stopping them is the superior tactics being implemented by the NSA through executive order and the Patriot Act and yet some Democratic Senators and writers at the NYT's think it's better to put partisan politics ahead of national security by leaking and publishing classified information about are strategy for defeating these murdering bastards.
Caine said:So.... now you know who leaked the story?
You better go tell Bush, he will love you forever.
The government does not "do what it wants"...Caine said:Let the government do whatever it wants in the name of "Security"
Typical Conservative Tactic:Trajan Octavian Titus said:You're the one who keeps classifying terrorism and terrorists as quote: "overhyped," and quote: "boogeymen."
Actually, the warrants can be obtained 72 hours AFTER the wiretap has been started, you can't tell me they have any other excuse except being lazy, if in fact they were doing the right thing and only targeting terrorist groups.cnredd said:The government does not "do what it wants"...
I'm pretty sure no one WANTS to have to do anything to prevent attacks, but it's still something that must be done...
When the laws were made , there weren't any such things as "throwaway phones" or $10 phone cards...
By the time a 72 hour warrant would be in place, the person they'd like to listen in on could've used three or four different phones by then...Making the wiretap, with or without a warrant, be useless...
So the President makes a decision...National Security or a law that doesn't work...
How you could believe that answer isn't obvious is beyond me...
Actually........Here's what I want you to do...
Go through a lawbook in some podunk town in Middle America...see if you can find a law that is still on the books saying how a certain road can only be used for a Horse and Buggy...
Then go on every news show you can find and tell the world how everyone in that town is breaking the law with their "engine cars" and "horseless SUVs" and that the Mayor, and indeed, every Mayor before him, is in direct violation of the law and should be prosecuted to the fullest terms...
See how stupid that sounds?...
Trajan Octavian Titus said:The only people who knew about it were key senators on the intelligence committee, the NSA, the head of the Justice Department, and the President, Vice President, and Secretary of State, now who stood to gain politically hmmm let me think could it be the Democratic senators on the intelligence committee???
It's called motive and opportunity it's circumstantial evidence but cases are won on circumstantial evidence all the time.
Caine said:Typical Conservative Tactic:
Turn one comment into something else to fit your own agenda.
I never said it was a myth.
I never said it was a myth.
I never said it was a myth.
Yes, it IS overhyped, its the excuse for everything.
Yes, I did start a poll asking if you were afraid of the middle eastern boogey man. No, I didn't say Al Qaeda IS the middle eastern boogey man, in a sense that it is a mythical creature.
You ASSumed so, and you did this so that it could fit your own agenda.
Tell you what, When you stop turning people's comments into something its not so that it can fit your own agenda, then maybe you will receive the respect of an honest debate from me, until then, Im going to be a sarcastic dickhead because you can't seem to debate without being dishonsest.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Typical liberal tactic:
When you don't have a leg to stand on revert to linguistic reinterpretation, and semantics to muddy the debate and draw attention away from the issue.
"Kerry didn't say that our troops are terrorists he said they're terrorizing which is completely different."
"I didn't say that terrorism was a myth I said: 'middleastern boogeyman,' and 'overhyped,'. . ."
"I don't support pol-pot I just said his crimes were overexagerated."
Wouldn't work...Caine said:Actually, the warrants can be obtained 72 hours AFTER the wiretap has been started, you can't tell me they have any other excuse except being lazy, if in fact they were doing the right thing and only targeting terrorist groups.
Proves the absurdity of dealing with outdated laws...Caine said:Actually........
There is still a law on the books in NC where a man can take his wife out on the courthouse steps on a sunday morning and beat her, legally.
This law came into effect when a man was arrested for beating his wife on the courthouse steps. He was let go because of this law, this happened in my hometown a few years ago.
Yes, it IS a cause for alarm. I'm sorry, the President is supposed to enforce the law, AND FOLLOW IT!cnredd said:Wouldn't work...
First, it UP TO 72 hours...By the time the warrent is issued, it's meaningless due to throwaway phones and $10 phone cards I've mentioned earlier...You're only accusation then is not that the President is eavesdropping, it;'s that he's not doing the proper paperwork...
Yeah..THAT'S a cause for alarm...:roll:
Second, it's already been made public that this info was given on 12 different occasions in meetings with the Senate Intelligence Committee...which includes?...(C'mon...take a guess)....D_m_cr_ts...Wanna buy a vowel?...:2wave:
Nope I would NOT defend him on that stance, why are you ASSuming? Keep your assumptions to yourself.Proves the absurdity of dealing with outdated laws...
And I'm sure your the first to defend him on that stance, correct?...
Hey!...It says it right here in the rules, so they MUST be right...:roll:
Ever drove above the speed limit?...Ever jaywalk?...
Turn yourself in, Mr. Righteous...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?