What is FISA and was is this Administration at Odds with the FISA COURT? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-22-2005, 09:49 AM   #16
New Yorker
Sherry Darling's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 05:22 AM
Thanks for being so passionate and vigilant about this Dread. Very informative articles.

FISA clearly hates freedom.

Independent judiciaries.

Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 12-22-2005, 09:18 PM   #17
love, blood, life
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,876
Local Time: 05:22 AM
Experts warn disputed wiretaps could taint terror court cases

By Ted Bridis

4:01 p.m. December 21, 2005

WASHINGTON – The Bush administration's decision to sometimes bypass the secretive U.S. court that governs terrorism wiretaps could threaten cases against terror suspects that rely on evidence uncovered during the disputed eavesdropping, some legal experts cautioned.
These experts pointed to this week's unprecedented resignation from the government's spy court by U.S. District Judge James Robertson as an indicator of the judiciary's unease over domestic wiretaps ordered without warrants under a highly classified domestic spying program authorized by President Bush.

Specter wants hearings on surveillance in January

Neither Robertson nor the White House would comment Wednesday on his abrupt resignation from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the little-known panel of 11 U.S. judges that secretively approves wiretaps and searches in the most sensitive terrorism and espionage cases. But legal experts were astonished.

"This is a very big deal. Judges get upset with government lawyers all the time, but they don't resign in protest unless they're really offended to the point of saying they're being misused," said Kenneth C. Bass, a former senior Justice Department lawyer who oversaw such wiretap requests during the Carter administration.


"This was definitely a statement of protest," agreed Scott Silliman, a former Air Force attorney and Duke University law professor. "It is unusual because it signifies that at least one member of the court believes that the president has exceeded his legal authority."

Robertson's surprise resignation added to a chorus of pointed questions in Washington over the propriety of the surveillance, which the White House said had successfully detected and prevented attacks inside the United States.

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he intends to begin oversight hearings in January to assess the stated justifications for the spying.

"When the attorney general says the force resolution gives the president the power to conduct these surveillances, I have grave doubts about that," Specter said.

Separately, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman of California, said she was informed about the program in 2003 and believes it is "essential to U.S. national security." But Harman also complained it was inappropriate for the White House to discuss the secret program only with leaders of the intelligence committees.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., the committee chairman, said he participated in at least six briefings on the spying program since August 2004. He said he is comfortable the surveillance was aimed at al-Qaeda terrorists and people associated with al-Qaeda inside the United States. Hoekstra also said lawmakers who were notified about the surveillance won't resign like Robertson.

"We all decided that we are going to stay, and we are going to keep our jobs," he said.

Under the spying program, secretly authorized by President Bush in October 2001, the National Security Agency was permitted to eavesdrop without a judge's approval on communications between suspected terrorists overseas and people inside the United States.

Officials have said they only performed such wiretaps when there was a reasonable basis to conclude that the conversation included a suspected terrorist and one party was overseas. Citing national security, officials have declined to say how many times they have done so.

A court-approved wiretap under traditional surveillance law requires a higher legal standard, demonstrating probable cause to the spy court that the target is an agent of a foreign power, such as a terrorist group. That law also says no such wiretaps can be performed except under its provisions.

Since the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, the government has focused on preventing and disrupting attacks rather than building court cases against suspected terrorists. But experts cautioned that future legal prosecutions could be tainted if evidence was uncovered about a terror plot using a wiretap determined to be improper.

"Imagine if there is evidence critical to a criminal prosecution and the defendant challenges the evidence because it is constitutionally suspect," said Beryl Howell, former general counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee. "It could jeopardize any criminal case."

Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-23-2005, 07:31 AM   #18
love, blood, life
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,876
Local Time: 05:22 AM
LOL...I just read the title of this.....Can ya tell I am suffering with MIGRANES this week....
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-23-2005, 08:34 AM   #19
New Yorker
Scarletwine's Avatar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 05:22 AM
Jane Hartman's remarks were taken out of context in this article and on FOX news (haha).

A December 22 Los Angeles Times article reported Harman's full statement:

Among those briefed on the spy program was Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), the House Intelligence Committee's top Democrat, who said Wednesday that she approved of the program as it was described to her, but that she had new reservations.

"I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to U.S. national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities," Harman said. "Like many Americans, I am deeply concerned by reports that this program in fact goes far beyond the measures to target Al Qaeda about which I was briefed."

In fact, Harman had previously expressed concerns about the recently revealed NSA activities. On December 17, the day after the New York Times broke the story, Harman and other Congressional Democrats reportedly sent a letter to President Bush expressing concern that media accounts "have gone beyond what the administration" briefed Congress. Harman also signed off, along with five other House Democrats, on a letter requesting that Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) "take steps immediately to conduct hearings on the scope of Presidential power in the area of electronic surveillance." The letter also stated that the signatories "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."

Scarletwine is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com