Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Waitone said:
Click on the underlined link in the post you quoted. Also feel free to share any cites you have that conflict with those.
Analysts: Bush spying rationale legally shaky
- Thread starter rick_reno
- Start date
- Status
Click on the underlined link in the post you quoted. Also feel free to share any cites you have that conflict with those.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
That's an informative site. Thanks for posting it.
beerslurpy
member
What laws and constitutional strictures bind the president in time of war?
ALL OF THEM. Without exception.
The same congress that must authorize military action can also choose to release a president from the bounds of an inconvenient rule or law. When congress declines to do so (as it did in this case) the president remains bound by that statute. The president can ask congress to declare war and he can ask congress to repeal or alter a statute. The president cannot do so himself, nor can he act as if such a thing had been done if it has not.
The constitution is doubly inviolable. Congress can declare war by a simple majority. The constitution requires a supermajority of both congress and the many states to be amended. Letting "war powers" override sections of the constitution is a backdoor to tyranny.
ALL OF THEM. Without exception.
The same congress that must authorize military action can also choose to release a president from the bounds of an inconvenient rule or law. When congress declines to do so (as it did in this case) the president remains bound by that statute. The president can ask congress to declare war and he can ask congress to repeal or alter a statute. The president cannot do so himself, nor can he act as if such a thing had been done if it has not.
The constitution is doubly inviolable. Congress can declare war by a simple majority. The constitution requires a supermajority of both congress and the many states to be amended. Letting "war powers" override sections of the constitution is a backdoor to tyranny.
Bartholomew,
did you read the requirements?
They are so stringent that in order to gat approval you have to have a perfect case. In other words, in order to justify a wiretap (which I repeat is NOT what goes on) you must already have so much evidence that the wiretap is unnecessary. The rules require that requests be so perfect that of course few will be rejected. But also of course fewer and fewer will be requested because of the cumbersomeness of the preocess.
Look at the rules closely, and tell me they have any connection with the real world. Congress views them as a tool to keep intelligence services in check, and the intelligencve services view them as a tool to minimize their exposure to charges of overstepping. What's missing in all this? Simply any focus on getting the best intel as fast as possible.
If you can't get through your head that this is not a matter of 'domestic spying', than I can't help you. Calls from the US to foreign places or vice versa in which one of the participants is believed to be connected to terrorism are the only calls involved. I can read the material for you, but I can't understand it for you.
did you read the requirements?
They are so stringent that in order to gat approval you have to have a perfect case. In other words, in order to justify a wiretap (which I repeat is NOT what goes on) you must already have so much evidence that the wiretap is unnecessary. The rules require that requests be so perfect that of course few will be rejected. But also of course fewer and fewer will be requested because of the cumbersomeness of the preocess.
Look at the rules closely, and tell me they have any connection with the real world. Congress views them as a tool to keep intelligence services in check, and the intelligencve services view them as a tool to minimize their exposure to charges of overstepping. What's missing in all this? Simply any focus on getting the best intel as fast as possible.
If you can't get through your head that this is not a matter of 'domestic spying', than I can't help you. Calls from the US to foreign places or vice versa in which one of the participants is believed to be connected to terrorism are the only calls involved. I can read the material for you, but I can't understand it for you.
publius
Member
Khornet said:
Which should be eliminated or modified?
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
It looks like the certifying official needs only have proper identification and tell the judge that it's important to authorize the wiretap to satisfy many of these stipulations. The rest seem perfectly reasonable. The fact that the administration followed the procedure nearly 6,000 times during its first four years indicates that administration officials were proficient at negotiating the stipulations of the law.
After reading this I find the Bush administration's decision to disobey the law even more troubling. Which stipulations of the law, stipulations that they had no trouble obeying nearly 6,000 other times, gave them problems on the warrantless wiretaps?
Saying the law is too complicated to obey is no excuse, especially when it wasn't too complicated to obey nearly 6,000 other times. You're going to have to try another approach to convince me, Khornet.
After reading this I find the Bush administration's decision to disobey the law even more troubling. Which stipulations of the law, stipulations that they had no trouble obeying nearly 6,000 other times, gave them problems on the warrantless wiretaps?
Saying the law is too complicated to obey is no excuse, especially when it wasn't too complicated to obey nearly 6,000 other times. You're going to have to try another approach to convince me, Khornet.
We're talking about
billions of electronic exchanges. 4,000 is a puny number. And you can see by the form how much manpower must have been spent on those 4,000 cases.
The worst enemy of good is perfect. FISA, and the spirit behind it, demand perfection in inteligence gathering. That's a good way to get crappy intelligence gathering.
I would eliminate FISA altogether, frankly. But from the list above, I'd eliminate 4B, 5, 7 A-ii, 9, 10, 11.
billions of electronic exchanges. 4,000 is a puny number. And you can see by the form how much manpower must have been spent on those 4,000 cases.
The worst enemy of good is perfect. FISA, and the spirit behind it, demand perfection in inteligence gathering. That's a good way to get crappy intelligence gathering.
I would eliminate FISA altogether, frankly. But from the list above, I'd eliminate 4B, 5, 7 A-ii, 9, 10, 11.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
You do realize that this was the mantra of the former Soviet Union? This was the rationale it used to excuse the tyranny and excesses of its leaders.
Are you saying that the law doesn't work because it doesn't allow the administration to monitor all electronic communications? I think many of us would argue that this means the law actually works, and is not simply a rubber stamp nullifying the Fourth Amendment, as we fear.
It does seem to me that you are advocating we nullify the Fourth Amendment because its perfection is the enemy of the good (although it now appears that what you define as "the good" is the mediocre, at best); hence, you are advocating a decent into tyranny.
Sorry, but when it comes to our Constitution, I'll remain a perfectionist.
Master Blaster
Member
From the horses mouth:
Jan 10, 2006 — Russell Tice, a longtime insider at the National Security Agency, is now a whistleblower the agency would like to keep quiet.
For 20 years, Tice worked in the shadows as he helped the United States spy on other people's conversations around the world.
Related: NSA Letter to Tice
ABC News Investigations: Complete Coverage
NSA Whistleblower Alleges Illegal Spying
Alito Pleases GOP Senators, Not Democrats
New Retirement
"I specialized in what's called special access programs," Tice said of his job. "We called them 'black world' programs and operations."
But now, Tice tells ABC News that some of those secret "black world" operations run by the NSA were operated in ways that he believes violated the law. He is prepared to tell Congress all he knows about the alleged wrongdoing in these programs run by the Defense Department and the NSA in the post-9/11 efforts to go after terrorists.
"The mentality was we need to get these guys, and we're going to do whatever it takes to get them," he said.
Tracking Calls
Tice says the technology exists to track and sort through every domestic and international phone call as they are switched through centers, such as one in New York, and to search for key words or phrases that a terrorist might use.
"If you picked the word 'jihad' out of a conversation," Tice said, "the technology exists that you focus in on that conversation, and you pull it out of the system for processing."
According to Tice, intelligence analysts use the information to develop graphs that resemble spiderwebs linking one suspect's phone number to hundreds or even thousands more.
Tice Admits Being a Source for The New York Times
President Bush has admitted that he gave orders that allowed the NSA to eavesdrop on a small number of Americans without the usual requisite warrants.
But Tice disagrees. He says the number of Americans subject to eavesdropping by the NSA could be in the millions if the full range of secret NSA programs is used.
"That would mean for most Americans that if they conducted, or you know, placed an overseas communication, more than likely they were sucked into that vacuum," Tice said.
The same day The New York Times broke the story of the NSA eavesdropping without warrants, Tice surfaced as a whistleblower in the agency. He told ABC News that he was a source for the Times' reporters. But Tice maintains that his conscience is clear.
"As far as I'm concerned, as long as I don't say anything that's classified, I'm not worried," he said. "We need to clean up the intelligence community. We've had abuses, and they need to be addressed."
The NSA revoked Tice's security clearance in May of last year based on what it called psychological concerns and later dismissed him. Tice calls that bunk and says that's the way the NSA deals with troublemakers and whistleblowers. Today the NSA said it had "no information to provide."
So all one would have to do in this case to comply with FISA is ask for 250 Million- 400 million warrants. One for each phone and cell phone in the United States. Quite doable, just hire 100,000 clerks and have them each fill out 4000 or so apllications to the FISA, and Bush and co. would be covered.
I suspect that the 1700 or so applications are a result of the filtering done by the NSA program where they have some probable cause to actually listen in on a call.
Jan 10, 2006 — Russell Tice, a longtime insider at the National Security Agency, is now a whistleblower the agency would like to keep quiet.
For 20 years, Tice worked in the shadows as he helped the United States spy on other people's conversations around the world.
Related: NSA Letter to Tice
ABC News Investigations: Complete Coverage
NSA Whistleblower Alleges Illegal Spying
Alito Pleases GOP Senators, Not Democrats
New Retirement
"I specialized in what's called special access programs," Tice said of his job. "We called them 'black world' programs and operations."
But now, Tice tells ABC News that some of those secret "black world" operations run by the NSA were operated in ways that he believes violated the law. He is prepared to tell Congress all he knows about the alleged wrongdoing in these programs run by the Defense Department and the NSA in the post-9/11 efforts to go after terrorists.
"The mentality was we need to get these guys, and we're going to do whatever it takes to get them," he said.
Tracking Calls
Tice says the technology exists to track and sort through every domestic and international phone call as they are switched through centers, such as one in New York, and to search for key words or phrases that a terrorist might use.
"If you picked the word 'jihad' out of a conversation," Tice said, "the technology exists that you focus in on that conversation, and you pull it out of the system for processing."
According to Tice, intelligence analysts use the information to develop graphs that resemble spiderwebs linking one suspect's phone number to hundreds or even thousands more.
Tice Admits Being a Source for The New York Times
President Bush has admitted that he gave orders that allowed the NSA to eavesdrop on a small number of Americans without the usual requisite warrants.
But Tice disagrees. He says the number of Americans subject to eavesdropping by the NSA could be in the millions if the full range of secret NSA programs is used.
"That would mean for most Americans that if they conducted, or you know, placed an overseas communication, more than likely they were sucked into that vacuum," Tice said.
The same day The New York Times broke the story of the NSA eavesdropping without warrants, Tice surfaced as a whistleblower in the agency. He told ABC News that he was a source for the Times' reporters. But Tice maintains that his conscience is clear.
"As far as I'm concerned, as long as I don't say anything that's classified, I'm not worried," he said. "We need to clean up the intelligence community. We've had abuses, and they need to be addressed."
The NSA revoked Tice's security clearance in May of last year based on what it called psychological concerns and later dismissed him. Tice calls that bunk and says that's the way the NSA deals with troublemakers and whistleblowers. Today the NSA said it had "no information to provide."
So all one would have to do in this case to comply with FISA is ask for 250 Million- 400 million warrants. One for each phone and cell phone in the United States. Quite doable, just hire 100,000 clerks and have them each fill out 4000 or so apllications to the FISA, and Bush and co. would be covered.
I suspect that the 1700 or so applications are a result of the filtering done by the NSA program where they have some probable cause to actually listen in on a call.
I don't care whose mantra it was
if Hitler says 2+2=5, you don't shout "Rotten Fascist!"; you simply prove him wrong.
FISA places an executive function under the control of the judiciary, which is not appropriate.
Amendment IV protects against 'unreasonable searches and seizures'. Reasonable people can disagree about what is reasonable, no?
You are certainly free to insist on perfection, my friend. That's how we did it before 9/11. That's how we got the famous Gorelick 'wall'. That's why Moussaoui's computer was confiscated but never searched.
if Hitler says 2+2=5, you don't shout "Rotten Fascist!"; you simply prove him wrong.
FISA places an executive function under the control of the judiciary, which is not appropriate.
Amendment IV protects against 'unreasonable searches and seizures'. Reasonable people can disagree about what is reasonable, no?
You are certainly free to insist on perfection, my friend. That's how we did it before 9/11. That's how we got the famous Gorelick 'wall'. That's why Moussaoui's computer was confiscated but never searched.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
"2+2=5" is simply an example of faulty math. "The perfect is the enemy of the good" is an example of the philosophy that guided the Soviet Union, which was a totalitarian state. When you cite a philosophy used to further the aims of a totalitarian state and I point that out, I am not calling you "Rotten Fascist." I am pointing out the danger of the philosophy underlying your basic premise.
BTW, Moussaoui's computer was never searched because of FBI bungling, turf guarding, and infighting, and violating the Bill of Rights would not have changed that.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
No points needed, Khornet. Just because you say it's so doesn't necessarily mean it's so.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Khornet said:
Khornet, I am aghast at some of the things you are claiming in this conversation. Did you not read the posted link? How is it that the administration has managed to both request and receive 5k+ FISA warrants in three years (compared to 13k FISA warrants in the previous 22 years) if the rules are as difficult as you claim?
Here are the requirements to obtain a FISA warrant:
The application must contain, among other things:
1) a statement of reasons to believe that the target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power, (subject to the relevant amendments made by the USA-PATRIOT Act, discussed below)
2)a certification from a high-ranking executive branch official stating that the information sought is deemed to be foreign intelligence information, and that the information sought cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques;
3)statements regarding all previous applications involving the target;
detailed description of the nature of the information sought and of the type of communication or activities to be subject to the surveillance;
4)the length of time surveillance is required;
5)whether physical entry into a premises is necessary, and
6)proposed procedures to minimize the acquisition, use, and retention of information concerning nonconsenting U.S. persons.
For U.S. persons, the FISC judge must find probable cause that one of four conditions has been met:
(1) the target knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of a foreign power which "may involve" a criminal law violation;
(2) the target knowingly engages in other secret intelligence activities on behalf of a foreign power under the direction of an intelligence network and his activities involve or are about to involve criminal violations;
(3) the target knowingly engages in sabotage or international terrorism or is preparing for such activities; or
(4) the target knowingly aids or abets another who acts in one of the above ways.
Also, thanks to the Patriot Act surveillance and collection of information can begin BEFORE a warrant is requested - a fact here that many seem to forget.
Finally, according to the 2002 FISA court review much of the bottleneck for FISA applications was not with the court (which at that time had not denied any request); but with the Department of Justice OIPR office that handled the requests before passing them on to FISA. So the same office that was the problem (DOJ) is still the same office that was approving warrantless surveillance by NSA.
Yes; Congress did this because former FBI head Hoover used domestic spying to collect information on political adversaries and blackmail politicians for his own personal gains. There is a reason this rule it exists.
In 2001 alone, the Bush administration requested 932 FISA warrants - that represents a number three times larger than EVERY OTHER FEDERAL WIRETAP REQUEST COMBINED. The target of those warrants were American citizens within the United States. If you don't consider that domestic spying, I'm wondering what you DO actually consider domestic spying?
Have you seen me extoll the virtues of the Democratic party on this board in any of the last two elections? Seen me talk about how great the LP party is recently? There is a reason why the Republicans will lose my vote over this - IT IS BECAUSE THIS IS WRONG.
BuddyOne
Member
Congressional Research Service
The American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service is composed of forty (40 for those of you in California) attorneys. Two of these, labeled "analysts" by msnbc, were asked by Democrat legislators to find "wiggle room" in the statutory framework enabling electronic eavesdropping by the government (of any political party). Two out of forty did the best they could and the most they could come up with was their own opinion that it looked like shaky ground.
Where would we be without "analysts"?
This type of post is becoming a common characteristic of THR. Those of you in Rio Linda seem to have missed the poll that reported a huge majority of Americans find eavesdropping to be acceptable.
Tomorrow, though, is another day. Same cast of characters, same Bush Derangement Syndrome.
See ya there,
Buddy
The American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service is composed of forty (40 for those of you in California) attorneys. Two of these, labeled "analysts" by msnbc, were asked by Democrat legislators to find "wiggle room" in the statutory framework enabling electronic eavesdropping by the government (of any political party). Two out of forty did the best they could and the most they could come up with was their own opinion that it looked like shaky ground.
Where would we be without "analysts"?
This type of post is becoming a common characteristic of THR. Those of you in Rio Linda seem to have missed the poll that reported a huge majority of Americans find eavesdropping to be acceptable.
Tomorrow, though, is another day. Same cast of characters, same Bush Derangement Syndrome.
See ya there,
Buddy
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Understand that Tice is parsing his words carefully to avoid spilling classified information for which he could be prosecuted. So read between the lines here a little.
Here's my best guess as to the true scope of the program. Automated keyword scavengers on all major U.S. international call hubs, set up to flag any international call containing certain keywords for NSA attention (such as "jihad," as Tice mentions). Sort of how Carnivore was supposed to work for email, except using voice recognition to flag "suspicious" conversations. Flagged conversations would then be selected for further analysis, and "contact trees" generated to see if the same person(s) in flagged conversations regularly call others, and automated analysis to see whether any names in such trees show up on watch lists. Just a guess, but perhaps not far from the truth.
That would explain why the administration secretly dodged FISA for this program, because FISA requires the administration to have a target, and the 4th Amendment precludes fishing. I suspect the administration's rationale may have been that no person looks at non-suspicious calls, that info on flagged calls is discarded if deemed irrelevant to an investigation, and only the "bad guys" are listened to further. But if true, that would totally turn the Fourth Amendment on its head.
Now they are "reporting" that Tice was an NSA employee but never actually worked on the program in question.
Also that he was fired over a year ago for "physcodtic (sp) paranoia", he fluked the head test.
An interesting twist,if true.
If this is disinformation I find it hard to believe that the Government thinks they could pull this off, in this atmosphere.
Also that he was fired over a year ago for "physcodtic (sp) paranoia", he fluked the head test.
An interesting twist,if true.
If this is disinformation I find it hard to believe that the Government thinks they could pull this off, in this atmosphere.
Waitone
Member
Tice's history has been batted around for about a week.
- Status
