Dec 17 2005

Govnerment Surveillance Since Clinton

Published by at 11:24 am under All General Discussions,FISA-NSA

Updates at end

There is a lot of hyperventilating and emotion from the liberal press about the fact the US government can and has monitored emails and international phone calls. This was started by a PR blitz by the now out of control NY Times as they promote a coming book meant to help the dems in the upcoming elections.

Eavesdropping may seem uncomfortable, but being manipulated by propaganda under false pretenses is downright despicable.

Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Emphasis mine. There is no breaking of the law here. That is because there are prescribed circumstances and areas where court orders are not required.

But common sense tells us if Citizen A is conversing with Terrorist B, who is under surveillance, Citizen A should not be surprised if they too come under surveillance. And, if innocent, it could bolster their position because all their actions demonstrating innocence will have been recorded.

What dems fear are out of control investigations where the focus of the surveillance and investigation is thrown aside as out of control prosecutors grab for any marginal indictment or marginal evidence they can find. They should be afraid of these kinds of acts. But an out of control prosecutor does not need, and possible would not want, surveillance which shows innocence. They can do what they want on the flimsiest of cases.

Back to the NY Times hysterics:

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible “dirty numbers” linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

I must point out here this is not new or simply from 2002. The NY Times, in their typical lazy and partisan hatchet job, fail to explain this was begun in the Clinton era with monitoring of internet traffic over what is a US government asset:

The Clinton Administration has developed a plan for an extensive computer monitoring system, overseen by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to protect the nation’s crucial data networks from intruders.
The plan, an outgrowth of the Administration’s anti-terrorism program, has already raised concerns from civil liberties groups.

A draft prepared by officials at the National Security Council last month, which was provided to The New York Times by a civil liberties group, calls for a sophisticated software system to monitor activities on nonmilitary Government networks and a separate system to track networks used in crucial industries like banking, telecommunications and transportation.

The effort, whose details are still being debated within the Administration, is intended to alert law enforcement officials to attacks that might cripple Government operations or the nation’s economy.

Such a system, to be put fully in place by 2003, is meant to permit Government security experts to track “patterns of patterns” of information and respond in a coordinated manner against intruders and terrorists.

The plan focuses on monitoring data flowing over Government and national computer networks. That means the systems would potentially have access to computer-to-computer communications like electronic mail and other documents, computer programs and remote log-ins.

For the naive maybe it is time to realize that corporations and government agencies who own your work computers at work have been monitoring you for over a decade:

Since creating the first computer monitoring tool in 1993, TrueActive has provided the most innovative and comprehensive monitoring solution available. Thousands of business, government, and individual customers have selected TrueActive as the Best and Safest Choice.

Another little detail the NY Times conveniently lost or was ignorant of. The Internet is a US government/public resource, and using it means you are open to the government’s rules and its policies. It is a public consortium, which makes it different from phone companies that own the equipment that connects phones to each other. But I digress. The NY Times doesn’t even understand the words it is trying to use:

The National Security Agency, which is based at Fort Meade, Md., is the nation’s largest and most secretive intelligence agency, so intent on remaining out of public view that it has long been nicknamed “No Such Agency.” It breaks codes and maintains listening posts around the world to eavesdrop on foreign governments, diplomats and trade negotiators as well as drug lords and terrorists. But the agency ordinarily operates under tight restrictions on any spying on Americans, even if they are overseas, or disseminating information about them.

Spying on Americans is defined as selecting a US citizen and focusing on that person exclusively. Monitoring data means watching everyone equally and trying to identify a threat from key words and patterns. The Able Danger data mining technology came out of the SIGINT and COMINT world. The monitoring of data is not new by any means, and the fact a target outside communicates with someone here in the US is fair game. The country has been debating this long bef0re 9-11 or George W Bush.

Of course there is a reason those against the NSA have had problems gaining traction – they have a serious lack of basic technical knowledge which leads them into flights of fancy.

But as I said, when Clinton was trying to open the export of advanced (what we would call current technology) computers there was much debate on the US Government’s plans to have a key to open all computer encryption codes. From 1997 we have this

Encryption has proven remarkably successful at enhancing the security of electronic data, but the availability of strong encryption technology has raised concerns among law enforcement and government officials worldwide. They fear that encryption could be used by international criminals to conceal illegal operations, and could render intelligence gathering ineffective. The U.S. government has restricted the sale of American encryption products abroad, and has attempted to create a national system that would enable officials to read encrypted messages and files produced with them. The effort has produced a torrent of opposition from the U.S. software industry, which has resisted the government’s plans. This clash between the national security interest of governments and the needs of international corporations is a textbook example of how new and rapidly changing technologies can conflict with established institutions, as features of the new global economy such as international telecommunications and trade threaten to undermine the authority of states. The debate concerning the effects of U.S. policy on the export of encryption products has major implications for the future of the U.S. software industry and the role of government regulation in the information age.

Here is how Bush has described the trigger which has brought him to use that part OF THE LAW that allows for our intelligence agencies to track calls and emails from overseas to their US counterparts:

In a broad defense of the program put forward hours later, however, a senior intelligence official told The Associated Press that the eavesdropping was narrowly designed to go after possible terrorist threats in the United States.

The official said that, since October 2001, the program has been renewed more than three dozen times. Each time, the White House counsel and the attorney general certified the lawfulness of the program, the official said. Bush then signed the authorizations.

During the reviews, government officials have also provided a fresh assessment of the terrorist threat, showing that there is a catastrophic risk to the country or government, the official said.

“Only if those conditions apply do we even begin to think about this,” he said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the classified nature of the intelligence operation.

“The president has authorized NSA to fully use its resources — let me underscore this now — consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution to defend the United States and its citizens,” the official said, adding that congressional leaders have also been briefed more than a dozen times.

This is not new folks. This is not news. This is a partisan propaganda plan wich is a multi pronged attempt to fool Americans into distrusting their government. The same government that has protected us from a second 9-11 for over 4 years now. If you feel like you are being used, that is probably because you are being used.

More on this subject from Ed Morrissey, Michelle Malkin, Mac Ranger, Stop The ACLU, Dean’s World and check out Atlas Shrugs for a rundown on the Patriot Act implications.


Bush pointed out today these asleep-at-the-wheel Congressman were briefed on this many, many, many times.

President Bush said Saturday he personally has authorized a secret eavesdropping program in the U.S. more than 30 times since the Sept. 11 attacks and he lashed out at those involved in publicly revealing the program. “This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security,” he said in a radio address delivered live from the White House’s Roosevelt Room.

“This authorization is a vital tool in our war against the terrorists. It is critical to saving American lives. The American people expect me to do everything in my power, under our laws and Constitution, to protect them and their civil liberties and that is exactly what I will continue to do as long as I am president of the United States,” Bush said.

Angry members of Congress have demanded an explanation of the program, first revealed in Friday’s New York Times and whether the monitoring by the National Security Agency violates civil liberties.

Defending the program, Bush said in his address that it is used only to intercept the international communications of people inside the United States who have been determined to have “a clear link” to al- Qaida or related terrorist organizations.

He said the program is reviewed every 45 days, using fresh threat assessments, legal reviews by the Justice Department, White House counsel and others, and information from previous activities under the program.

Without identifying specific lawmakers, Bush said congressional leaders have been briefed more than a dozen times on the program’s activities.

The president also said the intelligence officials involved in the monitoring receive extensive training to make sure civil liberties are not violated.

Appearing angry at times during his eight-minute address, Bush left no doubt that he will continue authorizing the program.

“I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al-Qaida and related groups,” he said.

I stand by my President. I have zero confidence in the liberal media.


This time the press and their anti-Bush enablers went too far. The fact that it was believed up until yesterday that emails and phone calls would not normally be monitored has obviously given the terrorists a heads up how to modify their actions so as to not tip off authorities. The good news is we may be able to finally get some people in front of a court and into a jail cell for these border line treasonaous acts. Mac Ranger has the news

The search is officially on for the leaker(s) in the New York Times so-called “blockbuster”. “Word” is that the FBI IS. (although don’t look for this to be on the Nightly News), actively involved in locating the leaker(s), as well as the CIA Prison leak.

He has the links, check it out.

18 responses so far

18 Responses to “Govnerment Surveillance Since Clinton”

  1. Snapple says:

    AJ–Thank you for all this information and links.
    I am going to read it.

  2. Snapple says:

    AJ writes:

    “This is a partisan propaganda plan which is a multi pronged attempt to fool Americans into distrusting their government. The same government that has protected us from a second 9-11 for over 4 years now. ”

    That’s what I think, too.

  3. Larwyn says:

    The book and the NYT’s article were concocted to pre empt the damaging information that will come out with real Able Danger hearings. And also handy to use against the extention of the Patriot

    It is ABLE DANGER that will expose the shame, greed and studity, once and for all of the Clinton Admin and of all the Clintonistas.

    Gorelick and the Clintonistas knew once the Able Danger was brought up to the 911 Omission staff that it wasn’t going to dissappear. They
    did all they could to make it go away – but Plan B was to totally discredit it.

    They are pre empting it – by making it a rogue operation – by making
    any information “fruit from a poisoned tree” as they are making the
    NSA a rogue operation.

    Is Beers’ resignation from the NSA and going
    over to Kerry part of this – seems he would be one of the players in this leak.

    I believe that the Admin didn’t want to push Able Danger until the
    Patriot Act was extended – they knew that the Clintonistas, those
    “protectors of civil rights” would use the “spying on private citizens” meme. They didn’t want this fight until the Patriot Act was passed.
    And politically, it would be much better timing to have the Able
    Danger hearings going on in the 2006 mid term election year.

    My prayer is that the “gentlemen” Republicans in the U S Congress
    will take the gloves off, will take their Viagra (if required) and put on the
    brass knuckles and take NO PRISONERS.

  4. Snapple says:

    I saw Bush talk on the news, too. He didn’t mince words about how the people who told this are endangering Americans.

    I am glad he took responsibility, and he said his actions were consistent with the US law and the Constitution.

    He said it was a highly classified program that was improperly provided to news organizations and puts our security at risk.

    I am not afraid of this guy. I have his picture on my dresser, and on my computer desktop. I have his Christmas card on my kitchen table. He’s no Hitler.

    He is the President Americans chose, and he is keeping us safe from people who would do more than monitor my e-mail.

    I also saw on TV that when they have to act without a court order to get information quickly, that they submit their information to a court affter the fact.

    Woolsey is on FOX and hinting that some of these terrorists are Americans linked with foreigners.

  5. Snapple says:

    The President’s Christmas card says:

    The Lord is my strength and my shield;
    In Him my heart trusts;
    So I am helped, and my heart exhults,
    And with my son I give thanks to Him.

    (Psalm 28:7)

    Well, my heart trusts George Bush, too!

  6. sbd says:

    From To The Point News


    Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler

    Friday, 16 December 2005

    How upset are you over the CIA “secret prison scandal”? Maybe you said, “What scandal?”, or maybe you’ve glanced at stories about it carried in the back pages of your newspaper. Here in Europe, it’s the giant screaming front page headline story on every paper you pick up from England to Germany. The Europeans are in a state of high emotional froth over CIA “renditions” of Moslem terrorists seized in one of their countries and taken to a “secret prison” in Poland or elsewhere. The Euroweenies are far more concerned with the “human rights” of the terrorists than they are about the threat of terrorists to kill them. If you think all of this is just an excuse to bash the CIA and indulge in anti-Americanism, you’re right – just as planned by the weasels. Everyone on the right, it seems nowadays, from the editorials in the Wall Street Journal to conservative columnists like Mona Charen and bloggers like John Hinderacker, are issuing calls to “Investigate the CIA!” They have been suckered by the left. They should instead be demanding, “Investigate the weasels, not the agency!” All of them have been accusing the CIA of conducting a covert war against the Bush Administration by leaking damaging classified information to leftwing journalists in the press. That the most damaging leak of all to date, the “secret prisons” story leaked to the Washington Post, is incredibly damaging to the CIA itself has not given them pause. Why would the CIA conduct a covert war against itself? Because the agency is now being run by an ally of George Bush who is trying to root out left wing “rogue weasels” from its midst: Porter Goss. You could call it, as some of the good guys at Langley are starting to, the Rogue Weasel Club. According to one member of the intel community, its members include: *Recently retired officials who are active in, or advising, all the Congressional investigative activities that have so crippled and mangled the reform of the intelligence community. *Current CIA officials who have migrated to other intelligence agencies within the community. Individuals of special concern should include current FBI officials and analysts who have ties to and sympathy with targets of Goss’ house cleaning. The club is being assisted by members of Congress, their staff, and the media in operating what amounts to a shadow intelligence community in opposition to the elected Republican Legislative and Executive branches of our government during a time of war. This intel individual concludes: “The Rogue Weasel Club operating with immunity as they sabotage and ‘stick the knife’ into the backs of their former co-workers who are faithfully attempting to carry out the oaths that they took when they signed up.” And so it is time to name names. The following are signees to a letter addressed to John McCain in support of his campaign against “torture.” (It’s in quotes because there already are such laws, and everyone knows McCain is indulging in his usual petulant grandstanding.) By affixing their names to the McCain letter, they came out of the cold and announced themselves as members of the Rogue Weasel Club. They are waging a covert, and increasingly overt, war against the Bush Administration and Porter Goss’s CIA. This is the cabal of leftwing spooks Bush and Goss are up against, who are purposefully damaging the president with leaks to the press and folks in Congress who wish them ill. One of them is the culprit who leaked the “secret prison” story to John McCain, who in turn leaked it to the Washington Post. They are the ones who should be investigated – and it’s about time conservative critics of the CIA figured it out. Signees to letter to Senator John McCain, December 9, 2005: ROBERT BAER, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA VINCENT CANNISTRARO, former director of the CIA Counterterrorism Center KATHLEEN CHRISTISON, former Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA WILLIAM CHRISTISON, former National Intelligence Officer and Director, Office of Regional & Political Analysis, CIA RICHARD CLARKE, former advisor, National Security Council RAY CLOSE, former Chief of Station Officer, CIA VICKI DIVOLL, former Assistant General Counsel, CIA GRAHAM FULLER, former Vice-Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, CIA MELVIN A. GOODMAN, former Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA PHILIP GIRALDI, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA MICHAEL GRIMALDI, former Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA RALPH M. HOCKLEY, Col. USA (ret), former intelligence officer ARTHUR S. HULNICK, former intelligence officer, US Air Force, former CIA LARRY C. JOHNSON, former Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA EDWARD R. M. KANE, former Chief of Station, CIA CAMERON LA CLAIR, former Executive Officer of Area Division, CIA W. PATRICK LANG, Col. USA (ret), Chief of DIA Middle East Division, Director Defense Humint Services LYNNE A. LARKIN, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA DAVID MACMICHAEL, former National Intelligence Council officer, CIA TOM MAERTENS, former analyst, Intelligence and Research, Department of State EUGENE A. MANNING, former Analyst, Office of National Estimates, Directorate of Intelligence, and Counterintelligence Center, CIA JAMES MARCINKOWSKI, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA JOHN E. MARSH, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA RICHARD MCDERMOTT, former Army Counterintelligence Special Agent RAY MCGOVERN, former Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA DAVID RUPP, former Case Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA GARETH A. SHELLMAN, former intelligence analyst, U.S. Army Security Agency JOHN P. SONTAG, former intelligence analyst, CIA and Department of State LEWIS R. SORLEY, former Director, National Intelligence Emergency Support Office, CIA ROBERT DAVID STEELE VIVAS, former clandestine officer, CIA STANSFIELD TURNER, former Director of Central Intelligence AMB. (RET) PHILIP C. WILCOX, JR., former Ambassador at Large for Counter Terrorism at Department of State AUSTIN YAMADA, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Combating Terrorism Discuss this article on the forums. (4 posts)


  7. Snapple says:

    Are you reading this AJ?

    I agree that the left has suckered people on the right into criticizing the CIA.

    They have been “accusing the CIA of conducting a covert war against the Bush Administration by leaking damaging classified information to leftwing journalists in the press. That the most damaging leak of all to date, the “secret prisons” story leaked to the Washington Post, is incredibly damaging to the CIA itself has not given them pause.”

    I think this statement is probably true. I have been saying that the whole CIA should not be bashed all along.

    Maybe there are a few bad apples. With CIA operatives it is difficult to tell what is going on.

    It is the CIA who are taking these terrorists off the street.

    Not that I am some big expert, however.

  8. BurbankErnie says:

    I agree that AD and the Klintoonistas are at the heart of this mess.
    Well said.

  9. The Real Scandal

    President Bush delivered a very tough radio address responding to the controversy over the New York Times report on National Security Agency surveillance. The gist, according to Byron York at National Review’s The Corner: the surveillance program is …

  10. Snapple says:

    Now I see why people hate the NYT so much. They are so selfish.

    This article by James Risen that ratted out the efforts to evesdrop on American Al Qaeda collaborators was publihed just as the Senators were voting on the extension of the Patriot Act. Also, as noted by Drudge, Risen has a book coming out soon, and this article will make his book sell.

    Here is an article that discusses the political damage from this leak.


    “[O]n Saturday [Sen. John Cornyn] accused The New York Times of endangering American security to sell a book by waiting until the day of the terror-fighting Patriot Act reauthorization to report that the government has eavesdropped on people without court-approved warrants. ”

    “At least two senators that I heard with my own ears cited this as a reason why they decided to vote to not allow a bipartisan majority to reauthorize the Patriot Act,” said Republican Sen. John Cornyn…of Texas. ”

    “Well, as it turns out the author of this article turned in a book three months ago and the paper, The New York Times, failed to reveal that the urgent story was tied to a book release and its sale by its author.”

    “I think it’s a crying shame … that we find that America’s safety is endangered by the potential expiration of the Patriot Act in part because a newspaper has seen fit to release on the night before the vote on the floor on the reauthorization of the Patriot Act as part of a marketing campaign for selling a book,” Cornyn said.

    “As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have,” Bush said in his weekly radio address. “The unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk.”

  11. Snapple says:

    Here is the text of the President’s speech about James Risen’s article.
    Bush said that this article damaged the national security and that revealing this information was illegal. He also said that what the Administration did was legal and in accordance with the Constitution.

    The talking heads keep saying it is wrong to spy on Americans.
    I disagree. Some Americans are working with the terrorists, taking their money in exchange for propaganda, or maybe even in exchange for votes. Treason is what some of this spying shows, I think.

    For example, the radical Colorado professor, Ward Churchill (a white American citizen who masqueradesas as an Indian), went to a conference in Washington hosted by Cynthia McKinney that was about Able Danger. Churchill has been an opponent of America’s policies toward Iraq. He celebrated 9-11 in an article called “On the Justice of Roosting Chickens” (also know as “Some People Push Back”) and called the 9-11 victims “Little Eichmanns.” I think he may have been snooping to see what Able Danger might know about him.

    I am going to hold the politicians who voted against the Patriot Act responsible should we be attacked again. I bet the people who were incinerated in the WTC, airplanes, and Pentagon would not feel that monitoring communications was violating their rights as much as getting burned up alive.

    Bush said:

    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. Before we intercept these communications, the government must have information that establishes a clear link to these terrorist networks.

    This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country.

    As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks, and the commission criticized our nation’s inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad. Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf al Hamzi and Khalid al Mihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn’t know they were here, until it was too late.

    The authorization I gave the National Security Agency after September the 11th helped address that problem in a way that is fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities. The activities I have authorized make it more likely that killers like these 9/11 hijackers will be identified and located in time. And the activities conducted under this authorization have helped detect and prevent possible terrorist attacks in the United States and abroad.

    The activities I authorized are reviewed approximately every 45 days. Each review is based on a fresh intelligence assessment of terrorist threats to the continuity of our government and the threat of catastrophic damage to our homeland. During each assessment, previous activities under the authorization are reviewed. The review includes approval by our nation’s top legal officials, including the Attorney General and the Counsel to the President. I have reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups.

    The NSA’s activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA’s top legal officials, including NSA’s general counsel and inspector general. Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it. Intelligence officials involved in this activity also receive extensive training to ensure they perform their duties consistent with the letter and intent of the authorization.

    This authorization is a vital tool in our war against the terrorists. It is critical to saving American lives. The American people expect me to do everything in my power under our laws and Constitution to protect them and their civil liberties. And that is exactly what I will continue to do, so long as I’m the President of the United States.

  12. BIGDOG says:

    (Pub. L. 95-511, title I, Sec. 102, Oct. 25, 1978, 92 Stat. 1786.)


    Ex. Ord. No. 12139, May 23, 1979, 44 F.R. 30311, provided:

    By the authority vested in me as President by Sections 102 and
    104 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
    1802 and 1804), in order to provide as set forth in that Act (thischapter) for the authorization of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, it is hereby ordered as follows:

    1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence
    Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.
    1-102. Pursuant to Section 102(b) of the Foreign Intelligence Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(b)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the court having jurisdiction under Section 103 of that Act (50 U.S.C. 1803) to obtain orders for electronic surveillance for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence information.

    1-103. Pursuant to Section 104(a)(7) of the Foreign Intelligence
    Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)), the following
    officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national
    security or defense, is designated to make the certifications
    required by Section 104(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications
    to conduct electronic surveillance:
    (a) Secretary of State.
    (b) Secretary of Defense.
    (c) Director of Central Intelligence.
    (d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
    (e) Deputy Secretary of State.
    (f) Deputy Secretary of Defense.
    (g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.

    None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that
    capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above
    certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the
    President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

    1-104. Section 2-202 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
    section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at the end of that section: ”Any electronic surveillance, as defined
    in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, shall be
    conducted in accordance with that Act as well as this Order.”.

    1-105. Section 2-203 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
    section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at the end of that section: ”Any monitoring which constitutes
    electronic surveillance as defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be conducted in accordance with that
    Act as well as this Order.

    Signed by Jimmy Carter.

    1802: Electronic surveillance authorization without court order; certification by Attorney General; reports to Congressional committees; transmittal under seal; duties and compensation of communication common carrier; applications; jurisdiction of court


    (1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that.

    As you can plainly see Buhs acted well withing the law. PERIOD!!!

  13. BIGDOG says:

    As you can see BUSH acted well WITHIN the law. PERIOD!!!

    Sorry my typing is off today…:)

  14. Snapple says:

    Dear BIGDOG,

    Everyone here is so smart.

    A big thank you for posting the law! I will study it.

    I knew it wasn’t as simple as the Democrats were saying.

    I know the Bush people must be consulting lawyers all the time to make sure they get this hunt for terrorists right.

  15. BIGDOG says:

    Anytime Snapple. Im just doing my part to help combat the dis-information campaign set forth by the MSM (main stream media). You are correct that the people here are very intelligent and that reflection i read in each post everyone makes. In some case’s i feel intimidated and well informed all in one breath. Thats why i love this site and the great people we have posting…:)

    I notice you posted bush’s radio address. In that speech he almost quotes the law verbatum, obviously not, but you can see how he was reflecting on the law by explaining it to the common folk with a dash of salt. In laymans terms that is…:) Thats why i have every confidence in Bush and his legal team.

  16. Links and Minifeatures 12 19 Monday

    Well, today marks six months that I’ve been at this.

    For those who are regular readers, this week I’m doing a series on Long Term Care. Today’s post on the …

  17. […] When the story broke I realized this was a PR effort in the vein of the Plame Game. I remembered all the silence surrounding the Echelon effort under Clinton, and the fact no one seemed to understand the power the Federal government wanted in being able to uncrypt anything, anywhere. That was my first post on this subject. […]

  18. […] and spent years blogging on what I see is a crime against our safety (275 posts and growing). It started with this post where I felt no one could be fooled by such faulty […]