Quote:
|
Originally posted by Cairo Oh, and the ACLU is akin to the KGB when it comes to brainwashing and scare tactics. Foreign Intelligence is the key word here...if it doesn't have to do with CIA Foreign Intelligence, the F.I.S.C. can not hear the matter.
|
First off I'd like to say that having some supporting documents makes your argument that much easier to follow. That doesnt mean that if someone posts a link it automatically supports their position, but it's very helpful to understand how someone formed an opinion. You did that, and I appreciate it.
Since you are one of the very few here that doesnt think I'm some dumb ass mouth breather, I really hate to disagree with you on this. This is what I found though, and it supports my original opinion that this whole mess is the wrong way to go.
The original article I posted that mentioned the FISC was from the ACLU homepage and is on page 4 of this thread. The ACLU claims that:
"Ruling for the first time in its history, the ultra-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review today gave the green light to a Justice Department bid to broadly expand its powers to spy on U.S. citizens."
I agree with that statement. Not just from my gut feeling that government is out to screw us all, but from the decision of the Appeals Court. The ACLU column is dated Nov. 18 '02 and says ""As of today," she said, "the Attorney General can suspend......blah, blah ,blah. The Appeals Court ruling was handed down Nov. 18 '02
The article you posted for review
was relevant, but the verbage specifically addressing FBI, DOJ, and FISA was detailing the changes in FISA from the Patriot Act (HR 3162) which was passes on Oct. 25, '01 The heading on your reference document also says "MEMORANDUM OPINION (AS CORRECTED AND AMENDED)" and is dated May 17, 02. This is the case that the FISA rejected the changes in the law regarding suspected US terrorists. The DOJ appealed the decision you cited, which was in favor of keeping the laws in question as they have been. The Nov 18. 02 decision overturned the May 17 , 02, the lower court's ruling.
Quote:
|
Last May, in a historic first, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court (FISA) made public a unanimous decision rejecting the government’s bid for expanded spying powers.
|
<a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/newsroom/02-001.pdf ">So this brings us to the ruling of Nov. 18, 02.</a> that has set the new rules for the FISA's dealings with "United States Persons"
This is the key sentence:
After careful reviews of the briefs filed by the government and amici, we conclude that FISA, as amended by the Patriot Act, supports the government's postition and the restrictions imposed by the FISA court are not required by FISA or the Constitution.
So what the hell does all this mean? You can use FISA to spy on a "US person" per a DOJ request, if you have "detailed information" (which shouldnt be too hard to arrange with the new system) that implicates them in international terror. Now lets look at the legal definition of the phrase "detailed information" (NOT)
Take a look over my information. I might have come to the wrong conclusion here, but I think I got it nailed
Does it really matter? I dont know. BUT, the DOJ now
does have access to FISA. Wonderful, the world is now a better place.