OK, I need a response for this LTTE

[graywarrior]

Democrats used wiretaps too

Ever since The New York Times reported that the National Security Agency had intercepted international telephone calls between Americans and suspected al-Qaida agents, Democrats and their media cohorts have been accusing President Bush of "domestic spying."

Why didn't they object when former Presidents Carter and Clinton authorized their NSA to do the same kind of surveillance during their administrations? Could partisan politics and media bias be motivating their present hysteria?

Citing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, Carter issued an executive order that the "attorney general is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order."

During the 1990s, Clinton's NSA monitored millions of phone calls and e-mails between U.S. citizens and foreign nationals under a secret program called "Echelon." These intercepts were done without "court search warrants" and were prior to the 9-11-01 terrorist attacks.



http://www.newscoast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051228/OPINION/512280406/1029

[NewJeffCT]

1. please check www.mediamatters.org

they debunk all these RW talking points on Snoopgate.

By the way, the attorney general is NOT part of the NSA. The AG runs the Justice Dept and the FBI. The FISA act does not apply to them, I believe.

[graywarrior]

2. Thanks.

[NewJeffCT]

7. Here is a direct link...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200512240002

[louis-t]

3. Drudge and others have mis-stated facts

Actually they report sections of the executive order but leave out key phrases.

[Ioo]

4. Here is the link...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200512240002

[Warpy]

5. The Echelon taps in the 90s were in compliance with the FISA courts

Why wouldn't this administration go to a rubberstamp court to get a warrant? Don't forget that warrants have also been issued as much as three weeks after the wiretap had occurred, yet they were never sought. What was different about these wiretaps that the administration never bothered to seek warrants?

Answer those questions and you'll begin to see part of why this is so important. The other part of why this is so important is that no president is above the law in this country, no matter whose party controls all 3 branches. Give them a pass on this, and you've given them permission for dictatorship.

(and no two wrongs have ever made a right, but good try)

[JuniperLea]

9. I'm convinced they didn't get warrants

Because the kind of spying they intended on doing was not directly terrorist related. I'm sure it was all Watergate-esque, just wanting to know which way the wind was blowing on all his pet issues.

[politicaholic]

6. Yes, go to mediamatters.com...

but the real point is that, even if Carter and Clinton had done what that writer is regurgitating from the Drudge Report, it doesn't make it not illegal. It doesn't mean that Bush wasn't caught in the middle of the constitutional violation, a criminal act.

I'll be surprized if that letter doesn't mysteriously show up over and over again word for word on editorial pages for papers around the country. It's happened before.

[ovidsen]

8. Here's a thought

It sounds as if that letter writer ripped a page directly from Drudge by taking phrases from Presidential orders out of context, and failing to note that other federal laws controlling wiretaps and other communications intercepts applied.

Try this link for useful ammo:

http://www.globalnewsmatrix.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4036

Knock 'em dead.

[graywarrior]

10. Hey, that's nice. Thanks.