THE LEFT IS WRONG AGAIN: RADIATION DETECTION WITHOUT A COURT ORDER IS LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL

USNEWS ran a traitorous story - based on an illegal and traitorous leak - about how the FBI and the DoE's "N.E.S.T." service have been monitoring hundreds of sites in the USA (which would have no legal use of radioactive material) in an effort to detect radiation which might indicate the presence of radioactive material for a nuclear device or a dirty bomb. Many of the sites monitored have been mosques. (GEE: I WONDER WHY?! Sheesh.)

Many other outlets in the MSM (350 so far, according to a GOOGLE NEWS search I just ran) have portrayed this monitoring by the FBI as illegal and unconstitutional because these efforts at radiation detection were done without a court-order, and just based on intelligence. THIS IS WRONG. Here are two great analyses of the issues involved:

(1) From a commenter ("The Original TS") at VOLOKH who asked if measuring ambient gamma rays different from measuring infrared radiation emanating from a specific surface (which the SCOTUS has previously held does require a court order? [SEE: Kyllo v. United States.]

Yes, extremely different. First, gamma ray radiation can't be used for imaging. Infrared radiation can. One of the big Constitutional problems in Kyllo was that allowing the police to do infrared imaging would effectively mean that everyone was living in glass houses without curtains.

Measuring radioactivity does not present the same issues. It's more aking to "smell" than it is to "sight." While it is improper for the police to use infrared detectors to "see" a drug lab from the street, there is no problem with "smelling" a drug lab from the street.

Another point is that, unlike infrared imaging, measuring radiation is extremely unlikely to reveal legal activity. Everything emits infrared radiation, especially, people. Hardly anything emits high levels of radiation, especially people. In fact, I'd be willing to bet (though I don't actually know for sure) that possessing something that is highly radioactive is a per se violation of some federal statute. In other words, at some level, radiating your neighborhood is a crime in and of itself.

The point here is that measuring radiation levels is not violating anyone's privacy since it won't provide information regarding legal activities.

(2) Even arch-liberal Justice JP Stevens recognizes that this type of detection is perfectly constitutional (via Jim Robbins at NRO):

Generally speaking, can law enforcement authorities use nuclear detection devices against someone's house without a warrant? This question is at root of the latest "no warrant" controversy.

Readers would do well to examine the Supreme Court case Illinois v. Caballes, decided earlier this year. The Court ruled that when a dog sniffed out drugs during a routine traffic stop, without a warrant, it did not constitute an illegal search because, in the words of Justice Stevens,

"Official conduct that does not 'compromise any legitimate interest in privacy' is not a search subject to the Fourth Amendment. Jacobsen, 466 U.S., at 123." The Court noted that "any interest in possessing contraband cannot be deemed 'legitimate,' and thus, governmental conduct that only reveals the possession of contraband 'compromises no legitimate privacy interest.' Ibid."

Note that in an earlier case, Kyllo v. US, the Court ruled that thermal detection devices could not be used to surveil houses without a warrant because this would compromise privacy -- the difference being that such devices pick up licit as well as illicit activity. In his dissent in that case, Justice Stevens pondered whether "public officials should not have to avert their senses or their equipment from detecting emissions in the public domain such as ...radioactive emissions .. which could identify hazards to the community.

In my judgment, monitoring such emissions with 'sense-enhancing technology,' ... and drawing useful conclusions from such monitoring, is an entirely reasonable public service."

Clearly Caballes rather than Kyllo controls in the case of using detection equipment to pick up emissions from nuclear materials banned under 18 USC 831 since, to quote Stevens' majority opinion, such activity "reveals no information other than the location of a substance that no individual has any right to possess." And even if you want to subject this to a balancing test, I think the government would not have to argue very strongly that there is a compelling state interest in keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of private citizens.

The fact that the MSM would run this story about a TOP SECRET RADIATION DETECTION PROGRAM - (EVEN THOUGH EXPOSING IT MAKES US MORE VULBNERABLE TO A NUKE ATTACK OR A DIRTY BOMB ATTACK BECAUSE IT TIPS OFF THE ENEMY AND ENABLES HIM TO CHANGE TACTICS) - reveals just how insanely angry and afraid of "King George BusHitlerburton" the Left is.

There's only one thing that will stop this spate of traitorous leaks: throw the leakers and those that published the leaks in jail - or execute them for treason. YEAH: I AM SERIOUS! These leakers are endangering millions of lives and trillions of dollars and our economy and our effort in the GWOT. They are traitors and should be tried and executed.

FISA EXPLICITLY ALLOWS "WARRANTLESS" ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE OF INTERNATIONAL CALLS

FISA 1801 (f) (3) [DEFINITION OF ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE]:

(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or ..."

This appears to mean that if ONE party is NOT INSIDE THE USE, that then the call CAN BE LEGALLY INTERCEPTED .

Since Bush ordered INTERNATIONAL calls between al Qaeda and their affiliates to be intercepted, FISA does NOT apply. YES: NSA and the US Armed Forces are ABSOLUTELY FREE to collect all the intel they need OVERSEAS by any means they deem necessary - WITHOUT a court order. And FISA seems to also allow similar freedom as it relates to intercepts of INTERNATIONAL calls, too.

NOTE: this definition says "RADIO COMMUNICATION" - and I am assuming that the NSA intercepts were done of the cellphones' signals as they were transmitted as RADIO SIGNALS; (cellphones send radiowaves/microwaves).

But perhaps this is why the MSM and the Dem/Left keeps referring to the intercepts as "wiretaps" - they don't want this section of FISA to apply.

UPDATE (file this under "blowin' yer own horn!"): I first blogged on this clause on WEDNESDAY AT 5:21PM, HERE. (This is a few hours after John at POWERLINE mentioned it in passing in his long and brilliant essay, "ON THE LEAGLITY OF..."; though I hadn't read POWERLINE at that time I posted). I thought this clause was so important I posted on it again today (above). NOW... POWERLINE has published an email from a lawyer who has worked these issues for the feds, and he makes the SAME EXACT POINT I DID: 1801 (f) (3) means that FISA does NOT apply. Which means that I got it right - and FIRST. (An' I ain't a lawyer, even!)

WARRANTLESS INTERNATIONAL INTERCEPTS: THE LEFT HAS IT EXACTLY BACKWARDS YET AGAIN

The Left is whining about the international intercepts which our CinC ordered against suspected Al Qaeda agents here and abroad.

They whine about this even though there is NO BETTER WAY TO PREVENT an attack here, than to intercept one that's being planned by an overseas al Qaeda operative and his sleeper cell INSIDE THE USA. This is the SINGLE BEST WAY TO DO IT.

Appearently, the Leftie doves and appeasers think that is NOT OKAY for the POTUS to use his constitutional powers as CinC in order to authorize the NSA to make those intercepts in a way that is MOST EFFECTIVE for the mission. They claim that these intercepts are (a) illegal; and (b) unconstitutional.

To stop the CinC and the NSA from gathering intelligence in this way (a way that some have known about for as long as FOUR YEARS!) these Lefties - (like Daschle and Reid and Pelosi and Boxer and Levin and Kennedy, AND THE EDITORS OF THE NYTIMES)- think it's OKAY TO (1) BREAK THE LAW (BY EXPOSING THESE INTERCEPTS); and to (2) EXPOSE SOURCES AND METHODS TO THE ENEMY.

AS USUAL, THE LEFT HAS THEIR PRIORITIES EXACTLY BACKWARDS --- that is IF you believe that defending the USA is a priority. PERHAPS THE LEFT DOESN'T!?

LOOK AT IT THIS WAY: this very same "anti-Iraq War" crowd now say that knowing what they know today (that Saddam apparently had NO WMD STOCKPILES) they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED TO GO TO WAR AGAINST SADDAM. Their admitting that they'd have given SADDAM the benefit of the doubt. (Bush did not, and EXPLICITLY said he wouldn't give ther ebenfit of the doubt to a tyrant who had used WMD against his own people and his neighbors.)

YET... when it comes to these NSA intercepts, the Left won't give president the benefit of the doubt!

This controversy once again proves that this "anti-Iraq war" crowd fears Bush more than they fear Binladen. Which is INSANE. And WRONG. And, it jeopardizes our national defense. This controversy proves once again that the Democrats CANNOT be trusted with our national defense, and MUST NOT BE.

THESE LEFTIES NOW PROUDLY ADMIT that they'd appease insanely dangerous tyrants who support international terror, and THEY ADMIT that they wouldn't do everything possible to prevent more attacks. By voting Democrat you endanger the security of the nation and the Free World.

TRUTH OF THE DAY

"After 9/11, any president who was not spying on people calling phone numbers associated with terrorists should be impeached for being an inept commander in chief."

Who else BUT Ann Coulter. I LOVE HER. RTWT.

"GOP VS. DEMS" BECOMING "WORKERS VS. GOVERNMENT WORKERS"

Professor Reynolds linked to an article by RYAN SAGER in the NYPOST:

[Sager] noted this morning, the strike opened up a class war -- just not the one the union was expecting. "[T]here is a class confrontation of a kind going on — but it's not between rich and poor. It's between the working class and what might be called the government-worker class. The gap between the two groups has been growing for a while."

I would like to add that the "government workers" (like NEA teachers, and AFSCME white collar bureaucrats, and SEIU etc) are PAID FROM TAXES and are also HUGE supporters of the Democrat Party. They are perhaps the strongest backers of the party - in money, right after the Left-wing billionaires like Soros, Lewis, and Heinz-Kerry. And they might contribute the most to the Democrats when one takes into account manpower hours during campaigning and their get out the vote efforts.

This is OBVIOUSLY one reason why the Democrats FAVOR BIGGER GOVERNMENT AND INCREASING GOVERNMENT SPENDING: It's a PAYOFF their supporters.

In this light, it's OBVIOUS that the "government employeee union"/Democrat Party alignment nothing more than a self-serving "AXIS FOR TAXES" and that this is why the AXIS nearly always favors more government programs and higher taxes: in order to pay for higher wages and more perks for MORE government workers/union members.

(This AXIS has been a Democrat stronghold since the days of Tammany hall, but NEVER before did it so strongly reflect GOVERNMENT WORKERS as opposed to blue-collar workers.)

The GOP, on the other hand, favors LOWER TAXES, CUTTING GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND SHRINKING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. The GOP is increasingly the party of TAXPAYERS, the self-employed and blue-collar workers.

Because there are more taxpayers than "workers who are paid through taxes," this way of looking at the divide greatly favors the GOP. KEN MEHLMAN: ARE YOU LISTENING!? here's a campaign slogan: "STOP THE AXIS FOR TAXES. VOTE GOP!"

UPDATE: MORE BACKLASH TO THE AXIS FOR TAXES HERE - an unlikely/unexpected source - THE WASHINGTON MONTHLY!

UDATE #2: The NYTIMES has a fact-filled article on the scale and scope of the impending crisis in government labor obligations. A MUST READ. Here's an excerpt:

Fast-rising pension costs for government employees - the issue that helped set off this week's transit strike in New York City - are a problem confronting cities, counties and states nationwide, causing many budgetary experts to predict a wave of painful fights over efforts to scale back government retirement programs.

This is a ticking time-bomb - fiscally AND politically. The LOUSY and CORRUPT labor deals which politicians running governments made is coming back to haunt us all.

If the Democrat Party stands by the "tax-getters" (the government labor unions listed above), AS THEY MUST - because these unions are their base - then they will get HAMMERED at the polls. I hope.

[ASIDE: toady's Democrat Party is reallu something: one half tax-getters the other half McGovernite-Leftie loons. Or "THE AXIS FOR TAXES" meets "THE AXIS OF APPEASEMENT". SHEESH!]

THE DEM/LEFT PROVES ONCE AGAIN THAT THEY ARE UNFIT TO DEFEND NATIONAL SECURITY OR THE FREE WORLD

For years, the Dem/Left has been deriding the Iraq War as an "unnecessary diversion" or "blunder" while CLAIMING that they were GUNG-HO on the GWOT and would have preferred if Bush had kept this nation's focus on the war against al Qaeda and in Afghanistan.

But, their current attacks against Bush's aggressive use of NSA capabilties to intercept suspected al Qaeda communications into and out of the USA PROVES that they are LYING ON THIS COUNT, TOO.

If the Dem/Left is not willing to use the NSA to intercept foriegn intelligence on international calls into the USA, and insists that this intel gathering for miltary use MUST be subordinated to a FISA judge's court order (as if the president was not fit to order it on his own - as CinC) then they are not fit to assume responsibility for defending the USA or Free World.

THE BIG LIE: BUSH AUTHORIZED D-O-M-E-S-T-I-C SPYING

Is the MSM disseminating a false meme (IOW: filthy Leftist propaganda) regarding the FISA/NSA brouhaha? I think so. Here's evidence:

HITS ON GOOGLE NEWS FOR "international spying" - ONE.
HITS ON GOOGLE NEWS FOR "domestic spying" - 3,160.

NEED MORE PROOF?! HERE:

HITS FOR GOOGLE WEB SEARCH ON "INTERNATIONAL SPYING"- 807. HITS FOR GOOGLE WEB SEARCH FOR "DOMESTIC SPYING"-1,570,000.

That's "1/3160" and "807/1,570,000." THIS IS AN ASTOUNDING EXAMPLE OF PILING ON! Only 0.00005 of all the stories on this matter lead with the FACT that the calls which Bush wanted intercepted by the NSA (not the FBI or the CIA but he NSA) were INTERNATIONAL.

Since the TRUTH is that Bush only authorized intercepts of INTERNATIONAL CALLS - and only from al Qaeda and their affiliates, in and out of the country - when the MSM and the Left portrays this as "domestic spying" they are distorting to such a degree that, for all intents and purposes, THEY ARE LYING.

And they are deliberately lying about this aspect of the story because they know that Americans WON'T GIVE A HOOT if only foreigner's and terrorist's rights are infringed. They know they need to make it SEEM like Bush authorized the NSA to snoop on EVERYONE'S calls domestically.

This is a classic Leftist tactic: Leftists regularly use CONFLATION, and conflation is a logical fallacy. EXAMPLE: "Some of A is B; some of C is B; therefore C is A." THIS IS FALSE. And so is the charge that Bush ordered DOMESTIC surveillance.

As Churchill said, a lie travels round the world five times before the truth gets its pants on. A contemporary of Churchill's - Goebbels - invented the BIG lie. Today's post-modern Left and the MSM they dominate have perfected it.

ADDENDUM: ACCORDING TO FISA - if ONE party in a communication between two parties is non-US person, or if one party is not in the USA, then it is an INTERNATIONAL call, and then the NSA and the president have a freer hands. FISA - 1801 (f):

(3) the intentional acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any radio communication, under circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes, and if both the sender and all intended recipients are located within the United States; or ..."

IN OTHER WORDS: For a FISA court order to be necessary: (a) "the person has a REASONABLE expectation of privacy"; (BUT, NOBODY TALKING TO AN AL QAEDA AGENT DOES HAVE THAT EXPECTATION!); and (b) BOTH sender and receiver MUST be in the USA; the calls which Bush wanted intercepted were INTERNATIONAL - meaning ONE PARTY WAS OUTISDE THE USA.

CASE CLOSED. (Hat tip JUST ONE MINUTE.)

CARTER AUTHORIZED COURT-ORDERLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE

EXERCISE OF CERTAIN AUTHORITY RESPECTING ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE EO 12139 - 23 May 1979

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 (this chapter) 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.''.

Jimmy Carter.

CLINTON AUTHORIZED COURT-ORDERLESS SEARCH AND SEIZURE

[Federal Register page and date: 60 FR 8169; February 13, 1995]
THE WHITE HOUSE - Office of the Press Secretary -

For Immediate Release February 9, 1995

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949 - FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.

Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information.

Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, 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 303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical searches:

(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; and (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, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON
THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 9, 1995.

STUDY: the "Academy" is overwhelmingly Leftist

MARGINAL REVOLUTION (hat tip PRESTOPUNDIT):

"This paper provides copious results from a 2003 survey of academics. We analyze the responses of 1208 academics from six scholarly associations (in anthropology, economics, history, legal and political philosophy, political science, and sociology) with regard to their views on 18 policy issues. The issues include economic regulations, personal-choice restrictions, and military action abroad. We find that the academics overwhelmingly vote Democratic and that the Democratic dominance has increased significantly since 1970. A multivariate analysis shows strongly that Republican scholars are more likely to land outside of academia. On the 18 policy questions, the Democratic-voter responses have much less variation than do the Republicans. The left has a narrow tent."

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? Leftists hire Leftists. This is human nature and why all institutions are subject to being "taken over" by any self-selecting group. The NYTIMES is now run by "Gay collectivistas." The department of State has long been run by Lefties, Arabists and status quoists. The CIA the same, with some Soviet symp holdovers. The Dem leadership by McGovernites.

State and the CIA have the added layer of self-selection because their alumni fill the Academy/foreign service schools. So the "old boy" network indoctrinates the next generation.

It is this UNELECTED ELITE - operating a shadow government, and exploiting their contacts in the Left-wing dominated MSM (with illegal leaks) which is underming Bush.

WHO IS SERIOUS ABOUT WAGING WAR, AND WHO IS NOT?

CLIFF MAY/NRO:

If an al-Qaeda operative in Karachi phones someone in Paris, France and tells him to go to the US to carry out an act of terrorism – obviously the President would have the authority to listen to that conversation without a warrant.But if an al-Qaeda operative in Karachi phones someone in Paris, Texas and tells him to go to Houston to carry out an act of terrorism -- the President would not have that authority to listen to that conversation without a warrant? In other words, once a terrorist lands on American soil he must be given additional rights, including an expectation of privacy when he gets a phone call from Osama bin Laden. That's what the administration’s critics are arguing.

AND IT'S STUPID! AND IT IF THE LEFT WINS THIS "DEBATE" THEN WE ARE MORE VULNERABLE TO AN ATTACK BECAUSE THE ENEMY WILL HAVE LEARNED FROM THIS INEXCUSEABLE BREACH AND THEY WILL USE THE INFO THEY'VE GAINED TO BECOME BETTER ABLE TO HARM US.

The Left is NOT serious about waging war against the enemy; they only want to wage war against Bush. Becasue Bush is our CinC, this makes the Left the enemy, too.

HEY, HEY; HO, HO: SPECTER, HAGEL AND SNOWE MUST GO!

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES!?

IS CHAVEZ HELPING AL QAEDA MAKE A DIRTY BOMB?

"Reuters":

Venezuela on Monday warned of a radiation hazard and launched a nationwide search for a capsule with highly radioactive material that was stolen along with the truck carrying it. "We have a state of emergency at a national and regional level and are looking for the capsule everywhere," civil defense director Col. Antonio Rivero told Reuters. The truck was stolen in the central-western Yaracuy state on Sunday night, officials said. Speaking on state television, Angel Diaz, director of nuclear affairs at Venezuela's Energy Ministry, asked the thieves to return the potentially deadly device, whose protective container is about the size of a lunchbox, and also urged the population to inform the authorities if they find it.

Maybe CHAVEZ "stole" it so he could give it to terrorists to use against "the evil Bush" while maintaining "deniability"?

THE MSM'S "BIG LIE" ON THE NSA INTERCEPT STORY

The Left-wing dominated MSM has got MANY things in the NSA brouhaha ALL WRONG, and done so DELIBERATELY in order to CRANK UP the sense that this is a major scandal, (see below). Among the many MSM distortions are these:

(1) The MSM constantly refers to what the president authorized the NSA to do as "DOMESTIC SPYING," as if a wide net was cast over a slew of US citizens. THIS IS SIMPLY NOT THE CASE. A relatively few number of callers or calls were intercepted. Only international calls and only between suspected al Qaeda phones/(emails).

(2) The MSM constantly says that only a few key Congressional leaders were notified (as if some who should have been told were NOT told), when in fact EVERY key leader who the FISA statute specifies should be informed WAS informed: (the leaders of each party in each House, the chairs and ranking members of the Intel Committees. And they were REPEATEDLY informed).

The MSM's BIASED version leaves the exact WRONG IMPRESSION, one which is exactly backwards:

they want the average American to believe that Bush is wire-tapping EVERYONE and not telling ANYONE, when in fact he is using WELL-DOCUMENTED AND PREVIOUSLY USED PRESIDENTIAL POWERS (see below) to authorize the NSA to intercepts a select type of call (from overseas to the USA) to a select few people in the USA whose numbers/accounts have shown up in equipment of al Qaeda and or their affiliates.

NOTE: The NSA cannot determine WHO IS ACTUALLY USING the phones in the USA (and if they are in fact a US person, and if they are actually INSIDE the USA until they intercept them). And even then, the NSA can make technical errors - as the NYTIMES admits today.

The Left - and the Democrat Party and MSM they dominate - has also CARPED about how the president COULD HAVE gotten a court order on these intercepts up to 72 HOURS after the intercepts were ordered, and that by failing to do this Bush failed to follow the law - that he broke the law.

THIS IS FALSE. The president has the authority in certain circumstances to order intercepts WITHOUT A COURT ORDER, (see below).

PROOF that Bush ha used this authority VERY SELECTIVELY is the FACT that he has sought and received over 4,000 FISA court orders for surveillance since 9/11. And continues to do so even as he also intercepts OTHER SPECIFIC TYPES of communication WITHOUT a court order.

OBVIOSULY, then, THESE PARTICULAR NSA "court-orderless" INTERCEPTS MUST FALL IN A SEPARATE CATEGORY.

I have posted for last several days that the reason that Bush did NOT WANT a court order for these intercepts is the fact that the information from these intercepts were never intended to be used in judical proceedings - for indictments, etc - but only for military acts, renditions and targeted killings (with missiles from drones for example).

As CinC, the president has the authority to order warrantless searches and seizures and wiretaps and intercepts to gather intel about the enemy for the military. This is what THESE SPECIFICS INTERCEPTS WERE ALL ABOUT, IMHO. And it's the best explanation as to why they were executed in the manner in which they were executed.

WARRANTLESS SEARCHES VERSUS WARRANTLESS CHARGES

POWERLINE:

Under all existing authorities, the NSA program, as we understand the facts, was legal. ... the November 2002 decision of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, in Sealed Case No. 02-001:

The Truong court [United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 4th Cir. 1980], as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. *** We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.

And those are cases that deal with electronic intercepts inside the United States. A fortiori, intercepts outside the United States that coincidentally sweep in messages sent from America would seem to be obviously within the President's inherent Article II powers. So far, I have found no authority to the contrary.

PUBLIC EYE:

Bill Clinton issued Executive Order 12949 in early 1995 authorizing “the Attorney General … to approve applications … to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information.”

In 1979, Jimmy Carter issued Executive Order 12139 which gave the Attorney General authorization “to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.”

QUESTION: MUST THE FEDS ALWAYS GET A COURT ORDER TO DO A SEARCH? ANSWER: NO! NRO: lists 28 instances where federal authorities are routinely allowed warrantless searches.

BOTTOM-LINE: (1) the feds don't always need a court order. And (2), NOBODY COMPLAINED WHEN DEMOCRAT PRESIDENTS WERE DOING IT. AND (3), WE WEREN'T EVEN FIGHTING A RECOGNIZED WAR WITH TERRORISTS THEN, EITHER - WE ARE NOW. AND (4), SINCE THEN, CONGRESS PASSED AN AUMF IN 2001 GIVING THE PRESIDENT EVEN MORE AUTHORITY.

THEREFORE, it is OBVIOUS that the president can authorize warrantless searches. Arguing he cannot is a warrantless charge. In other words: The Dem/Left and the MSM they dominate are way off base. They're either hypocrites or dummies. EITHER WAY: Their current outrage will one day soon come back to bite them in the ass.

CEDAR REVOLUTION CONTINUES: GROUPS DEMAND RESIGNATION OF PRO-SYRIAN PRESIDENT

AL JAZEERA:

A coalition of Lebanese groups, angered by the recent assassination of a prominent anti-Syrian journalist, called today for the ousting of Lebanon’s pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud. The call came as anti-Syrian youth activists protested in Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, late today to press for Lahoud’s resignation and removal of pro-Syrian agents in Lebanon’s security services.

Today’s meeting of the coalition of anti-Syrian legislators and politicians came after An-Nahar newspaper general manager and legislator Gibran Tueni was killed in a December 12 car bombing. Tueni was the third anti-Syrian critic killed in similar circumstances since the February 14 blast that killed ex-Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri in Beirut.

The inevitable march of freedom continues - and it continues to SQUEEZE Assad. I expect a violent backlash by Assad's agents - in Lebanbion or Israel - very soon. STAY TUNED.

A REVISED AND REPRISED POST: WHY THE PRESIDENT DIDN'T WANT A FISA COURT ORDER (AND KEPT THE FISA JUDGE INFORMED)

The recent NYTIMES leak revealed that the president decided NOT to get a FISA Judge to issue a court order, and instead used the presidential powers specified in the Constitution and in the FISA laws and in the 2001 Congressional authorization to wage war on al Qaeda and its affiliates in order to (for limited, 45-day time periods, against specified individuals, and only with informing both the DOJ and the Congressional leadership EACH AND EVERY TIME AN AUTHORIZATION WAS SIGNED) permit the NSA to intercept international communications between suspected jihadoterrorists here and abroad.

The Left is up in arms. They accuse the president of circumventing the law and subverting the constitution and "checks and balances."

Today - in a rare live Saturday radio AND TV broadcast, (which I watched) - the president forcefully and straightforwardly ACKNOWLEDGED and defended his actions.

I think he made an absolutely iron-clad case. (TEXT HERE.)

Still, one must wonder: What is it about the targets of THESE NSA intercepts that made the president and the DOJ and the Congressional leadership agree that they were properly NOT authorized by the FISA court?

I think the answer is that these targets, and any information gathered from them, were not ever intended to be brought into the jurisprudential system, but were intended for EXTRA-JUDICIAL use, for use by our armed forces - both uniformed and black op's. In other words, the information gathered would not be used for indictments, but for military and extra-military actions: covert and preemptive counter-attacks and targeted assassinations of terrorists or RENDITIONS.

At least, I hope so. I hope that the USA is capable of taking "executive action" to "neutralize" the enemy BEFORE they attack, before they destabilize us or our allies.

I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT BUSH DID. I DO HAVE ONE SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE WAY BUSH DID WHAT HE DID: why in the heck did he tell the Democrats in Congress!? They're NOT the most trustworthy folks in the world when it comes to secrets; in fact, they CONSTANTLY LEAK THEM TO THEIR COMRADES IN THE MSM! The fact that he told CONGRESSMEN - and not FISA judges - ONLY FURTHER PROVES TO ME that the entire point of these intercepts was to get information for the military and not the courts. (Otherwise he wouldn't have risked the leaks.)

I'm VERY CONCERNED that the Left - from presidential candidate Senator Russ Feingold to the "Senator from France," Chuck Hagel, and the liberal Arlen Specter (who immediately and thoughtlessly exclaimed "... there is no doubt that this is inappropriate"), and the "Teddy Jo Kennedy/Babs Boxer" crowd, AND their more-than-willing comrades in the MSM - will try to exploit this info, and cause a fight which could further damage our national security by further exposing our methods and sources.

AND I PREDICT that the ACLU will sue to get the list, of those whose calls were intercepted, released.

The ACLU and the Left will do this IN FULL KNOWLEDGE that these efforts aid the enemy. They don't care: THEY HATE BUSH MORE THAN THEY FEAR THE ENEMY, OR LOVE AMERICA. That's why those on the Left are traitorous scum.

They are essentially "9/10" people who would rather we prosecuted jihadoterrorists in an international tribunal like those in The Hague (which DOESN'T have the death penalty), then retailiate militarily AND transform the Arab and Muslim world by transforming backward tyrannical regimes into vibrant democracies.

More HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE.

REID ON SURVEILLANCE

WASH POST:

Reid acknowledged that he was briefed by the administration about the surveillance program "a couple of months ago." [... ] Reid said whoever disclosed the existence of the surveillance program should be prosecuted, but he said the president should not have unchecked authority to disregard the Constitution.

Which means that: (1) Reid ADMITS was informed as soon as he took over Dem Senate leadership from Daschle, (as we should expect); and (2) he accepts that the disclosure of this was a crime.

If Reid thought it was illegal or unconstitutional then why didn't he complain "a few months ago"!? Ditto Pelosi and Rockefeller and the other Dems in Congress who were REPEATEDLY told about this NSA program for the last FOUR YEARS?! Could it be that they DIDN'T think it was illegal or unconstitutional?! Could it be that they are attempting to exploit biased MSM misinterpretations of the NSA effort for partisan gains!?

YES. The Dems put partisanship ahead of our war effort - which I arguye is unpatriotic and (when their efforts help the enemy -- as their effort to derail the Patriot Act does) it verges on TREASON.

CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS: DUMB OR DISENGENUOUS?

(1) The Congressional Dems NOW complain that they were misled by Bush on WMD - (as if Saddma's WMD stockpiles were the SOLE reason they authorized Bush to attack Saddam! In fact, there were 23 reasons in Congressional Joint Resolution SJ #114 - and only 3 had to do with WMD!). [HTML LINK HERE.]

But they saw virtually the same intel as he did, and - in fact - had MORE intel' briefings than the White House did!

(2) The Congressional Dems NOW complain that Bush broke the law and violated the Constitution by directly authorizing (without the FISA judge's prior approval) the NSA to intercept highly selective communications between "foreign powers" and phones and/or email adresses in the USA, even though (ACCORDING TO THE NYTIMES AND BUSH) BUSH KEPT THEIR LEADERSHIP AND THE FISA JUDGE REGULARLY INFORMED AS HE WAS REQUIRED TO DO BY FISA), even though he followed the letter and spirit of the FISA law.

Are the Dems disengenuous, or are they dumb? ARE THEY LYING NOW - FOR SHORT TERM POLITICAL GAIN, OR ARE THEY SO STUPID THAT THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE WMD INTEL BRIEFINGS OR THE FISA/NSA BRIEFINGS!?

I think it's a little of both: the Dems are stupid liars.

IRAQ ELECTIONS RESULTS ARE IN!!!!

HERE ARE THE RESULTS:

THE IRAQIS WON!

THE DEMOCRAT-LEFT AND ENEMY-APPEASING DOVES - (PELOSI/DEAN/REID/KERRY/KENNEDY/MICHAEL MOORE/CINDY SHEEHAN/GEORGE SOROS) - LOST.