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.

THE U.S. CODE IS CLEAR: BUSH HAD AUTHORITY TO ORDER INTERCEPTS

(Via ACE):

Here are the relevant sections of the US CODE which seem to govern the reported actions authorized by the president. I have highlighted what appears to me to be sections which clearly authorize ther president to do EXACTLY what he did. (I am NOT a lawyer; my reading is based on my comprehension of English, which is my first language):

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 36 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1802

§ 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

(a)

(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—

(A) the electronic surveillance is solely directed at—

(i) the acquisition of the contents of communications transmitted by means of communications used exclusively between or among foreign powers, as defined in section 1801 (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this title; or

§ 1801. Definitions As used in this subchapter:

(a) “Foreign power” means—

(1) a foreign government or any component thereof, whether or not recognized by the United States; (2) a faction of a foreign nation or nations, not substantially composed of United States persons;

"Al Qaeda in Iraq" (and other similar groups - such as al Qaeda - or their affiliated groups, ANYWHERE) are UNDOUBTEDLY factions within Iraq (or factions in whatever nation they have found safe haven in); therefore anyone communicating with them - or with groups like them in Afghanistan or Jordan or Pakistan - is subject to LEGAL surveillance by presidential order and WITHOUT COURT ORDER.

*******UPDATE(hat tip Glenn; via ORIN KERR)*******

According to this US Federal District Court decision (in a 1997 case, which was never appealed or ruled on by the SCOTUS, and is essentially operative today) "AL QAEDA IS PROPERLY A FOREIGN POWER AS DEFINED BY US CODE 1801 (a)-(b)". [See page 6, paragraph 4 - (or section C#1).]

***********************

IT THEREFORE SEEMS ABSOLUTELY CLEAR TO ME THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS OPERATING WELL WITHIN THE LAW; (HE HAD IT CLEARED BY THE AG/DOJ AND NOTIFIED THE NECESSARY PERSONS IN CONGRESS). AND HE DID SO FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE NATION AND THE FREE WORLD.

WE SHOULD ALL BE THANKING HIM. NO ONE SHOULD BE ACCUSING HIM OF ANYTHING BAD.

God Bless You, Mr. President. And God Bless Our Troops.

RENDITION: COLIN POWELL DIRECTLY DERIDES EU'S FALSE RESPONSE

BBC:

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has indicated that Europeans are being disingenuous when they deny knowledge of the rendition of terror suspects.

Mr Powell said the recently highlighted practice of moving people to places where they are not covered by US law was neither "new or unknown" to Europe. He was speaking after his successor, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, faced tough questioning about the use of rendition during a recent trip to Europe.

She admitted that terror suspects were flown abroad for interrogation, but said this was "a lawful weapon", and denied the prisoners were tortured. She refused to address claims that the CIA runs secret prisons abroad where suspects are interrogated without reference to international law.

But Gen Powell was dismissive of the furore in Europe. "There's a little bit of the movie Casablanca in this, where, you know, the inspector says 'I'm shocked, shocked that this kind of thing takes place'. "Well, most of our European friends cannot be shocked that this kind of thing takes place... The fact that we have, over the years, had procedures in place that would deal with people who are responsible for terrorist activities, or suspected of terrorist activities, and so the thing that is called rendition is not something that is new or unknown to my European friends."

I'm no fan of Powell's - haven't been since 1991, when he left the job in Iraq UNFINISHED. But I am glad he spoke the BLUNT truth today. The furor over rendition is BS - as is the furor over the NSA intercepts - (as was the furor over Abu Ghraib and Gitmo).

The Left is morally and politcally bankrupt; the Left has no policies except to attack the USA - even if it helps the enemy. And the Left's reactions to Abu Ghraib and Gitmo and the Patriot Act and to renditon and to secret CIA prisons and to NSA intercepts are WRONG.

THIS IS NOT SURPRISING: The Left has been WRONG about EVERYTHING: the Left said we woudln't dislodge the Taliban, (after all the USSR couldn't defeat the Afghanis), AND THEY WERE WRONG. They said millions of refugees would starve. THEY WERE WRONG - millions returned home. The Left said we went into Iraq for oil; they were wrong. They said Bush lied; they were wrong (as was much of the WMD stockpile intel'). They said we'd never establish either an Afghani or Iraqi democracy; they were wrong.

The Left: 100% WRONG 100% of the time. Why does ANYBODY listen to them anymore!?

AS I PREDICTED: HAMAS THREATENS ISRAEL ON BEHALF OF IRAN

HAMAS admits they are stooges of the jihadomullahs who run Iran. BBC:

Hamas chief vows to support Iran

The political leader of the Palestinian militant group Hamas has said the group will increase attacks on Israel if it attacks Iran. Khaled Meshaal told reporters in Tehran that his group would join a united front against the enemies of Islam. Mr Meshaal also praised Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his "courageous" remarks about Israel. The president has been strongly criticised for saying on Wednesday that the Nazi Holocaust was "a myth". Mr Ahmadinejad also called for Europe or North America to host a Jewish state, not the Middle East. The Hamas chief was visiting Tehran for talks with Iran's leadership. "What Iranian officials say may not please some people, but these are just courageous declarations," he said.

I predicted on September 25, 2005 that HAMAS and Hizb'Allah would attack Israel in behalf of Syria and Iran - but perhaps by using other pretexts. This annoucement essentially means that other pretexts won't be necessary. Essentially it means that Iran and Syria will ATTEMPT to start another full-fledged Arab-Israeli War BEFORE Assad is toppled or Iran's nukes are neutralized. It's their final trump card - or so they think.

If the USA or Israel preemptively destroys either Assad's regime or Iran's nukes, then expect their jihadoterrorists stooges to attack israel with the ENORMOUS cache of weapons which Iran has been suppplying them with these last few months. STAY TUNED...

LEBANESE MUSLIM EX-PATS: A FIFTH COLUMN FOR ASSAD?

"Reuters": Australian police set up road blocks and searched cars heading for Sydney's beaches on Saturday to prevent a second weekend of racial violence between ethnic Lebanese youths and local surfers. ... Racist text messages and e-mails have been circulating calling for violence this Sunday and local media has reported talk of Lebanese youths calling themselves the "Lions of Lebanon" coming from across the country to fight at the beaches this weekend.

The Australians have been having a problem with their LEBANESE MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS. Churches have been torched. And more violence is threatened.

I WONDER: Are these immigrants from south Lebanon - stronghold of Hizb'Allah, or are they really SYRIANS, (since Lebanon was OCCUPIED by Syria for 25 years)? [YEAH: These self-identified Lebanese immigrants MIGHT actually be Syrian! Surely the Syrians - who ran Lebanon with an iron fist - could have given them Lebanese passports to make it easier for them to migrate, no!?]

I mean, wouldn't most of the REAL Lebanese who migrated from Lebanon since the civil war and since Israeli withdrawal have been Christian (as most of the people who have migrated from the West Bank, since Arafat's return there in 1993, have been Christian)!?

And if they are really Hizb'Allah-types or pro-Syrian Lebanese or really Syrians, might they be more prediposed to islamofascism and instigating an intifada - perhaps even with the encouragement of the Syrians or some other jihadoterrorist group!??! Especially now, as more pressure is brought to bear on Assad - and thereby on Hizb'Allah - might they be itching for a fight and/or looking for an excuse to riot!?

Just asking. Because IF this is the case, then other nations with concentrations of Lebanese and Syrian immigrants who have immigrated since 1975 MIGHT have a problem brewing...

I AM GAMING HERE, BUT FOR A REASON: (1) Assad's murderous regime has proven it not above using ANY means, INCLUDING assassination, and (2) on 12/12 Assad made a rather BLATANT THREAT: "The Middle East is the heart of the world, and Syria is the heart of the Middle East," Assad said. "If the situation in Syria and Iraq isn't good, the whole region will become unstable and the entire world will pay for that." I believe that what he is REALLY saying is that he will try to make the whole world pay for destabilizing of his regime. Sicne he cannot do that with cruise missiles or a navy, he would have to use surrogates: Arab/Muslim jihadoterrorists.

Saddam made a similar - though perhaps even more blatant threat when we first put his back up against the wall in 1991: SADDAM:

"The United States wants to secure the flow of oil. This understandable and known. But it must not deploy methods which the United States says it disapproves of -- flexing muscles and pressure. If you use pressure, we will deploy pressure and force. We know that you can harm us although we do not threaten you. But we too can harm you. Everyone can cause harm according to their ability and their size. We cannot come all the way to you in the United States, but individual Arabs may reach you."

Maybe what I'm suggesting is that the Australians ought to be doing MORE than merely monitoringtheir domestic TEXT MESSAGING; they should be monitoring the email and phone calls between their Lebanese Muslim communtiy and Syria and Lebanon. And Iran.