by Mark Silva
While President Bush and Congress tangle over the "terrorist surveillance program'' -- and conflicting views over whether Att'y Gen. Alberto Gonzales has testified truthfully about internal deliberations over the government's surveillance of domestic communications with suspected terrorists abroad -- the administration is attempting to modernize federal law.
The administration maintains that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, drafted in 1978 as a means of regulating wiretaps for national security purposes while protecting Americans from unwarranted government intrusion at home, has not kept up with technology. The law's requirement for warrants from a special FISA court does not permit intelligence authorities to move quickly enough when threats are detected in electronic communications, authorities say.
Yet it was only after newspaper reporting revealed the existence of a secretive surveillance program in which the administration had eavesdropped on telephone calls and emails of people inside the U.S. suspected of communicating with terrorists outside -- wiretapping without the approval of the FISA courts -- that the administration acknowledged it was happening.
Gonzales has told Congress that there had been no controversy over the terrorist surveillance program within the administration, while FBI Director Robert Mueller has testified about great internal debate. The White House says Gonzales has spoken the truth -- that he was speaking specifically about this warrantless wiretap program -- and that any debate had to do with broader, classified matters of intelligence-gathering that it still can't discuss.
But this much the administration can talk about: It's time to update the law.
"Today we face sophisticated terrorists who use disposable cell phones and the Internet to communicate with each other, recruit operatives, and plan attacks on our country,'' Bush said in his weekly radio address today. "As a result, our Nation is hampered in its ability to gain the vital intelligence we need to keep the American people safe.''
The American Civil Liberties Union, for one, suggests that what Bush proposes is not a modernization of FISA, but rather a gutting of the act.
For more, read on:
Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the ACLU, said today: "Thisadministration now makes the outrageous claim that they need even more power to wiretap without warrants. The administration claims the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act must be ‘modernized.’ Actually, it needs to be followed. The reality is, their proposal would gut FISA.
“Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell, claims that terrorism has outrun the law, but it is the administration that has outrun the law - and the Constitution - by trying to bypass the FISA court,,' she said. "Under the proposal that the Cheney team is floating on Capitol Hill a ‘modernized’ FISA would simply be a blank check for warrentless domestic and international surveillance.
“It takes an enormous amount of hubris to ask for more power on the heels of revelations that the president tried to go around his own attorney general on his NSA domestic electronic eavesdropping program'' she said, in reference to a visit that administration officials paid on then AG John Ashcroft recuperating in a hospital. "The already-shaky legal ground on which this domestic spying program stood is crumbling beneath those who defend it. ''
"Hidden in this bill is a disturbing provision that would give complete immunity - from criminal prosecution as well as civil liability - for the telecom companies’ participation in the National Security Agency’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program,'' Frederickson said. "It is unprecedented and undemocratic to give retroactive and sweeping immunity to an entire industry. Not to mention, giving blanket immunity before a full and public airing of the facts.
"This is not the time to hand even more power to an administration that has permitted the wholesale abuse of civil liberties; has denied the legislative branch’s constitutionally mandated oversight role and refused to hold the attorney general accountable for a series of conflicting claims that defy logic, the law and common sense,'' the ACLU spokesman suggested. "The only thing more outrageous than the administration’s call for even more unfettered power is a Congress that would consider giving it to them.”
This is what the president had to say about it today, with the weekly radio address:
"Good morning. This week I visited with troops at Charleston Air Force Base. These fine men and women are serving courageously to protect our country against dangerous enemies. The terrorist network that struck America on September the 11th wants to strike our country again. To stop them, our military, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals need the best possible information about who the terrorists are, where they are, and what they are planning.
One of the most important ways we can gather that information is by monitoring terrorist communications. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- also known as FISA -- provides a critical legal foundation that allows our intelligence community to collect this information while protecting the civil liberties of Americans. But this important law was written in 1978, and it addressed the technologies of that era. This law is badly out of date -- and Congress must act to modernize it.
Today we face sophisticated terrorists who use disposable cell phones and the Internet to communicate with each other, recruit operatives, and plan attacks on our country. Technologies like these were not available when FISA was passed nearly 30 years ago, and FISA has not kept up with new technological developments. As a result, our Nation is hampered in its ability to gain the vital intelligence we need to keep the American people safe. In his testimony to Congress in May, Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, put it this way: We are "significantly burdened in capturing overseas communications of foreign terrorists planning to conduct attacks inside the United States."
To fix this problem, my Administration has proposed a bill that would modernize the FISA statute. This legislation is the product of months of discussion with members of both parties in the House and the Senate -- and it includes four key reforms: First, it brings FISA up to date with the changes in communications technology that have taken place over the past three decades. Second, it seeks to restore FISA to its original focus on protecting the privacy interests of people inside the United States, so we don't have to obtain court orders to effectively collect foreign intelligence about foreign targets located in foreign locations. Third, it allows the government to work more efficiently with private-sector entities like communications providers, whose help is essential. And fourth, it will streamline administrative processes so our intelligence community can gather foreign intelligence more quickly and more effectively, while protecting civil liberties.
Every day that Congress puts off these reforms increases the danger to our Nation. Our intelligence community warns that under the current statute, we are missing a significant amount of foreign intelligence that we should be collecting to protect our country. Congress needs to act immediately to pass this bill, so that our national security professionals can close intelligence gaps and provide critical warning time for our country.
As the recent National Intelligence Estimate reported, America is in a heightened threat environment. Reforming FISA will help our intelligence professionals address those threats -- and they should not have to wait any longer. Congress will soon be leaving for its August recess. I ask Republicans and Democrats to work together to pass FISA modernization now, before they leave town. Our national security depends on it.
Thank you for listening.''
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Talk about monitoring, most people are unaware their cell phones are a personal tracking device. See this:
http://tinyurl.com/2p79yq
Posted by: Peter | July 28, 2007 10:57 AM
The C.I.A. was right all this time.
I want these outlaws hunted down and captured.
But what is wrong with working with Judge Roy Bean?
Fellas-
we better figure this one out right,
because my boys need the best "Colt 45 Peacemaker"
we can provide to get the job done.
The public can be only so vigilant
before the profeesionals must step in.
Their duty to defend and protect is no joke.
Give the fellas a chance to do their job,
lawfully, legally (and with the best .45 we can provide).
Good Luck
Posted by: Steve Real | July 28, 2007 12:09 PM
I would guess that the new authority will be used immediately to focus on those traitors that call for withdrawing our troops from Iraq.
We will now be able to get better information about those opponents of the administration that make their way on to our "enemies list".
We can keep track of all anti-war groups and have their membership watched and listened to.
No warrrant,no record.
Posted by: c. perry | July 28, 2007 12:19 PM
President Bush must reap that which he has sown.
He places himself and his cronies above the law. His condescending it's my way or the highway is beneath contempt.
If Dubya says the sky is blue and the grass is green it is incumbent upon freedom loving Americans to go outside for a look.
Republicans:
Have you no honor, have you no shame, have you no respect for our Constitution and its separation of powers, checks & balances and precident?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 28, 2007 12:23 PM
I see that on Fox News now..that any carbombing or suicide bombing is now called... an Al-Qeada style inspired attack.
Spread the fear!
Posted by: bill r. | July 28, 2007 12:29 PM
Once again, my pie hole's agape at this administration's continued bone-headedness. You're worried about terrorists? Spend a whole lot more on human intelligence. Burrow into these cells and kill them like the new generation cancer treatments we now have.
This administration...I can't take it. Unbelievable.
Posted by: Dan M | July 28, 2007 12:56 PM
W. and Cheney are bound and determined to make it legal for KKKarl Rove to listen to your phone calls and read your e-mail.
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican."
-H.L. MENCKEN-
"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservatives."
-JOHN STUART MILL-
"Conservatives supported slavery, Conservatives opposed women's suffrage, Conservatives supported Jim Crow, Conservatives opposed the 40-hour work week and the abolishment of child labor, and Conservatives supported McCarthyism. In short, all the major advancements of freedom and justice in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by Conservatives, no matter the party they inhabited at the time.
Conservatism is Bill Bennett lecturing you about self-denial, then rushing off to feed his slot habit at the casino. It's James Dobson telling you that children need regular beatings to stay in line. It's a superannuated nun rapping you on the knuckles so you won't dirty your pants. It's Jerry Falwell watching "Teletubbies" frame by frame to see if Tinky Winky is trying to turn him gay.
Conservatism is everyone you never wanted to grow up to be.
-PAUL WALDMAN-
Posted by: John E | July 28, 2007 1:07 PM
Freedom of speech just watch what you say!!!
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 28, 2007 1:51 PM
I agree it's time to update the surveillance laws. How about Bush be held strictly to FISA, with any infringement considered a High Crime or perhaps a Misdemeanor?
Posted by: Op109 | July 28, 2007 2:21 PM
Wow, the maniacal rantings from the Loony Left again.
Doug, take a chill pill. No one is trampling on the Constitution.
The real issue though is that if it comes down to whether innocent are killed or not by the hands of terrorists, the Loony Left has made themselves heard loud and clear that they come down on the side of letting innocent Americans be killed.
Posted by: John D | July 28, 2007 2:31 PM
This is an aside, but I couldn't help bringing up this article from the Tribune's sister paper because, four and a half years into this regrettable war, it doesn't appear that any progress has been made by Iraq's democratically elected government towards a political solution to its most critical issues. In fact, while we commit evermore blood and treasure to a conflict that can't be solved militarily, Iraqi lawmakers continue to dawdle. What was it that the president said, something about how "Iraqi's have looked into the abyss and didn't like what they saw"? Apparently, that hasn't translated into any sense of urgency.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-missing27jul27,0,4508518.story?coll=la-home-center
Posted by: dt | July 28, 2007 2:32 PM
Why does W need a new law to ignore? He'd just issue a signing statement.
Posted by: athena | July 28, 2007 2:46 PM
Isn't it amazing how Bush got a world-wide system up and operating literally overnight. The launch pads at Cape Canaveral must have melted.
Posted by: whatnow | July 28, 2007 2:55 PM
New laws are going to make us safer? How?
There are so many ways the bad guys can communicate, and so many low tech ways they can hurt us, that I don't see how new surveillance laws will protect us.
They can hit us and we can't stop it, even if we ceased to be a free society.
Nope, expanding surveillance laws will only whitle away at the rights of the law abiding.
Posted by: [INSERT CLEVER POST NAME HERE] | July 28, 2007 4:36 PM
John D, you are as clueless as a conservative can be.
George Bush is wrecking this country & what it stands for under the guise of "war on terrorism".
Pray he does no more irreparable harm to what I hope will still be a great country before he leaves, or is lead out of office.
Posted by: RomanB | July 28, 2007 4:42 PM
Until this administration PROVES that it can abide by the laws that they a currently violating, why would ANYONE want to give them more power?
Posted by: dogjudge | July 28, 2007 5:01 PM
Sadly today,Our Congress is controlled by the democrats,so anything to Keep America Safe is put on the back burner...
The democrats are in bed with the A.C.L.U. which are pro-abortion and anti-death penalty...Hey,isn't abortion like a death penalty?
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | July 28, 2007 7:58 PM
I do not like this because it is an invasion of privacy.
Posted by: Elizabeth Lord | July 28, 2007 10:58 PM
Terrorism is just a fear tool. You are more likely to die in a car crash then get kill by a Terrorist. By today's standard, anyone can be labeled as a Terrorist. The definition of a Terrorist is so loose. . .
History has shown that Terrorism has little effect in toppling a government. It's usually the government that topples itself. Look at Rome? They broke their piggy bank, started persecuting their own people. And, open their gates to invasion.
I mean, aren't we heading down the same path? When we start accusing people of being Terrorist? Very simliar to me. Why bother study History? It's just going to happen again.
Sure, I'm not saying Terrorist doesn't need to be dealt with but why burn a house down to get rid of a flee? How about a flee trap? Doesn't that work better?
Our streets are full of crime and aren't even safe to walk at night. And, we fear Terrorism? Give me a break!
Posted by: Lou | July 28, 2007 11:50 PM
Doug, take a chill pill. No one is trampling on the Constitution.
Posted by: John D | July 28, 2007 2:31 PM
John D, your a lost cause. You have very little understanding of how important it is to keep checks and balances. Unless of course you want a unicameral government.
The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.
John Adams
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | July 28, 2007 11:57 PM
Isn't this the Watergate controversy all over again. The only difference is the administration has the audacity to want to legalize it. It took the Soviets 60+ years to see how well the government looks out for them
Posted by: Richard Desmond | July 29, 2007 12:04 AM
A new law that will legalize all past and future FISA violations would be perfect, wouldn't it? Heck, why not throw in amnesty for Gonzales' perjury and a couple hundred million for some RNC front company like MZM for future use as bribes...er...campaign contributions?
Posted by: Tom O | July 29, 2007 2:27 AM
John D.,
Instead of my ingesting a chill pill, I suggest you place country before party.
In your world, is Watergate still just a third rate burglary?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 29, 2007 9:15 AM
Oh Doug, I always put country before party. These surveillance techniques are putting the country first. While there can be dangers in this, no doubt, I also do not want to see thousands of Americans die at the hands of a bunch of Islamic kooks. Just because nearly six years has passed since anything major in this country, they have been stopped from conducting other incidents because of surveillance -- by the U.S. government and by aware regular folks.
Posted by: John D | July 29, 2007 11:25 AM
John D.,
You forgot the part where you regularily, at length, an naseum, typically suggest we Democrats are unpatriotic, pro-terrorist cut-and-runners.
Will the real John D., please stand up?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 29, 2007 1:24 PM
Doug, I don't say you Democrats are unpatriotic and pro-terrorist cut and runners. I say the Loony Left is that way, which probably makes up about half the Democratic party today. You see, folks like Joe Lieberman aren't unpatriotic or cut and runners; or even Richie Daley, Patrick Quinn, Lee Hamilton, Pat Caddell, are all good Democrats. I may not agree with them on most issues, but their patriotism is sound.
Folks like Harry Reid (we've lost and there is no way to win), Patrick "Leaky" Leahy, Michael Moore, Sean Penn, Al Franken, etc. are unpatriotic and cut and runners.
By the way, Doug, sorry to hear your nephew is having a hard time. One thing, though, when I inquired about his thoughts on the war, it's not that he should be debated, but to ask of his experiences and thoughts on the situation. I've done it with guy who have been there. Heard a variety of feedback from them, good (most) and bad ( a couple). Never debated their thoughts with any of them.
Posted by: John D | July 29, 2007 7:00 PM
Yes, next in line for surveillance by Big Brother GW and Dick will be the Swamp. These calls for impeachment here will put many of us under the hammer, if not already. Maybe we can walk the yard with the AG!
Posted by: Rick/Sneads Ferry, NC | July 29, 2007 8:27 PM
I would guess that the new authority will be used immediately to focus on those traitors that call for withdrawing our troops from Iraq.
We will now be able to get better information about those opponents of the administration that make their way on to our "enemies list".
We can keep track of all anti-war groups and have their membership watched and listened to.
Thanks, c perry.
Anyone who thinks it is beyond their capacity to do these things needs to read up on McCarthyism. They ruined many Americans' lives, carrers and families if they thought there was a known association with "communists". Back to the Dark Ages, I guess.
Posted by: Giraffe | July 30, 2007 3:27 AM
If they can listen in on us, how about we listen into the oval office? No, You go explain and proof to a judge why a citizen should be supervised!!!
Posted by: Mike | August 1, 2007 8:48 PM