You're right guys, we should just 'trust them', no reason (or precedence) to worry... http://www.boston.com/news/nation/a...illance?mode=PF Data on FBI cite abuses in secret surveillance By Dan Eggen, Washington Post | October 24, 2005 WASHINGTON -- The FBI has conducted clandestine surveillance on some US residents for as long as 18 months at a time without proper paperwork or oversight, according to classified documents scheduled to be released today. Records turned over as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit also indicated that the FBI has investigated hundreds of potential violations related to its secret surveillance operations, which have been stepped up dramatically after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, but which are largely hidden from public view. In one case, FBI agents kept an unidentified target under surveillance for at least five years, including more than 15 months without notifying Justice Department lawyers after the subject had moved from New York to Detroit. An FBI investigation found that the delay was a violation of Justice Department and prevented the department ''from exercising its responsibility for oversight and approval of a foreign counterintelligence investigation of a US person." In other cases, agents obtained e-mail messages after a warrant expired, seized bank records without authority, and conducted an improper ''unconsented physical search," according to the documents. Although heavily censored, the documents provide a glimpse into domestic spying, which is governed by a secret court and overseen by a presidential board that does not publicize its deliberations. The records also emerge as the House and Senate battle over whether to put new restrictions on the controversial USA Patriot Act, which made it easier for the government to conduct searches and surveillance but has come under attack from civil liberties groups. The records were provided to the Washington Post by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group that has sued the Justice Department for records relating to the Patriot Act. David Sobel, the advocacy group's general counsel, said that the documents raised questions about the extent of possible misconduct in counterintelligence investigations, and that they underscore the need for greater congressional oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States. ''We're seeing what might be the tip of the iceberg at the FBI and across the intelligence community," Sobel said. FBI officials disagreed, saying that none of the cases have involved major violations, and that most amount to administrative errors. The officials also said any information obtained from improper searches or eavesdropping is eventually destroyed. ''Every investigator wants to make sure that their investigation is handled appropriately, because they're not going to be allowed to keep information that they didn't have the proper authority to obtain," said one senior FBI official, who declined to be identified by name because of the ongoing litigation. ''But that is a relatively uncommon occurrence."
Now granted that this article does not state specifically what they were observing (drug deals, terrorists, ect ...), if they did find someone who were terrorist or terrorist connections, wouldn't that be considered treason to the country and thus they would be tried under a military court? If so, wouldn't the privacy act no longer apply to them? Im sure many of us would over look the legal means of gathering evidence if the person was guilty of a very serious crime (such as terrorist), but where do we draw the line?
We draw the line at the laws in place and our constitution. If it violates that then we don't allow it.
So you're telling me that you would allow for an event such as the massive catastrophy at the WTC for the sake of a couple illegal wiretaps?
Yes, that is our system. The treatment of foreign nationals should be conducted under the Geneva Convention. In my opinion, of course. Now, if you caught someone in the New York subways with a bomb strapped to them, and had reason to think they were part of a group, with time of paramount importance, then leeway is justified. Again, imo. What we are doing under the Bush Administration is a wholesale rape of the international conventions regarding the conduct of war. Most of those captured during the Afghan War certainly fit that description, as distasteful as that may be to some here. Wiretaps? Get approval through the judicial process. If I recall correctly, the Patriot Act sped that process up a great deal and lowered the "means test" for getting permission... more than some of us would like. If we lower our standards regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, and what constitutes them, we open up our military to be treated the same way. And if we toss our constitution aside to fight terrorism, then the terrorists have won much of what they seek, the destruction of our political system. None of this is easy. Keep D&D Civil.
I wouldn't allow anything. Wiretaps aren't the only way to find about terrorism. Human intel is probably the best method. I would follow the law, and uphold the constitution, though.
