Did we miss something? Who said such?
This was in the news yesterday. It's old news already.
And you're a national security expert to make such an assessment? Your real life job is what exactly?

And I keep on asking to clearly lay out what was illegal here? Are there any facts on this anywhere?

Inter Arma Silent Leges. Or something like that.

Mike, you refer to the NSA's charter. I thought that for the NSA had to get a FISA warrant to monitor an American? Could you clarify please?

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if what Bush did was illegal. And Congress DID NOT know. Him briefing the Congressional leaders means a handful of people knew. I understand that if he actually took it to Congress, it wouldn't be secret anymore. IMO, Bush is on very thin ice. But he's not going to get in trouble for it because it's war time. And if it really did prevent attacks I think it was worth it. Illegal, but worth it. Kind of like the suspension of Habeas Corpus during the Civil War. Or the Emancipation Proclamation, arguably.

I believe in his speech he said he did it about 30 times. I don't see why it couldn't have gone through FISA, as FISA requests are rarely denied.

PD

I can think of few much different scenarios which can be totally taken the wrong way.

Like mentioning your freind Jamey has started taking flight school classes and you are thinking of giving it a try yourself. Good luck with the rest.

I'm sure finding out what's it like to live with KGB-type organization next to you is not going to be comforting. And knowing how they get the information, with incompetent personnel that at times tortures you, well... Id' be hoping never to get in the path of those people, who consider everyone on this war on terror to be void of any human rights. So if you are a suspect - good luck. Checks and Balances... Man this has become such a cliche.

"Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges"

Thanks, TLAM. :)

Hot off the wireless!

Text of Bush's radio address.

Yeah i read the article. So what? nobody ever denied surveillance occured but whether said surveillance was omg "illegal".

From your BBC article. Note the bolded part:

In spite of the irepeated ncorrect spelling of "program" please note that not only was Congress involved in the process from the start, they've had 30 opportunities to put a stop to it.

So again i ask: Why is this suddenly a big deal?

I'll bet the only ones who bother to click that link are those who haven't made up their minds that Bush is teh Hitler.

Periscope Depth,
First, you'll have to review the federal register to define what "monitoring" is (in the legal sense).
Say, when is the media going to divulge when such activity (gasp) was taking place during the Clinton era?!?

Yours, Mike

Supposedly all the intercepts were done on the receiving end of the comms...no big deal.

Tut tut, thats a false argument, and your clever enough to know. :|\

Briefing Congressional leaders does not mean he was acting with the authority of the legislative behind him.

PD

:) August, I agree with you on that statement. Although maybe Bush is actually the Anti-christ and not Adolf Hitler the 2nd.

For the record, I don't hate Bush and I think these intercepts were the right thing to do if they saved lives.

I'm just debating whether or not they were legal.

PD

Well said :up: