more on Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts >:o >:o]

["David Farber" <dave () farber net>]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts >:o
> :o
From:    "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>
Date:    Sat, December 17, 2005 11:45 am
To:      dave () farber net
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are a lot of things, of course, that bother me about this
incident.  I think what bothers me most, about this and about many  parts
of the Patriot Act, is the sense that the executive branch is  trying to
avoid any oversight or public comment whatsoever.  What they  want, by
definition, is right and must be done.

Please note that although I'm currently speaking about the Bush
administration, prior administrations are not without fault.  The  Patriot
Act was not created de novo on 9/12; rather, most of its
provisions came from a long wish list that the Justice Department, the 
FBI, and more had been compiling for a long time.  Most of the
controversial provisions do not grant law enforcement new powers, though; 
rather, they grant law enforcement new powers *without a warrant*.  Why 
is asking a judge an undue burden?

Yesterday's NY Times gave part of the administration's answer: sometimes, 
it's just too urgent a situation.  Guess what?  The law makes
provisions for such situations.  Part of FISA, 50 USC 1805(f) permits 
emergency wiretaps as long as a judge is notified and a court order 
requested within 72 hours.  A similar provision exists in the regular 
wiretap law.  But we can't see the administration's analysis; it's 
classified.  A legal analysis, classified?  I suppose I shouldn't be 
surprised, given that we've heard claims that secret laws and
regulations are permissible.

Probably, the best summary is the news analysis in today's Times, which 
starts "A single, fiercely debated legal principle lies behind nearly
every major initiative in the Bush administration's war on terror,
scholars say: the sweeping assertion of the powers of the presidency."

An administration that tries to appoint judges who adhere to the
original intent of the framers of the Constitution should pay more 
attention to history.  In particular, it's instructive to read
British history from, say, 1215 -- the year of the Magna Carta -- until 
the drafting of the Bill of Rights.  The

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/