[Phoneemer]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0207-03.htm

Carter, isn't he the one that let our citizens launguish as hostages in Iran for well over a year? That is the way he WANTS to see our citizens treated. He'd probably also say the the beheadings were OK, too. That's it Peanut Brain, stand with the terrorists. Pathetic.

[NaMbessemab]

Not sure how you connected condemning eavesdropping with public beheadings...

[PoideAdelereX]

Carter tiptoed around the Iranian hostage situation in the late seventies. He let our citizens just sit over there as captives. He has no guts and no right to say anything about terrorists as badly as he capitulated.

[Dynasty]

Carter tiptoed around the Iranian hostage situation in the late seventies. He let our citizens just sit over there as captives. He has no guts and no right to say anything about terrorists as badly as he capitulated.

You sound like the blathering fool in your avatar, Spad.

Just thought I should let you know.

[lizadax]

In fairness to Carter, he did authorize military forces to attempt a rescue, but they failed.

[Marat]

Of course, Carter signed an executive order authorizing searches without warrants, so how does he explain that?

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm


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.

[Dreqsqse]

That is the way he WANTS to see our citizens treated. He'd probably also say the the beheadings were OK, too.

Isn't that a bit of stretch?

[KukkoDrukko]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0207-03.htm

Carter, isn't he the one that let our citizens launguish as hostages in Iran for well over a year? That is the way he WANTS to see our citizens treated. He'd probably also say the the beheadings were OK, too. That's it Peanut Brain, stand with the terrorists. Pathetic.

Are you the one who said "Everyone in the world is wrong but you and me. (and I'm not at all sure about thee)???

I don't think your posted comment was appropriate. OR accurate.

[QqJamxqP]

Of course, Carter signed an executive order authorizing searches without warrants, so how does he explain that?

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm

Was that before or after the present law was passed/altered? and were the circumstances the same???? It seems a leader a long time ago approved of the crucifiction of Christ. Tell me, is crucifiction still allowed by law???

[Ganoshenko]

Was that before or after the present law was passed/altered? and were the circumstances the same???? It seems a leader a long time ago approved of the crucifiction of Christ. Tell me, is crucifiction still allowed by law???

Seeing as how his order references FISA, I assume after.

[G8whlTAe]

I think that if anyone has the right - and the knowledge - to speak out on the current domestic spy program, it's Carter. After all, he signed FISA into law in 1978.

I did some browsing, and found the following that you may find interesting. The first is a statement by Carter urging the House to pass FISA, and the second is part of Carter's signing statement when he signed FISA into law.

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Legislation - Statement Urging Passage of the Legislation by the House of Representatives, September 6, 1978

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote this week on the foreign intelligence surveillance act, one of the most significant legislative initiatives involving our intelligence agencies in the last three decades.

This act will establish the Nation’s first legislative controls over foreign intelligence surveillance conducted by the United States government. Most importantly, those controls will be established so as to protect both the strength of our Nation’s intelligence agencies and the privacy rights of our citizens.

American citizens will be assured that the intelligence agencies so vital to protecting our security will be able to perform their tasks fully and effectively. The bill also assures intelligence officers who serve our country that their proper activities in this field will be authorized by statute.

By providing clear statutory standards, this legislation will help strengthen the ability of our intelligence agencies to deal with foreign espionage and international terrorism. The strong support of this legislation by every intelligence agency clearly reflects this fact.

The passage of this legislation is also a major step toward eliminating the potential for abuse of electronic surveillance by the Federal Government. Americans will now be afforded the safeguards of a judicial warrant procedure for any electronic surveillance which might affect their rights.

This legislation has been carefully developed over several years, by executive and congressional leaders of both parties. The kind of bipartisan cooperation needed to develop legislation in the intelligence area, which is so important to the defense of our Nation, was demonstrated earlier this year by the overwhelming Senate vote, 95-1, passing the bill.

I urge the Members of the House to vote for passage of this legislation, so that we can promptly begin to implement this well-balance, long-overdue initiative. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 - Statement on Signing S.1566 Into Law, October 25, 1978

This bill requires, for the first time, a prior judicial warrant for all electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purposes in the United States in which communications of U.S. persons might be intercepted. It clarifies the Executive’s authority to gather foreign intelligence by electronic surveillance in the United States. It will remove any doubt about the legality of those surveillances which are conducted to protect our country against espionage and international terrorism. It will assure FBI field agents and others involved in intelligence collection that their acts are authorized by statute and, if a U.S. person’s communications are concerned, by a court order. And it will protect the privacy of the American people.

In short, the act helps to solidify the relationship of trust between the American people and their Government. It provides a basis for the trust of the American people in the fact that the activities of their intelligence agencies are both effective and legal. It provides enough secrecy to ensure that intelligence relating to national security can be securely acquired, while permitting review by the courts and Congress to safeguard the rights of Americans and others. Source

Yeah, I'd like to see Carter testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee ... wouldn't you?

[occurrini]

Yeah, I'd like to see Carter testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee ... wouldn't you?

Not really - his only information is over 20 years old, and not likely to be probative with regard to the programs in question today.

Matt

[Txaizdxx]

Not really - his only information is over 20 years old, and not likely to be probative with regard to the programs in question today.

That's a good one. At what point is information too old to be valuable? For example, the Constitution is getting along in years ...

Carter is highly qualified to speak to the intent of FISA. I found his words - especially with regard to "review by the courts and Congress" - striking when compared to the reality of today, when Bush has authorized secret electronic surveillance of U.S. persons without getting a warrant and without any judicial or Congressional oversight ... exactly what FISA was designed to prevent!

I found Carter's statements to be highly revealing, informative, and applicable to today's discussions on Bush's domestic spy program.

[jurnalkduo]

You're right. I always admired the way reagan bargained with terrorists in the guns for hostages deal. If only all of us could so easily sacrifice our supposed core beliefs for expediency.

[BloofPailafum]

That's a good one. At what point is information too old to be valuable? For example, the Constitution is getting along in years ...

Carter is highly qualified to speak to the intent of FISA. I found his words - especially with regard to "review by the courts and Congress" - striking when compared to the reality of today, when Bush has authorized secret electronic surveillance of U.S. persons without getting a warrant and without any judicial or Congressional oversight ... exactly what FISA was designed to prevent!

I found Carter's statements to be highly revealing, informative, and applicable to today's discussions on Bush's domestic spy program.

Legislative intent comes from the legislators that draft a law, not the guy who signs it.

Matt

[KellyMP]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0207-03.htm

Carter, isn't he the one that let our citizens launguish as hostages in Iran for well over a year? That is the way he WANTS to see our citizens treated. He'd probably also say the the beheadings were OK, too. That's it Peanut Brain, stand with the terrorists. Pathetic.

No, no, no, he’s the one who slashed the military, then attempted a complex special forces operation in bad weather, putting Marine pilots in Navy helicopters that they had never flown before that caused a crash while trying to refuel and made our Armed Forces a laughing stock.

[aceriscoolon]

That's a good one. At what point is information too old to be valuable? For example, the Constitution is getting along in years ...

Carter is highly qualified to speak to the intent of FISA. I found his words - especially with regard to "review by the courts and Congress" - striking when compared to the reality of today, when Bush has authorized secret electronic surveillance of U.S. persons without getting a warrant and without any judicial or Congressional oversight ... exactly what FISA was designed to prevent!

I found Carter's statements to be highly revealing, informative, and applicable to today's discussions on Bush's domestic spy program.

I too found it interesting to read when President Carter wrote way back when. But one thing I found absent was any statement to the effect that the Executive branch did not have the power before enactment of the statute. Instead, he twice mentioned the desirability of intelligence agents knowing that their work was authorized not only by the Executive but also by a statute passed by Congress, thereby giving them greater confidence what they were doing was legal.

[blogforloversxx]

...Tell me, is crucifiction still allowed by law???

The way Dems treat Bush, I would have to think so.

[abossakon]

No, no, no, he’s the one who slashed the military, then attempted a complex special forces operation in bad weather, putting Marine pilots in Navy helicopters that they had never flown before that caused a crash while trying to refuel and made our Armed Forces a laughing stock.

I never realized he was so hands on, actually assigning specific pilots to specific aircraft................

[lE3l6Lgn]

Sure he did, just like you say Bush does.