Domestic Spying Program to Get Judicial Oversight

Alchemist253 writes "The U.S. Justice Department has consented to court oversight (albeit via a secret court) of the controversial domestic wiretapping program (the "Terrorist Surveillance Program") previously discussed at length on Slashdot. From the article, "[oversight] authority has been given to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and [it] already has approved one request for monitoring the communications of a person believed to be linked to al Qaeda or an associated terror group.""

Re:Not good enough

[Jherek Carnelian]

2. During Attorney General Gonzales' previous congressional testimony on this topic, he was very careful and lawerly in asserting that his statements only applied to the program under discussion, that is the "Terrorist Surveillance Program". The clear implication is that there are other programs besides TSP which have not seen the light of day.

Yes, AT&T is still working on their, "Terrorist Friends and Family Surveillance Program." Spy on all the friends and family of a suspected terrorist that you want to for just one, low-cost, secret warrant!

this is pre-911 thinking

[Adult film producer]

and it's gonna get us killed, whether you like it or not. We are more vulnerable now that investigators have to wade through the legal system. If you've seen the latest episode of 24, you'll know what I'm talking about, a nuclear attack on an american city. With the appropriate monitoring systems in place, that would have never happened on the show but they were hamstrung like the FBI and NSA is today. Blame the leftists and the god damn liberals for the terror that will befall us :(

Re:So it was 100% legal before ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Avoid testing the legality of the program? Doesn't Congress have the power to investigate any illegal activities such as warrantless wiretapping, even if they occurred in the past? If the investigations reveal something, don't they have the power to impeach and convict?

Oh yeah, nevermind. The Democrats are afraid of looking partisan. They saw the voter backlash against the Republicans for impeaching Clinton over a blowjob, and said "Oh no! Now we can't impeach anyone for fear of looking partisan, even if they eat a baby on live television! We're helpless!"

What do you think? What happens if Bush eats a baby on live TV? My predictions:

1. FOX News runs a lively debate on Hannity and Colmes. Hannity claims we should all be eating babies. Colmes suggests that eating babies is generally wrong, but concedes that this one baby probably deserved it.
   
2. 25% of Americans believe that baby planned 9/11.
   
3. Joe Lieberman and John McCain demand to know why that baby was not eaten earlier.
   
4. Hillary Clinton says it's not productive to rehash whether or not it was right to eat the baby, we should just spend our efforts finding out if there's dessert.
   

...anything else?

Re:So it was 100% legal before ...

[dangitman]

Written constitutions Just Don't Work.

That's why I prefer my constitutions on audio cassette. Preferably narrated by James Earl Jones or Sir David Attenborough.

Re:So it was 100% legal before ...

[crotherm]

Those who fear a totalitarian government would to well to reconsider their approval of this perspective. What the nine giveth, the nine can take away.

Sheesh, they gave us Bush. PLEASE make them take him away!!!!