| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Clinton: EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949 - Wiretap Certification + |
| 2005-12-21 |
| [Federal Register page and date: 60 FR 8169; February 13, 1995] THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release February 9, 1995 EXECUTIVE ORDER 12949 - - - - - - - FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PHYSICAL SEARCHES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 302 and 303 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("Act") (50 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), as amended by Public Law 103- 359, and in order to provide for the authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes as set forth in the Act, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section. Sec. 2. Pursuant to section 302(b) of the Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court under section 303 of the Act to obtain orders for physical searches for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information. Sec. 3. Pursuant to section 303(a)(7) of the Act, the following officials, each of whom is employed in the area of national security or defense, is designated to make the certifications required by section 303(a)(7) of the Act in support of applications to conduct physical searches: (a) Secretary of State; (b) Secretary of Defense; (c) Director of Central Intelligence; (d) Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (e) Deputy Secretary of State; (f) Deputy Secretary of Defense; and (g) Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. None of the above officials, nor anyone officially acting in that capacity, may exercise the authority to make the above certifications, unless that official has been appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. WILLIAM J. CLINTON THE WHITE HOUSE, February 9, 1995. |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #9 I read an editorial this morning noting the original order was solid gold, but ... W had four years to get a more formal 'approval'.... I suppose he was concerned (certain?) some far-left windbag would blow the whistle on the whole shebang. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-12-21 21:38 |
| #8 It sure looks like Clinton's wiretapping was more intrusive than that of Bush. Clinton's reasons are sorta weak (economic mainly) while Bush's are very strong (imminent national security reasons). By the way, what's the big deal about getting approval from a judge? There are a lot of scummy judges out there. 62 million people voted to give Bush authority to lead the nation. I think that's more significant than one judge. |
| Posted by: Intrinsicpilot 2005-12-21 15:17 |
| #7 Sadly, if you could send a heavenly query to any of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103, Khobar Towers, the Beirut Bombing, or 9/11, I suspect you'd discover not a single one would have objected to anything NSA could have monitored. Why should any of us? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2005-12-21 11:36 |
| #6 First off unless they changed the rules since I retired in 2000, there was absolutely nothing wrong with what the President authorized. Spying on communications outside the U.S. is the primary job of NSA. Second, if there were some legal grayness on this issue I would make it a quick vote in the Senate to eliminate any ambiguity. Although I doubt that the law was that vague and I do believe the President followed procedures. Third, you can’t readily tell if someone is talking about a terrorists act or ordering takeout unless you first listen and then analyze. This does not lend itself to FISA process, because most of these phone calls didn’t last long enough to fill out the paperwork. Finally, whoever leaked this story to the press should be sent to prison for leaking classified information outside official channels. If they thought something was done wrong they should have addressed it to their superiors. This also exposes a subculture in DC that thinks THEY are in charge of the country and not the President. A few key firings would due wonders to remedy this culture. This is not whistle-blowing, this is subversion. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-12-21 11:31 |
| #5 As I said in the oterh thread, this is an "inconvienient truth" for Rocks-For-Brains-Feller. |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-12-21 11:11 |
| #4 I think LA has move back to addicting games and Nickelodean. |
| Posted by: 49 pan 2005-12-21 10:39 |
| #3 Don't like it when you're shown proof of identical "Wrongdoing" by your God Clintoon? Well, Clintoon isn't in office anymore so what he did doesn't count. That's the idea, at least... |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-12-21 10:26 |
| #2 It is simply a question doing as we say not as we do, just like the EO written and signed by Jimmy C |
| Posted by: Cheaderhead 2005-12-21 10:05 |
| #1 "Left Angle" you're awfully quiet. Don't like it when you're shown proof of identical "Wrongdoing" by your God Clintoon? How dare we expose your hypocracy? We dare. Printed proof is a bitch, isn't it? |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2005-12-21 08:33 |