Monday, January 30, 2006
Why can't the Times understand the law?
Here's a graf from Philip Bobbitt's essay in the New York Times, "Why We Listen."
LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/30/opinion/30bobbitt.html?ex=1296277200&en=26b1bef3fcbf1310&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Ok, this guy's a professor at the University of Texas Law School. What am I missing, because this guy's characterization of "U.S. persons" seems flatly false.
For one thing, agents of foreign powers and members of violent sects not substantially composed of U.S. persons do not qualify as "U.S. persons."
Secondly, even absent that association (proven beyond doubt by the events of 9/11), their mere presence does not establish them as "U.S. persons" for the purposes of the FISA law. You have to be a citizen or permanent resident.
Student visas and tourist visas and temporary work permits don't count.
Is it just me, or has the New York Times just once again demonstrated its fundamental unseriousness on this issue?
Splash, out
Jason
Nor was the fact that we knew the identities of two of the terrorists sufficient to thwart the attack the next day. But had we at the time cross-referenced credit card accounts, frequent-flyer programs and a cellphone number shared by those two men, data mining might easily have picked up on the 17 other men linked to them and flying on the same day at the same time on four flights. Such intelligence collection would not have been based on probable cause, and yet the presence of the hijackers in the country would have qualified them as "U.S. persons."
LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/30/opinion/30bobbitt.html?ex=1296277200&en=26b1bef3fcbf1310&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Ok, this guy's a professor at the University of Texas Law School. What am I missing, because this guy's characterization of "U.S. persons" seems flatly false.
For one thing, agents of foreign powers and members of violent sects not substantially composed of U.S. persons do not qualify as "U.S. persons."
Secondly, even absent that association (proven beyond doubt by the events of 9/11), their mere presence does not establish them as "U.S. persons" for the purposes of the FISA law. You have to be a citizen or permanent resident.
Student visas and tourist visas and temporary work permits don't count.
Is it just me, or has the New York Times just once again demonstrated its fundamental unseriousness on this issue?
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
