The FISA-NSA row exploded last December when it was learned NSA leads on possible terrorists in this country, leads detected when legitimately monitoring the communications of terrorists overseas, were passed to the FBI, who then took them to FISA under a new process enacted after 9-11. Prior to 9-11 I am convinced the NSA would simply withhold any and all leads here in the US it detected from monitoring these overseas terrorists from a historically entrenched, overabundance of caution to avoid any possibly misuse of the intelligence surveillance function. Recall that FISA was enacted in the panic that resulted from Nixon’s alleged monitoring of his political enemies. So short sighted people ran around and closed up anyu possible avenue, even if it meant ignoring terrorists in our midst.

Well, now there is a ‘compromise’ coming out which actually fixes FISA and puts it back in its proper place. The FIS Court will consult on all the checks and processes the Bush administration has put in place to make sure the leads are legitimate and need to be pursued by local law enforcement. And Congress get’s to say they made this happen (though the FIS Court lead judge help establish the first processes for handling these leads).

The plan, brokered over the last three weeks in negotiations between Senator Arlen Specter and senior White House officials, including President Bush himself, would apparently leave the secretive intelligence court free to consider the case in closed proceedings, without the kind of briefs and oral arguments that are usually part of federal court consideration of constitutional issues. The court’s ruling in the matter could also remain secret.

The court would be able to determine whether the program is “reasonably designed” to focus on the communications of actual terrorism suspects and people in the United States who communicate with them. That determination is now left entirely in the hands of the security agency under an internal checklist.

Emphasis mine. It is very imnportant in large complex organizations which contain many, many programs and projects to differentiate a primary role from an interface. The Times has been so closed down to any contrary information to their original, flawed reporting that they have never been able to understand what they are reporting on. There are two ‘programs’ if you will working in two worlds. The first is the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program which has been a job of NSA for decades. It is part a specific focus of the general role of NSA to monitor our enemies to protect ourselves.

The second “program” is that of the FBI-FISA tandem to monitor terrorists activities here in the US. The NY Times was given the impression that the NSA was doing something new and spying on Americans. That ruse worked because the NY Times is so ignorant of what the NSA does and how it relates to things like the FBI that they bought the conspiracy theory hook, line and sinker. Of course I may be wrong, they could be working to undermine this country by deliberately reporting false information.

Anyway, the process this agreement covers is the handover of leads, to make sure the leads were part of the general NSA mission and that proper evidence handling procedures were followed (i.e., sign offs so that a rogue analyst can’t set up his ex-wife around alimony check time). The courts cannot and would not redirect the NSA. All they can do is refuse to accept evidence of possible pending death and destruction here in the US.

Which is why the NY Times story was a propaganda piece in the first place. The story carried weight because a FISA judge supposedly resigned because NSA was ‘going around’ FISA. Well, the judge resigned because FISA was accepting NSA leads about possible terrorists in our midst. The crime here was everyone who resisted acting on NSA leads because of some paranoia about possible misuses. That was the crime. Leaving American families exposed to terrorist attacks because someone might someday set up someone they had it in for.

The NY Times finally comes clean and admits what this program is for, in what must be a huge chunk of Crow:

The proposed legislation represents a middle-ground approach among the myriad proposals in Congress for dealing with the wiretapping controversy, which has allowed the security agency to eavesdrop on the international phone calls and e-mail of thousands of people in the United States with ties to terrorism suspects.

Yeah, we wouldn’t want the NSA to eavesdrop on communications with overseas terrorists. The NY Times is pretty dense here. You monitor all communications with your target and then workout the details about who was on the other line of the conversation. You find the contact was in the US you pass it on to the FBI to deal with. The NSA will catch as much as they can when monitoring a terrorist overseas. It would be criminally negligent for them not to. But note that the NSA has no law enforcement abilities whatsoever. They cannot bring a criminal complaint. They cannot even go to FISA, only the DoJ can submit requests to FISA. So what is it the NY Times thinks the NSA could do? Are they fantasizing about Nixon again? Maybe the should get their heads out of the 70’s and face the challenges on this century.