-Caveat Lector- from: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ <A HREF="http://www.aci.net/kalliste/">The Home Page of J. Orlin Grabbe</A> ----- Sixth Floor, DOJ Spy Probe Puts Spotlight on Secret Court Reno didn't present Wen Ho Lee case to judges. WASHINGTON -- Encased in vaultlike security and sheltered by extraordinary secrecy, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the most clandestine pocket of the U.S. legal system, is receiving a rare dose of public attention amid the controversy about whether Atty. Gen. Janet Reno did enough to pursue alleged Chinese espionage. The top-secret tribunal, where FBI agents seek permission to use wiretaps in national security cases, operates on the sixth floor of Justice Department headquarters behind a series of security doors reminiscent of the "Get Smart" television show's introductory scenes. Inside, the legal system's ordinary rules evaporate in the name of national security: There are no defense lawyers, and government lawyers have lost only once. Lawmakers have attacked Reno in recent days for her refusal to go into the windowless, surveillance-proof courtroom in 1997, as the FBI wanted her to, and seek a wiretap on Wen Ho Lee, a former scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory suspected of passing secrets to China. Reno has fiercely defended her decision not to seek the wiretap. But the political back-and-forth does not reflect the complexity of the system by which the FBI and other agencies get permission to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens in the name of national security. Unlike ordinary wiretap authority, this system relies less on the familiar tenets of law and order than on a nation's fundamental right to protect i ordinary criminal court. Since its creation two decades ago, the court has approved 11,210 of the 11,211 national security wiretaps requested by the Justice Department -- and rejected just one. The tongue-lashing Reno is enduring for not seeking a wiretap on Lee is in some ways ironic, since by far the most common criticism of the system is that it grants wiretapping authority too freely. Some fear that lawmakers will react to the current scandal by making it even easier for FBI agents to get national security wiretaps. "The real danger in this Lee situation," said Kenneth Bass, former counsel for intelligence policy at the Justice Department, "is that Congress will go the other direction and inhibit the Justice Department from playing its role of being a serious, knowledgeable, fully informed hurdle that has to be overcome by zealous agencies." The seven-judge FISA court -- named for the law that created it, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- was established in 1978 as a reaction to the "black-bag jobs" of the Watergate era and the FBI's COINTELPRO investigations of civil-rights activists and others. In the wake of these abuses, Congress decided that the FBI and National Security Agency would no longer have unfettered freedom to spy on U.S. citizens, resident aliens, foreign embassies and others in the name of national security. Now, one of the FISA judges flies to Washington every two weeks to sit in the vaultlike courtroom and hear Justice Department lawyers make their case for the wiretaps. Some say these jurists are so dazzled by the glamor of spy wiretaps that they can't say no. "It's like receiving a decoder ring in the mail," said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who has challenged the FISA system in court. "Suddenly these judges find themselves players in a high-stakes national security game. That has an insidious effect, I think, and there is a dangerous identification of the judges with the agencies that they must review." Royce Lamberth, a federal judge in Washington who serves as the FISA court's current chief judge, was traveling and could not be reached for comment. Harold A. Baker, a judge from Urbana, Ill., who also sits on the FISA court, did not return a call. The system's defenders say it works just fine. A senior Justice Department official insisted the process is not all that different from getting a criminal wiretap. The reason the FISA court grants so many of the wiretap requests, the official added, is that by the time they reach the court they have been exhaustively reviewed. "It's been scrubbed by enough people, it's been reviewed at such a senior level and so many people have had to verify the accuracy of it -- it shouldn't be a surprise that we have made the best case we can make and that it meets the standards in the statute," the official said. When the FBI wants to wiretap someone, it sends over a two- or three-page document known as a letterhead memorandum, signed by the assistant FBI director for national security. A special office at the Justice Department -- the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, or OIPR -- decides whether to recommend to Reno that she seek the wiretap. In the Lee case, the office recommended that Reno not do so, and she didn't. Reno was probably not even informed of the request; that is typical when OIPR recommends against a wiretap. Still, Reno faced fierce recriminations earlier this week for the department's inaction. "I believe the attorney general ought to resign and she ought to take her top lieutenants with her," said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Sen. Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.), usually a strong administration supporter, was almost equally harsh. "I think it's time for President Clinton to have a conversation with the attorney general about her ability to perform her duties and whether or not it is in the national interest for her to continue," he said. Reno responded to the criticism, saying the FBI did not make a sufficient legal case for a wiretap. There is often tension between the FBI, pushing for a wiretap in an urgent spy case, and OIPR, insisting on strong evidence before passing on the request. For a tap to be approved by the Justice Department and the court, "probable cause" must exist that the potential surveillance target is engaged in clandestine, possibly illegal intelligence-gathering for a foreign power. "I have the awesome responsibility to determine whether to authorize government intrusion into the lives of American citizens," Reno said. "But the Justice Department has not -- nor will it -- authorize such intrusions when, as in this case, the standards of the Constitution and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act have not been met." Lee has strongly asserted his innocence through his lawyer. Some activists applauded the department's decision not to eavesdrop on Lee. "This case gives me confidence that the process is not a rubber stamp and that you really do need probable cause to get one of these applications approved," said Steven Aftergood, director of the government secrecy project at the Federation of American Scientists. "I find cause for celebration where congressional leaders find cause to call for the attorney general's resignation." The Justice Department's critics say Reno was obligated to take the Lee case to the FISA court and let the judges sort out the legitimacy of the wiretap, which is their job. "The Lee case was a terrible mistake, both by OIPR and by the FBI in not following up after it was turned down," said Stewart Baker, former chief counsel at the National Security Agency, which also conducts counterintelligence. "We may have all paid a very high price for OIPR's vigilance in protecting the rights of suspected spies." Whether the wiretap decision was the right one, broader questions remain about the handling of the Lee espionage investigation by the FBI and the Justice Department. Reno acknowledged as much by recently naming a task force, headed by a federal prosecutor from Virginia, to review the department's performance. "The team will review everything and make recommendations," Reno told said. "We'll be looking at anything related to Wen Ho Lee . . . We'll be reviewing process and conduct to determine what the circumstances were and what can be done." Chicago Tribune, May 27, 1999 Der Fuhrer Invades Yugoslavia Majority in Greece Want Clinton Tried for War Crimes Follow the polls A majority of Greeks wants President Clinton to face war crimes charges for his role in the Kosovo conflict, while just 14 per cent want President Slobodan Milosevic tried, an opinion poll showed yesterday. The poll showed 69.7 per cent of Greeks want Mr Clinton tried and 35.2 per cent want the British Prime Minister, Mr Blair, also charged over NATO's campaign of air strikes against Yugoslavia. But only 14 per cent believe Mr Milosevic should face international sanctions for his role in the repression and expulsion of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian population. The poll was carried out by the ICAP Institute, which questioned a representative sample of 1,000 Greeks between April 29th and May 5th. Around 13 per cent also want to see the NATO commander, Gen Wesley Clark, tried for war crimes and 9.6 per cent the NATO Secretary General, Mr Javier Solana. Nearly 85 per cent attributed the NATO operation to a US "show of force" and only 2.5 per cent saw it as a reaction to "ethnic cleansing". The poll published in Greek newspapers yesterday confirmed the overwhelming opposition of Greeks - 99.5 per cent - to the NATO action in Yugoslavia, which began on March 24th. The Greek press gives full coverage to NATO "atrocities" while glossing over the fate of the hundreds of thousands of ethnic Albanian refugees. Greece - a NATO member - enjoys good relations with Serbia and the majority of its people are Eastern Orthodox Christians. Faced with massive opposition at home, the Greek government has called for an end to the air campaign and for priority to be given to a diplomatic push for peace. Greece's ruling Panhellenic Socialist Movement (Pasok) has gained ground on the conservative opposition two weeks before the June European elections, but a large number of Greeks are still undecided, two opinion polls showed. A Metron Analysis poll published in the daily, Ta Nea, yesterday gave Pasok 29.4 per cent support and the opposition New Democracy 31.4 per cent. Some 36 per cent of voters said they had faith in Pasok to manage the economy best, compared to 24.3 per cent who thought New Democracy would do a better job. Another poll, by pollsters Opinion and published in Eleftherotypia, said Pasok had 27.4 per cent support and New Democracy 29.5 per cent, with 11.6 per cent still undecided. The Irish Times, May 27, 1999 India vs. Pakistan Pakistan Says It Downed Two Indian MiGs in Kashmir Two countries follow NATO's fine example SKARDU, Pakistan - In a sharp escalation of military tensions between India and Pakistan, Pakistani armed forces said Thursday that they had shot down two Indian MiG fighter jets that had crossed six to eight kilometers inside the Pakistan-controlled portion of Kashmir, the Himalayan region claimed by both countries. Military authorities in Islamabad said their surface-to-air missiles had shot down two planes during the fourth round of Indian air strikes aimed at dislodging pockets of Muslim guerrilla infiltrators inside India-controlled Kashmir. They said that one pilot had been killed when his plane crashed and that the other had been captured alive and was being held as a prisoner of war. ''This is a threat to peace and regional stability,'' said Mushahid Hussain, minister of information, speaking in Islamabad several hours after the shootdown. ''Kashmir has been the natural flash point'' between India and Pakistan, he said, ''and now it has the potential to become a nuclear flash point as well.'' Mr. Hussain and other Pakistani officials called for the United Nations to intervene in the mounting conflict. India and Pakistan both tested nuclear weapons last May, and Pakistan is set to mark the anniversary of its test with a nationwide celebration Friday. Late Thursday, a Pakistani military helicopter flew a small group of journalists to Skardu, a military base and village deep in the Himalayan foothills of Pakistani Kashmir. On Friday, the group is to be airlifted to 17,000 feet (5,200 meters) in the mountains, where officials said they could view the wreckage of the two MiGs and interview the captured Indian pilot, whom Pakistani officials identified as Flight Lieutenant Nachikeeta. Officials in New Delhi insisted that their MiGs had not crossed into Pakistani airspace intentionally and that only one plane had been hit by hostile fire. They said that one plane had developed engine trouble and that the second had followed it to assist. Indian officials said they had no aggressive intentions against Pakistan and were only seeking to drive out Pakistani guerrillas from the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir. But Pakistani officials said the position of the MiGs when they were shot down proved that India has wider ambitions. They said India might seek to push back Pakistani forces who are defending their side of the Line of Control, a 725-kilometer (425-mile) border between the two portions of Kashmir. ''We are still in a defensive mode, and we do not want the situation to escalate, but there is definitely a fear that this could start snowballing,'' said Brigadier Rashid Qureshi, a spokesman for the Pakistani military. ''When the Indians start overflying and bombing Pakistani territory, we are constrained to take appropriate action.'' Pakistan has accused India of dropping several bombs inside its portion of Kashmir this week, but Indian officials have denied that accusation. India launched the series of air strikes in Kashmir on Wednesday in what Indian officials called a concerted attempt to dislodge 400 to 600 Pakistani and Afghan guerrillas, who they said had taken up positions in high mountain ridges of the Kargil region of the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir. The air raids followed nearly three weeks of intensive action by thousands of Indian ground troops, which failed to drive out the infiltrators and was met by cross-border artillery fire from Pakistan. At least 200 fighters from both sides are said to have been killed in the recent clashes. India has accused Pakistan of directly aiding the guerrillas, who seek to end Indian control of southern Kashmir, and they said Pakistani Army troops had also participated in the infiltration. Islamabad strongly denied the accusation, and officials here said suggested New Delhi was exaggerating the threat from infiltrators as an excuse to attack. International Herald Tribune, May 27, 1999 ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, Omnia Bona Bonis, All My Relations. Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End Kris DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
