YemiOULDC0AhNtrXoL7N8zWqhlAzGghw9zTYMXyFBXC18paSvy jGXCt1q6Y8cBXLdPnVH6YPKsVdxIBmkzM2gd4ZdsTDFQ7GqPYz bbs

done so far is to the
* credibility of those who opposed the measure.

There is no constitutional basis for this
massive loss of Fourth Amendment rights.

It sounds like some wild conspiracy theory, doesn't it?

Yet it exists.




************************************************** ****************************

Secret Court
------ -----


: The Washington Post Magazine, June 23 1996
: Government surveillance, terrorism and the U.S. Constitution:
: The story of a Washington courtroom no tourist can visit.
: By Jim McGee and Brian Duffy [snipped article excerpts shown here]
: Adapted from the book "Main Justice", 1996, ISBN 0-684-81135-9.
:
* Last year, a secret court in the Justice Department authorized a record
* 697 'national security' wiretaps on American soil, outside normal
* constitutional procedures.
*
* The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, is a 1978 law that permits
* secret buggings and wiretaps of individuals suspected of being agents
* of a hostile foreign government or international terrorist organization
* EVEN WHEN THE TARGET IS NOT SUSPECTED OF COMMITTING ANY CRIME.
*
* The FISA court operates outside the normal constitutional standards for
* searches and seizures. Non-government personnel are not allowed.
* The courts files cannot be publicly reviewed.
*
* The average U.S. citizen might reasonably assume use of this court
* is at the least: unusual.
*
* It is not. In fact, in the United States today it is increasingly
* common. In 1994, federal courts authorized more wiretaps for
* intelligence-gathering and national security purposes than they
* did to investigate