Just to be clear -- it's your belief that the Government, under the new FISA law, can only examine the data relating to international calls in which U.S. citizens participate, but can't listen in on those calls without a warrant?
That's actually your understanding of what this new FISA law allows?
You do realize that you don't have the slightest clue what this law does? Please answer the question above. -- GlennGreenwald

Wiretapping is not data-mining. A tap overseas is not equivalent to a tap in the US. Apparently David Kris, one of your own references, agrees with me...

b. One-End-U.S. Communications. The second group is for “one-end-U.S.” communications, where one party, but not both, is located in the United States. This includes, for example, a telephone call from New York to London. Here, FISA has always been a mixed bag. But as I mentioned in prior posts, Congress in 1978 deliberately allowed NSA to conduct warrantless surveillance of international calls as long as it was not targeting individual Americans located in the United States. Vacuum-cleaner surveillance of communications to or from the United States, which didn’t target anyone in particular, was permitted if NSA took certain operational steps – namely, applying the vacuum cleaner either to a radio communication or to a wire or cable located outside the United States. And this was the rule even if that surveillance acquired calls to, from, or about Americans located in the United States. (emphasis mine)

So the answer to your question is that absolutely yes, Americans can be listened to without a warrant IF they are heard overseas. But not if the tap is in the US. But this is old law not related to the podcast about the ACLU's suit.

That said, IANAL and can certainly entertain the idea that I'm wrong about the datamining and everything else. If you can demonstrate in plain English that I'm wrong I'll be happy to look at it. But considering that wiretapping isn't part of the suit, as amazingly well placed interference tries to obscure, I think you're trying to conflate old law with the new and call everything an "evisceration".

Except that Bushista is allowed to declare ANY U.S. citizen at anytime to no longer be a citizen, without having to tell anyone. -- brightstar65

You are wrong. Habeas Corpus is alive and well for anyone in the US and even prisoners overseas. It's not nice to scare people for no good reason.

Wire taps are not synonymous with data-mining.

Exactly. That's the problem here, misrepresenting data-mining with wiretaps to scare people.

Under the new FISA legislation, the N.S.A., but not the Sierra Club, is allowed to target individual phone conversations.

Thats always been true in some situations, hence the four points about what FISA DOESN'T COVER, REGULATE, APPLY TO, or ANYTHING ELSE.

You are arguing against your own straw man; if you read the many posts here, you'll find not one objection to data-mining among them. -- dr rick

Terrific, send the ACLU an email about pulling the suit.

So how about just those, then -- international calls and "cross-border" emails of yours -- will you record those and forward them all to me? -- GlennGreenwald

Which part of "Anything I want to keep secret, can easily be kept secret." didn't register?

Look Glenn, I'm not trying to be harsh here, but the comments from people who felt physically ill, and contributed their next to last dollar for your cause, got to me. They looked to you as Leader, and from where I sit, you used them. Taking legitimate issues and blowing them all out of proportion to the extent where nightmares ensue, is abuse of position.