Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Senate Gives in on Wiretapping. 16 Dems Go Along
The Senate has surrendered to Mister Bush on domestic spying, yielding ignominiously to the White House’s demands that the unitary executive be given more authority when it seeks to wiretap suspected terrorists without warrants. The vote was 60-28. If passed by the House, the bill would be law for six months. Meanwhile, Congress would use that time to put together a permanent one.
The New York Times notes:
The White House and Congressional Republicans hailed the Senate vote as critical to plugging what they saw as dangerous gaps in the intelligence agencies’ ability to detect terrorist threats. "I can sleep a little safer tonight," Senator Christopher S. Bond, the Missouri Republican who co-sponsored the measure, declared after the Senate vote. The measure approved by the Senate expires in six months and would have to be re-authorized. The White House’s grudging agreement to make it temporary helped to attract the votes of some moderate Democrats who said they thought it was important for Congress to approve some version of the wiretapping bill before its recess. The White House and Republican leaders pressed the point throughout the day that a vote against the measure would put the nation at greater risk of attack.No Republicans voted against the bill. The following Democrats voted for it: Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawai‘i); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).
Senators Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama all opposed the bill, as did 23 other Democrats and Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont. Joe Lieberman voted ...well, you know how he voted.
Read More
For more information:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/4...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The New York Times published this editorial on Friday, Aug. 3.
Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not feel bound by the law or the Constitution when it comes to the war on terror. It cannot even be trusted to properly use the enhanced powers it was legally granted after the attacks.
Yet, once again, President Bush has been trying to stampede Congress into a completely unnecessary expansion of his power to spy on Americans. And, hard as it is to believe, congressional Republicans seem bent on collaborating, while Democrats (who can still be cowed by the White House's with-us-or-against-us baiting) aren't doing enough to stop it.
The fight is over the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires the government to obtain a warrant before eavesdropping on electronic communications that involve someone in the United States. The test is whether there is probable cause to believe that the person being communicated with is an agent of a foreign power or a terrorist.
Disregard for law
Bush decided after 9/11 that he was no longer going to obey that law. He authorized the National Security Agency to intercept international telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans and other residents of this country without a court order. He told the public nothing and Congress next to nothing about what he was doing, until The New York Times disclosed the spying in December 2005.
Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not feel bound by the law or the Constitution when it comes to the war on terror. It cannot even be trusted to properly use the enhanced powers it was legally granted after the attacks.
Yet, once again, President Bush has been trying to stampede Congress into a completely unnecessary expansion of his power to spy on Americans. And, hard as it is to believe, congressional Republicans seem bent on collaborating, while Democrats (who can still be cowed by the White House's with-us-or-against-us baiting) aren't doing enough to stop it.
The fight is over the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires the government to obtain a warrant before eavesdropping on electronic communications that involve someone in the United States. The test is whether there is probable cause to believe that the person being communicated with is an agent of a foreign power or a terrorist.
Disregard for law
Bush decided after 9/11 that he was no longer going to obey that law. He authorized the National Security Agency to intercept international telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans and other residents of this country without a court order. He told the public nothing and Congress next to nothing about what he was doing, until The New York Times disclosed the spying in December 2005.
For more information:
http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=80c3e295-...
WASHINGTON — Bowing to pressure from the Bush administration, the Senate passed emergency legislation Friday that would significantly expand the authority of U.S. spy agencies to monitor overseas phone calls and e-mails.
It also would remove requirements for court approval when those communications passed through the United States.
The measure would clear away an array of legal obstacles that President Bush and top intelligence officials said were impeding the nation's ability to track the communications of Al Qaeda operatives and other terrorism suspects abroad.
The House is scheduled to vote on an identical bill today; congressional officials said they expected the measure to pass. On Friday, the House rejected a competing version offered by Democrats.
The Senate bill, approved 60-28, "will give our intelligence professionals the essential tools they need to protect our nation," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.
"It is urgent that this legislation become law as quickly as possible."
The Senate's action was a key victory for Bush at a time when adverse court rulings and dismal approval ratings have forced his administration to retreat from some of its most aggressive assertions of executive authority in the war on terrorism.
Bush had pressured Congress to pass the legislation before it left on a monthlong break, with administration officials repeatedly pointing to recent intelligence reports that have warned that Al Qaeda is regrouping in Pakistan and has refocused on striking the United States.
More
It also would remove requirements for court approval when those communications passed through the United States.
The measure would clear away an array of legal obstacles that President Bush and top intelligence officials said were impeding the nation's ability to track the communications of Al Qaeda operatives and other terrorism suspects abroad.
The House is scheduled to vote on an identical bill today; congressional officials said they expected the measure to pass. On Friday, the House rejected a competing version offered by Democrats.
The Senate bill, approved 60-28, "will give our intelligence professionals the essential tools they need to protect our nation," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.
"It is urgent that this legislation become law as quickly as possible."
The Senate's action was a key victory for Bush at a time when adverse court rulings and dismal approval ratings have forced his administration to retreat from some of its most aggressive assertions of executive authority in the war on terrorism.
Bush had pressured Congress to pass the legislation before it left on a monthlong break, with administration officials repeatedly pointing to recent intelligence reports that have warned that Al Qaeda is regrouping in Pakistan and has refocused on striking the United States.
More
For more information:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...
What the votes on this piece of legislation means for all Americans is that a fearful and fully bought Congress does not in fact possess the moral and legal competence to make decisions in the interest of the American people. To that end, it is no longer a legitimate Congress established of, by, and for the people of this nation. In passing this piece of legislation in both houses of congress against the wishes of the American people, the Congress of the United States has clearly become the enemy of the people and thus possesses no constitutional rights to develop laws that protect people's privacy though I am fully aware they will carry on with their illegitimate activities. I ask: "Who among them were elected in a legitimate election, absent hackable voting machines, by a free vote of the people." The true counters of those votes on those severely compromised voting machines decide who will win and who will lose, and how many of the 16 Democratic Senators, who voted to eviscerate or severely restrict the privacy rights of the American people, won their elections by virtue of these highly hackable machines? How many of those 16 know that they would be targeted in the next election by those who count the votes if they had voted against this infamous legislation, if they had voted to prevent government snooping on unwitting American citizens.
In essence, those who possess the power to count the votes can also control the votes of politicians in both houses, regardless of the legislation in play. The coup d'etat took place in the year 2000 election when five black-robed supreme court justices decided who would become president and, I might add, an unsuspecting, compliant American people accepted this decision, and by a vast majority later went along with the pronouncement that a man in a cave undergoing kidney dialysis was behind the disaster in New York City. Now many of those same people who permitted in silence five justices (five votes) to decide the winner of the 2000 presidential election and who accepted the absurd reasoning regarding this abstract cave-dweller find themselves nonplussed upon determining that their man in 2000, their man who created two wars with their approval seeks to substantially eliminate their civil liberties by superceding the Constitution at every turn possible. This vast majority failed to understand that a man who has no problem whatsoever making decisions that lead to the deaths of hundreds of people whose supposed crimes were under dispute and therefore unsettled (Texas death row inmates when the current president was governor of that state) has the capacity to turn his back on his own friends to feather his own cap and to ultimately protect himself.
Finally, the coup d'etat in 2000 was tacitly or otherwise supported
by the vast majority of the American people. The coming American dictatorship will then be a creation of the American people who now wish to reverse course. We have made our bed and we will likely have no choice except to sleep in it.
In essence, those who possess the power to count the votes can also control the votes of politicians in both houses, regardless of the legislation in play. The coup d'etat took place in the year 2000 election when five black-robed supreme court justices decided who would become president and, I might add, an unsuspecting, compliant American people accepted this decision, and by a vast majority later went along with the pronouncement that a man in a cave undergoing kidney dialysis was behind the disaster in New York City. Now many of those same people who permitted in silence five justices (five votes) to decide the winner of the 2000 presidential election and who accepted the absurd reasoning regarding this abstract cave-dweller find themselves nonplussed upon determining that their man in 2000, their man who created two wars with their approval seeks to substantially eliminate their civil liberties by superceding the Constitution at every turn possible. This vast majority failed to understand that a man who has no problem whatsoever making decisions that lead to the deaths of hundreds of people whose supposed crimes were under dispute and therefore unsettled (Texas death row inmates when the current president was governor of that state) has the capacity to turn his back on his own friends to feather his own cap and to ultimately protect himself.
Finally, the coup d'etat in 2000 was tacitly or otherwise supported
by the vast majority of the American people. The coming American dictatorship will then be a creation of the American people who now wish to reverse course. We have made our bed and we will likely have no choice except to sleep in it.
how can our government invade or privace without our concent.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network