top
North Bay
North Bay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Today—U.S. Senate Votes Whether to Shoot Down 1st and 4th Amendments

by Dan Scott
If this Act is passed, it will be Free Speech in America only “if you—Dare!
Today the U.S. Senate Votes on THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008, HR 6304.

H.R. 6304 EH may be found at:
thomas.loc.gov/

As most Americans know, Telecoms got caught helping U.S. Spy Agencies—illegally wiretap millions of U.S. private phone calls, faxes and emails. The Bush Government will not reveal the extent of its spying program. U.S. Government wants to give Telecoms that assisted the Government Spy on Americans, retroactive immunity from lawsuits and other liabilities that might result.

Will U.S. Government’s millions of stored illegal-Wiretaps be made available to U.S. and International Criminal & Civil Courts after THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 is passed?

Before the U.S. Senate passes THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008, the Senate should disclose to America what will happen to the Government’s millions of illegally seized Electronic Communications that belong to U.S. Citizens?

Why hasn’t Congress disclosed to U.S. Citizens whether the Bush Administration’s years of illegal wiretaps are admissible into U.S. criminal and civil courts? It is problematic after HR 6304 is passed, police agencies and private government contractors will want to use illegally collected NSA/FBI and other illegal government wiretap surveillance to go back years to arrest Americans and or civilly forfeit their homes, businesses and inheritances using only a “preponderance of civil evidence” under Title 18 of the United States Code; or under the Patriot Act.

There are over 200 U.S. criminal laws, violations and U.S. Government cooperating agreements with other countries that can make property subject to civil asset forfeiture. No one need be charged with a crime for government to civilly forfeit an owner’s home or business.
U.S. Senators are seen on Television reading sections from HR 6304 they allege will protect lawful persons in the U.S. from being spied on and targeted by government wiretaps.

Not mentioned by Senators, is THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 includes a low level of probable cause that permits Government to wiretap U.S. phone calls, faxes and emails.

For example: HR 6304 (2) Probable Cause section under (C)(Order) undermines protections for persons in the U.S. exercising 1st Amendment rights. The Act’s use of the word “May” in “May Be Considered” a foreign power, agent of a foreign power…”appears legally to protect no one from government wiretapping and spying.
This is from the Probable Cause section in HR 6304: “No United States person may be considered a foreign power, agent of a foreign power, or officer or employee of a foreign power solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”

Unbelievably The House inserted the weak word “may” and failed to insert, e.g., “SHALL NOT” which legally would have been more binding on Government and police not to violate the 1st and 4th Amendments rights of U.S. Citizens. Consequently it will be harder for persons in the U.S. to defend against government wiretap evidence.

After HR 6304 is passed, any person in the U.S. who exercises his or her 1st Amendment Rights under the vague provisions of HR 6304, “MAY BE CONSIDERED” by U.S. Government an agent of a foreign power. This is the result of The House of Representatives leaving out protective words, like “Shall Not Be Considered” an agent of a foreign agent.

If this Act is passed, it will be Free Speech in America only “if you—Dare!
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by Zachary
“No United States person may be considered a foreign power, agent of a foreign power, or officer or employee of a foreign power solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”

This means that no US citizen can be considered an agent of a foreign power based solely on something which the First Amendment protects. IE, you can say whatever you want and the government can't claim you're an agent of a foreign power.

That is to say unless you've done something besides speak; I haven't read the bill so I don't know if this is accurate, but assuming you said at one point (during a phone call with your Swedish foreign exchange student friend, which was being monitored without a warrant for the purposes of National Security) "The Bush Administration sucks; we should be socialist," the government could do nothing. However, if you also stole a bag of potato chips and got caught at some point in time, they could say that "Based on his vocal decrying of the US Government AND his felonious acts, we deem this man to be an agent of a foreign power."

Does that sound about right? It's a stretch, and a vague one, but if the ability gets into the hands of the wrong person...
by amo
I don't think stealing a bag of potato chips is a felony, yet. possibly after some more months of food crisis and sinking dollar.
by Sandra Evans
Clarifying the word “May” in HR 6304

HR 6304 (2) Probable Cause section under (C)(Order) does appear to undermine protections for persons in the U.S. exercising 1st Amendment rights.

That “probable cause” section is provided below. The Act’s text used the word “may.” Not the word “shall or must” to protect persons exercising their Constitutional rights. To clarify this point, see below the enclosed dictionary definition and web address for the word “may” versus “shall and must.” The word “may” is no stronger than “might or possibly.” The use of “may” in the Act’s following sentence does not appear at law to protect anyone: Consequently –possibly anyone- “MAY” BE CONSIDERED” by U.S. Government a foreign power or agent of a foreign power who exercises his or her 1st Amendment rights.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/may
may¹ Definition
may (mā)
might
1. used to express ability or power: now generally replaced by can
2. used to express possibility or likelihood it may rain
3. used to express permission you may go
4. used to express contingency, as in clauses of purpose, result, concession, or condition they died that we may be free
5. used in exclamations and apostrophes to express a wish, hope, or prayer may he rest in peace

LAW shall; must

“No United States person may be considered a foreign power, agent of a foreign power, or officer or employee of a foreign power solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”
Bush Administration may be able to use illegal-wiretaps against Americans from before before 9-11:

Previously U.S. prosecutors were not allowed access to the Justice Department’s “intelligence files” for domestic criminal prosecutions. In 2003 a court ruling lowered that barrier, allowing prosecutors to review old surveillance. In 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft asked government prosecutors to review thousands of old intelligence files including wiretaps to retrieve information prosecutors could use in “ordinary criminal prosecutions.”

(See http://www.securityfocus.com/news/5452
WASHINGTON (AP) - "U.S. reviewing old, secret surveillance files in terrorism investigations." “4,500 files.” By, Ted Bridis, The Associated Press 2003-06-04.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$50.00 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.

IMC Network