Various FISA threads

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by Michael

I am hoping that some of the telecommunication companies NOT cooperate, advertise that point, and customers simply quit the companies that are cooperating with Bush's violation of the constitution.

From the bill =

10 ‘‘(D) CONTEMPT OF COURT.—Failure to
11 obey an order issued under this paragraph may
12 be punished by the Court as contempt of court.

This deals with those patriotic telcos ( such as Qwest ) who refused to provide data without a valid warrant to do so.

[Lazarus]

I am somewhat amazed at the deafening silence here ( and elsewhere) over this impending sell-out.

Perhaps this is the reason why -

"Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.
"That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

"After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

"Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

"It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people."

This statement comes from Barack Obama, btw.
Once blessed by the fearless leader, all criticism ends.
And all rationalizations commence.

Pathetic.


********

The best that I can hope for now is the use of any and all procedural measures by the few true Democrats remaining in the Senate to push passage til after the Independence Day recess.
These are the methods at their disposal =
Object to waiving first and second readings to be on successive days.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when H.R. 6304 is received from the House, it be placed on the calendar.

There was no objection.

Now Reid is obviously wanting to finish this up this week, and I am sure that this little game was known by some, but not by those who would have objected. Reid pulled a fast one and got away with it. Bills are usually read the first time then read the second time on consecutive days, before being placed on the calendar.



Object to limiting debate on the motion to proceed.

Object to limiting debate on any/all pending amendment.

Object to limiting debate on final passage .



Maybe, just maybe, all those fireworks will stir some shred of patriotism and some remembrance of the principles upon which this Nation was founded.

[TheStripey1]

Bourne... are you also in favor of the retroactive protection from prosecution for the phone companies and anyone else who knew about this and other nefarious deeds that this bill provides?

[Chan]

So, how is this bill good for the country? How are warrantless searches and other unconstitutional activities good for the country?

[sleuth]

1984, for real.

[Lumara]

This bill is unconstitutional and every congressional rep who voted for it is in violation of his or her oath of office.

This bill does NOTHING to protect our country against terrorism. What it does is hold officials and corporations above the law and removes their accountability. It eliminates the protections guaranteed to citizens in the constitution and as Michael said, removes oversight.

This bill is a huge new step into totalitarianism.

[Bourne]

Originally Posted by Chan

So, how is this bill good for the country? How are warrantless searches and other unconstitutional activities good for the country?

If they identify terrorist activities targeting us or our allies the question would then be what isn't good about them.

[Bourne]

Originally Posted by Lumara

This bill is unconstitutional and every congressional rep who voted for it is in violation of his or her oath of office.

This bill does NOTHING to protect our country against terrorism. What it does is hold officials and corporations above the law and removes their accountability. It eliminates the protections guaranteed to citizens in the constitution and as Michael said, removes oversight.

This bill is a huge new step into totalitarianism.

I may very well save this country from another 911.

[Lumara]

Originally Posted by Bourne

I may very well save this country from another 911.

Exactly how will this illegal violation of the Constitution save anything?

Before this legislation was passed, it was legal to set up wiretaps in advance of a warrant but probable cause had to be shown and a court order had to be obtained within a certain period time AFTER the wiretaps were set up. This protected citizens from overzealous law enforcement officials yet allowed officials to set up surveillance quickly without having to wait.

So please explain how removing accountability and the requirement to show probable cause increases our protection. I'd like to hear your rationale.

Just because some federal agencies failed to share information that may have prevented 911, those that want total control over the citizenry are using that as an excuse to further their totalitarian agenda. The failure of the intelligence agencies had nothing to do with having to show probable cause and obtain court orders for surveillance after the fact and there is no valid reason to institute legislation to further erode our rights.

[Drakej]

This will do absolutely nothing to prevent any thing. If they have reason to believe that someone is up to something bad then they have enough to get a warrant. I fail to see how recording random people's e-mails and telephone calls is going to help any thing. The fact that they can monitor or even charge you with a crime without you being notified is just flat out wrong.

Does anyone else find it odd that an enemy combatant has been granted constitutional rights but REAL American citizens are being watched with no probable cause?