Letters to the Editor
Westmiller
Published Letters: 83
-
Absolutely delicious
[Read the article: The fun and excitement of civilization wars (fought from afar)]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]" ... with them -- and only them -- courageous and tough enough to "do what needs to be done" to triumph."
An absolutely delicious rant, with which I totally agree, but a weak ending. Better:
" ... with them -- imagining that they are bestowed with a glorious and superior wisdom -- courageous and tough enough to send other people's children to their death and destroy every vestigate of liberty in our own nation, if that is what "needs to be done" for their own edification."
-
Courts are just Cowardly
[Read the article: The courts and Congress affirmatively conceal and protect lawbreaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... and courts were therefore barred from ruling on their claims
There's a difference between being barred and cowardice. The courts could have given the plaintiffs "standing" on the basis of clear and convincing evidence that they were victims - or likely to be victims - of unconstitutional government actions.
...(due to the absolute secrecy under which the program operates).
Except that it isn't secret when the President admits that he is doing it, which is the basis of the AT&T suit.
The hallmark of tyranny is when secret laws are administered by secret tribunals. They are secret because they are illegal; violations of basic constitutional rights.
The last time I checked, the constitution was the "supreme law of the land," or maybe it's just "a Goddamn piece of paper," as our venerated leader suggests.
The cowardice of the courts is nothing, compared with the cowardice of our elected representatives. They can't even read the constitution, which prohibits ex-post-facto laws (like extended "sovereign immunity" for telecoms).
When do we get our constitution back?
-
I fear that you're wrong, Glenn
[Read the article: McConnell/Mukasey: Eavesdropping outside of FISA is "illegal"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The implication of your column is that the President has hidden something from Congress. I fear that's not the case.
At every step along the way, even the most recent approval of the extension of the PAA, legislators have endorsed every violation of the constitution sought by the administration.
The leaders in both chambers were advised of the "secret" wiretapping well in advance. It isn't that they were just too cowardly to disclose the program: they agreed with it and offered their explicit and legislative support.
Even as far back as the original FISA law, legislators intentionally declined to distinguish between "foreign communications" and "international" (into and out of the United States) communications. They knew that they were creating an administrative loophole and adopted it after all "due deliberation." The secrets are not secrets to the Congress, they are secrets withheld from the American public, which cannot be allowed to know that governments monitor, record, and process every form of communication at their disposal (beyond a whispered word).
The fault is not purely with the administration, it is with [nearly] every member of Congress, who despise the legal constraints dictated by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The message is simple: "Surrender every facet of your individual liberty, or you will die."
-
Glenn: A Tip for Your Next Tangent
[Read the article: The "liberal" position on the Surveillance State]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ditto on your view of the FISA Court, but there's an interesting narrative that's rarely told about the primary purpose of foreign - and domestic - unwarranted wiretaps and their corporate handmaidens.
For decades, administrations have shared their foreign intelligence with American corporations, in secret. I'm sure you can find the cites and stories, but most of the "foreign" information isn't related to terrorism, it's all about foreign financial and corporate plans and schemes - what might be considered "trade secrets" - being disclosed to American companies, in order to secure an advantage in the worldwide economy.
The party holding the White House gets to decide which U.S. companies will gain an advantage in international trade, by being privy to commercial information on their foreign competitors, obtained by the NSA in the normal course of its foreign (non-FISA) spying. Thus, the battle for control of the White House is really a battle over which companies will gain an advantage from a particular candidate.
Of course, the military-industrial leaders (GE, ATT, Haliburton, et al) get the information in any case, since they are essential to the process of getting it in the first place.
The unwarranted foreign spying, totally outside of FISA, is critical to the success or failure of thousands of major American corporations engaged in international trade.
That, in essence, is why both parties relish the spying programs. They simply hope that they are in control of the system, rather than their political competitors.
-
Simple, really.
[Read the article: Why do conservatives really find the Obama campaign "scary"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What we're witnessing is (strikes me as) the same cultural process that occurred in Germany prior to the election of Hitler.
It's the cult of personality, the "savior", who can perform miracles with the incomparable, majestic power we have bestowed on our government ... which no one can possibly manage, except the "chosen one," who will mold the entire society into a marvelous utopia.
I really like Obama as a person, but it's evident that he scares those who have "held the reigns of power" for decades. It isn't just the African, tribal chant of the video, but moreso the Southern Baptist revival flavor. That's been the province of conservative Republicans for decades. That appropriation of messianic fervor is scary to them, because it represents a loss of power over religious fundamentalism.
However, the basic problem is that we have allowed government to grow to such a degree that it alone is the central cultural vehicle and unchallenged power withing our society. There is no single individual (least of all the President) who can understand, much less control, the evolution of this focused and egomaniacal gang of privelege brokers.
The "hope" in Obama's campaign is that he can make it all "work," changing it for the good. That fervent but foolish faith in one supreme, inspired personality is scary in itself.