Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

totoro

Published Letters: 220
Editor's Choice: 5

Thursday, January 17, 2008 07:49 AM

Kos has a good write-up too

from http://thehill.com/markos-moulitsas/wiretaps-for-sale-2008-01-16.html ...

One of the more darkly amusing developments coming down the pike in 2008 is the impending Republican effort to paint Verizon and AT&T executives as bona fide war heroes. Their brave act? Allowing the Bush National Security Agency (NSA) to listen in to your phone calls. And while the idea of pinning virtual Silver Stars to the telco execs’ bespoke suits sounds laughable, the tragedy is that the GOP may well succeed, and in so doing gut basic privacy rights.

Prior to Sept. 11, 2001, the NSA approached the nation’s telecommunications giants and demanded they allow wiretaps, including access to local switches that carry primarily domestic calls. Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), such requests can only be granted via court order or certification from the U.S. attorney general. Administration officials blatantly ignored the law and provided neither.

AT&T, Verizon, and Bell South quickly complied, with only Qwest, the nation’s fourth largest carrier, refusing to break the law. A federal judge subsequently declared the program illegal, and as a result, AT&T now faces a class-action lawsuit for allowing illegal spying on its U.S. customers.

While everyone agrees that FISA requires a technical correction dealing with international calls routed through the U.S., Republicans have hijacked the amendment process by demanding retroactive amnesty to the telco giants for any violations of law — while at the same time bizarrely claiming no laws were violated.

Nevertheless, last fall, the House passed a “clean” FISA bill without retroactive immunity, as did the Senate Judiciary Committee. The full Senate, however, found itself debating a bill that included amnesty. Republicans like Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah) rose to hail the telcos’ bravery, insisting that “any company that assisted us following the attacks of 9/11 deserves a round of applause and a helping hand, not a slap in the face and a kick to the gut.”

President Bush declared he would veto any bill that did not include telco immunity, leading Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) to reason that “the president has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA.

But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retroactive immunity ... So if we take the president at his word, he’s willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies.” But a number of Democrats, perpetually fearful of being labeled “weak on national security,” capitulated to the Republicans.

Those efforts were for naught, however, after Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), and allied Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Kennedy and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) courageously took steps to filibuster the legislation. After initially testing Dodd’s resolve, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pulled the legislation. After withdrawing from the presidential race earlier this month, Dodd dispelled insinuations that his filibuster was a campaign stunt by renewing his commitment to stop the telecom amnesty. Now Reid is considering an extension of the current stopgap measure — sans retroactive immunity — for another year.

As Republicans once again attempt to sabotage FISA with amnesty, keep in mind that the “patriotic” telecoms recently cut off FBI wiretaps, including ones related to FISA investigations, because of failures by the federal agency to pay the bills.

Sounds like the telcos were always motivated by the bottom line, not by patriotism. And while the profit motive is important to any corporation, it’s no excuse for amnesty from illegal behavior. Senate Democrats need to reject this craven attempt to redefine heroism and stand up for the rule of law.

Thursday, January 17, 2008 07:52 AM

I haven't seen Glenn reference this

... that wiretaps were stopped because the government forgot to pay the bills. an "urgent security matter" i'm sure ...

FBI wiretaps dropped due to unpaid bills

Lax FBI Money Controls Lead to Shutdown of Surveillance, Justice Department Audit Finds

LARA JAKES JORDAN

AP News

Jan 10, 2008 11:17 EST

Telephone companies cut off FBI wiretaps used to eavesdrop on suspected criminals because of the bureau's repeated failures to pay phone bills on time, according to a Justice Department audit released Thursday.

The faulty bookkeeping is part of what the audit, by the Justice Department's inspector general, described as the FBI's lax oversight of money used in undercover investigations. Poor supervision of the program also allowed one agent to steal $25,000, the audit said.

More than half of 990 bills to pay for telecommunication surveillance in five unidentified FBI field offices were not paid on time, the report shows. In one office alone, unpaid costs for wiretaps from one phone company totaled $66,000.

And at least once, a wiretap used in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation — the highly secretive and sensitive cases that allow eavesdropping on suspected terrorists or spies — "was halted due to untimely payment."

"We also found that late payments have resulted in telecommunications carriers actually disconnecting phone lines established to deliver surveillance results to the FBI, resulting in lost evidence," according to the audit by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.

Thursday, January 17, 2008 09:50 AM

here, here ondelette

i second retired military patriot ... you are a smart cookie, and i'm glad you read and post here.

unless ... my conspiracy theory is true ... that you and greenwald are actually super-smart alien clones determined to take over the world. if so, please don't use your FISA laser on me!!

Monday, January 21, 2008 11:51 AM

if you parse the point of argument enough, nothing is different

are they both christian? yes

are the both politicians? yes

are they both trying to appeal to a south carolina electorate? yes

so, to answer your question: "Are there differences between Mike Huckabee's and Barack Obama's overt political appeals as Christians?"

the real answer is "yes, of course" ... but your lawyerly narrowing, parsing leaves one to answer "no." which makes this a useless post, glenn.

Most Active Letters Threads

530

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
206

I live in a van down by Duke University

How do I afford grad school without going into debt? A '94 Econoline, bulk food and creative civil disobedience
204

A new report questions "suicides" at Guantanamo

Why is the Obama DOJ attempting to block judicial review of three highly suspicious deaths?
128

Is my kids making me not smart?

Stay-at-home fatherhood dulls my intellect to a nub. Excuse me while I ponder the subtext of "Hippos Go Berserk"
126

Trig, the anti-abortion straw baby

Sarah Palin's son is being used to demonize pro-choicers

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon