Letters to the Editor
-
My fax to Hillary Clinton
Dear Senator Clinton,
I believe strongly that the proposed provision in the FISA bill that grants immunity to the telecom companies against legal action by victims of government spying is extremely damaging for our democracy. Litigation against companies complicit in illegal spying is the only way that remains for the American people to find out whether or not individual civil liberties have been violated by the Bush administration.
A court of law will exonerate the phone companies if they acted in good faith. If they did not, they should be held accountable.
The restoration of the Constitution, including the fourth amendment, is THE most important campaign issue for me in the upcoming primary, and I will be watching closely to see how Senator Clinton votes on telecom amnesty for companies accused of illegally spying on Americans.
Sincerely,
(Name)
-
I'm surprised that your argument
doesn't include this tidbit
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR2007101202485.html
While you are correct to point out that the lawless activity continued for years and was motivated by BushCo's desire to consolidate exectutive power and non-accountabilty, multiple lines of evidence suggest that this behavior predates 9-11:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Pioneer-Groundbreaker+&btnG=Search
-
money quote:
"...immunity for communications companies has become a cause celebre for opponents of the surveillance program as a whole..."
So a fantasy group of people who oppose "the surveillance program as a whole" have a fantasy cause celebre, and this has caused "widespread confusion".
How could it not.
-
Paul Dirks:
I'm surprised that your argument
doesn't include this tidbit
It's far from clear what happened there. Even assuming that to be true -- and there are reasons it may not be -- it seems that the programs they pursued prior to 9/11 were far more limited in scope and illegality than the post-9/11 free-for-all that ensued.
If you raise pre-9/11 surveillance, amnesty proponents will quickly point out that there is no immunity for that. I think what will happen is that post-9/11 amnesty will leave only minor and technical pre-9/11 lawbreaking, if that. I do mention this sometimes but I think the argument has the potential to be counter-productive.
-
I'm sure I speak for many here...
But, this FISA w/ the retroactive immunity thing will be the litmus test for me whether or not I vote for the next Democratic national candidate. Punto.
-
Pre 9/11: "It's far from clear what happened there." --GG
It would be sufficient to find out exactly what happened after 9/11. I would be willing to leave what happened before 9/11 to historians if we can restore our constitional protections now.
-
Rockefeller's naiveté or complicity?
How can Rockefeller (or anybody) base policy on Bush regime "assurances," since literally everything Bush apparatchiks say proves to be false?
"Fool me once," and all that. After so many instances of Bush duplicity and mendacity, any politician's (or journalist's) willingness to uncritically accept any statement of fact by the Bush regime can only indicate gross naiveté or willful complicity.
-
52 intelligence warnings
52 intelligence warnings, 2 per week in the six months leading up to 9/11, indicate to me that absolutely no intelligence gathering deficit needed to be corrected.
-
Free scoundrel hot line advice. The 9/11 tragedy was horrible enough. To the ash heap Lie's, take a moment to call serious Jay Rockefeller.
The F. Hiatt's, Chaney's, AOL's, an all other members of the human race call...
...even Al Qaeda can call, but no kill all.
Dial, the # CarolynC suggested and fax too.
No fax # here, but please call: 2024527468.
_
P.S. A Red Tail Hawk is calling from above.
Serious.
-
Rockefeller's Safe
The FISA lawbreaking over many years is simply too large to fit into Mr. Rockefeller's safe. It can't be locked away, as was his infamous "CYA" letter to the Vice President.
-
Time For A Primary Challenge
He's up for election in 2008. He may not be Joe Lieberman. He may be unbeatable in the primary. But he should not run unopposed.
-
Excellent Rebuttal
Glen - you should contact Hiatt to request that Washington Post publish your rebuttal.
-
Corporate Vigilantism
If we are to defeat this Existential Threat to our nation then we must Take The Gloves Off! Don't you people understand they want to kill us!
If we don't break laws then we will be accused of not being passionate enough in our lust for revenge!
Post 9-11 Justice isn't what you think it is, obviously.
/sarcasm off
Besides, telecoms need to take a bite of this apple too before it rots. Just like the rest of the "in crowd" of companies friendly to this administration. The natives are getting restless about all this unaccountable spending that resides in black budgets and wars of aggression.
-
Within the law
"Over the past year, the Senate intelligence committee has examined this issue, along with the need to bring the warrantless surveillance program within the law."
Did I miss something? If something is not "within the law" isn't it illegal? Doesn't the Senate care about illegality?What a rotten neologism THAT is.
-
Color me cranky.
But can anyone explain exactly WHY Rocky is always referred to in such hushed and hallowed tones, befitting his patrician mantle of Seriousness and Stature? I'm so sick of his b.s. it makes me want to throw up.
And GG, I implore you to act accordingly in light of yesterday's thread.
-
Let's pretend for a second telecoms obeyed the law...
All questions of amnesty aside, what the hell good does it do to monitor domestic phone lines, or even international calls? Seriously, how could anyone really think they would hear something noteworthy enough to prevent a terrorist attack? Even if perpetrators were stupid enough to talk openly about it (or even in "code") using phone lines, the odds of someone zeroing in on that particular conversation are remote at best. Same with chat or email. There's way too much information to sift through, no matter how big your supercomputers and data-analysis programs are. It's preposterous to think you can "listen" to all the voice and data flowing in and out of America and somehow prevent the next big attack. Which, of course, is all the more reason NOT to grant amnesty. There could not be a more futile strategy to protect the homeland than to eavesdrop on phone calls or snoop through email. But hey, if you want to do it, then do it lawfully. There is a lawful way to do it. But they didn't. So this should go to court and there should be consequences.
Jebus, I can't believe there's even a debate about this.