From the NYT, "Senate Moves to Shield Phone Companies on Eavesdropping."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/washington/12cnd-fisa.html?_r=1&8au&emc=au&oref=slogin
I can barely even come up with words to respond to the Senate finally passing a bill that not only broadens the Executive Branch's surveillance powers, but also grants immunity to the telecomm companies that cooperated with the White House's warrantless wiretapping program. This last part, to paraphrase a caller on Mario Solis-Marich's show on AM 760, Denver's progressive talk radio, goes beyond the phone companies and really serves to make the President and his crew immune. Another caller asked, if these people were following the law and did nothing wrong, then why do they need immunity? Indeed.
Is it really "patriotism," as some who voted "yea" claim, to pass such a measure? Are the people we have voted into Congress and the White House speaking and acting for the people who voted them in? If I were President, at least one would be.
p.s. I am a bigger fan of Senator Chris Dodd (D- CT) now, even with that hair and those eyebrows.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
In my opinion, this move is utter horse shit. We should all feel a little nervous about the power that is slowly being given over to the executive branch of this administration. I wonder, even now, if my comment to this blog post will set off a red light somewhere, and I wonder how thick my file might be simply from being a proud American who believes in liberty and FREEDOM, including freedom from spying by the powers-that-be in my own country simply because I don't approve of the way they handle things. Is this paranoia, or reality? It seems convenient that this country has been at war for nearly the entire time that the current president has been in office when wartime measures allow for added authority and increased lack of accountability.... To me, this seems one step away from true liberty and freedom and one giant leap toward Big Brother.
Big Brother... Speaking as your big sister, I feel compelled to say how proud I am to see you speaking up like this online, when just a few short years ago you asked me to stop forwarding to you the e-mails I so faithfully creafted and zapped to the White House criticizing policy decisions and asking for transparency and accountability, because you were worried that file on you would be created and you might be pursued, along with me, by the guys in the black suits and helicopters. Congrats; I raise my cold delicious Boulevard Pale Ale to you!
I have been watching the "progress" on this trainwreck of a piece of legislation for months. Despite near unanimous outcry from the governed who realize what had been tucked into this bill, somehow it still ended up squeezing it's way throught the Senate unaltered, like a mouse through an owl's esophagus.
I've worked for telecom, and there is no doubt that they are sophisticated and punctilious about their legal obligations as far as customer privacy is concerned. They knew flat out that dragnet style surveillance is against the law, explicitly stated in FISA. There is no need for an immunity clause if no law was broken. Laws were broken, and the administration doesn't want the telecoms pointing the finger at the individuals who asked them to break the law.
It is still possible that the House may insist in conference upon the removal of the immunity provisions. Great. Now I'm grumpy. /shakes fist at sky/
Post a Comment