House of Representatives To Discuss Wiretapping In Closed Session

Nimey brings word that for the first time in 25 years, the US House of Representatives will use a closed-door session to discuss proposed wiretapping legislation. The old legislation expired last month when government officials could not agree on retroactive immunity for the telecommunications providers who assisted with the wiretaps. The most recent version of the bill, proposed by House democrats, does not include telecom immunity. Because of that, President Bush has stated his willingness to veto the bill. The Yahoo article notes, "The closed-door debate was scheduled for late Thursday night, after the House chamber could be cleared and swept by security personnel to make sure there are no listening devices."

Comments

Attention: "security personel"

[Anonymous Coward]

We would absolutely love it if you would get a tape and give it to wikileaks. Or Youtube. Or John Stewart.

Re:Attention: "security personel"

[JM78]

Our society has become self-complacent. We, as a society, will do nothing to fight against injustice unless we feel it in our homes. It makes no difference if the media says we are being spied upon or if some guys on TV go and die for a war that doesn't affect me directly (I personally don't know anyone in the military, sure I'm not the only one where the war exists only on TV). It matters only if we feel it. Society, as a whole, must feel violated in order to force a drastic change within itself.

The kicker, of course, is that because we have to feel it we are wholly susceptible to manipulation of our feelings. There simply aren't enough insightful, intelligent people in our national community to counter the massive manipulation the Bush administration has mastered through the media and political double-speak (e.g. It's not torture, it's enhanced interrogation methods!); they just give us each $600 bucks and say everything's groovy.

It's really pathetic how materialism and self-riotous we have become (as a whole, mind you). Fortunately we are starting to get a taste of why Barak Obama has done so well in our current democratic primary - he helps people remember what it feels like to have national pride; why it feels good to be an American. The media vultures may pick it apart but his wife spoke truth when she said, "this is the first time in my adult life I am proud to be an American;" perhaps not the first time, but certainly one of the very few for me (I'm 30 so most of my adult-life has been spent watching Bush destroy many great things I learned about this country in school as a kid).

Not an Obama fanboi, but I do hope we have more people like him start to speak about unity, hope and peace cause it just makes me sad to think I'm nationally-related to men like G. W. Bush.

Just my 2-cents as a currently-free American

Re:Republicans and Democrats will do NOTHING.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because following the Constitution is SUCH a bad idea?!?!? *rolling eyes*

Where did you get the idea that the constitution is so fantastic? The founders didn't intend for it to last. And it hasn't lasted - you do understand what amendments are, right?

Stop holding the constitution up as unassailable perfection and a goal that eclipses all else. I know Americans have this weird quasi-religion when it comes to the founding fathers and the constitution, but please try to snap out of it and judge it on its own terms and in perspective.

Quite frankly, I don't know how you've managed to keep this fiction going for so long. The "living document" died years ago. The politicians started ignoring it. The judges reinterpreted it. The people let them get away with it. What the constitution says no longer applies and nobody really cares. And Ron Paul can't change that.

Re:But it is a matter of principle

[jonberling]

I don't think it was ignorance. I use to be an intelligence analyst for the US Army. When I first heard about the wire tapping program (I'd had only been out for about a year) the first thing that came to my mind is "Holy crap, that must have been illegal!" We were clearly briefed about what we could and couldn't listen to. Domestic calls were 100% off limit. US Citizens, in the US, calling someone in a foreign country were also protected. The reason: the US military isn't used against US citizens (unless martial law is declared). We have law enforcement separate from the military for a reason. If it were the FBI instead of the NSA doing the wiretaps, I think it wouldn't have been as big a issue (At lease at the time I though that, I'm not sure if I think that now.)

Re:The Facts

[stupidpuppy]

So, if US intelligence services determine, exactly, the location of Osama Bin Laden, we can either ...

1. Kill Him
2. Listen in on his phone conversations (requires warrant)

The "Protect America Act" only restores the status quo. It was created in response to a recent ruling -- a judge on the FISA court suddenly decided that warrants were needed to domestically eavesdrop on foreign targets. It was a bizarre ruling with zero precedent and clearly flies in the face of congressional intent. The Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton administrations never ever needed a warrant in the same situation.

AT&T *doesn't* want to pay you $146,000.00

[mikelieman]

And that's what they're on the hook for, spying unlawfully on you.

Multiply that by everyone with a phone or internet connection, and you have a statutory fine which exceeds AT&T market valuation.

Re:Republicans and Democrats will do NOTHING.

[Captain Splendid]

Obviously you've had a humour bypass and have NOT understood that if you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?

Re:Grant No Immunity. Get Info to ACLU.

[sumdumass]

Congress has no other choice then to believe what Bush says. All and any information they can get is cleared through his offices first. Now I don't mean they go through the president's office, but all inteligence agencies including the military are under indirect control of Bush by the nature of him being president. And congress knows that if they want to do anything, they will need Bush to sign something into law or have to gut and word everything in a way that gains enough support to bypass the president's veto.

They also won't impeach him because there is a good change that Bush might have been justified after all. I know people are going to say there is a law blah blah blah. But congress can only pass a law that limits the powers of the president outside the scope of the constitution which means that a law that is valid in most circumstances can become invalid when we declare war and he assumes another position like commander in chief. That was the original excuse given. Congress will not push this issue because even the democrats know how much percieved power it will take away from congress. That is why they made it a law, the senate renewed that law, the house is a little more stupid on the matter but in the end, they won't even bother. Instead they will just use this as a political tool to get people to vote for them.

So don't take it too personal when they sit on their hands and don't do what you want them to do.