Slashdot Mirror
ACLU Warns of Next Pass At Telecom Immunity
The ACLU has reportedly uncovered another pass at telecom immunity and is urging concerned citizens to speak out against what they call a "dangerous backroom deal." "But now, word comes that House leadership may be working hand-in-hand with Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who has spearheaded efforts to give immunity to law-breaking phone companies that provided mountains of customer data to the government without warrants. As discussions continue, it's critical that House leadership avoid buckling to pressure from the White House or Senator Rockefeller at all costs. House leadership — and every representative — need to draw a line in the sand, by rejecting any compromise that would undo the achievement we fought so hard for in February."
Please follow the link and sign the ACLU petition and call your local representative. Domestic spying should be exposed and eradicated. The principle is more important than party politics.
No calls now, I'm
Does Congress even have the power to grant immunity? They think they have the power to do anything they want, but is providing blanket immunity even constitutional?
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Seriously, how long are we going to be able to keep up the fight? It's obvious the current administration and the telcos will just keep making one run after another until one gets through; and don't bother suggesting that we will actually hold them accountable at some point. That's laughable.
So the question becomes, how long until we burn out?
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
This is not a troll, but can anyone tell me what does it matter? Have the telecos been successfully sued in court for their indiscretions? Are we pursuing them in court? If the answer is no to both counts, then what does it matter if we grant them immunity.
If the telecoms don't have anything to hide, why would they be afraid of a few questions?
Uh-oh, Big Brother. It looks like that logic has a nasty way of working both ways. The only way to prevent this from happening in the future is to keep immunity out, sue every single telecom into bankruptcy, and throw every member of the Administration who was involved into prison.
Pff... hahahahah. Alright, it was worth a good laugh. Now please, go back to watching your televisions. The Factor is coming right up! Top news story? Reverend Jeremiah Wright is not an "honest man," and makes money selling lies...
If they're going to come for me, they're going to come for me.
Why be a pussy?
Blar.
As an European, I might not see the subtle differences between Democrats and Republicans, but to my eyes, they look so similar I can't really see the choice.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What's at stake here is that an entire sector of corporation (allegedly) broke the law in secret, and once exposed, is now trying to make what they did suddenly legal.
What's at stake here is the public's right to discover who in our government (allegedly) requested that the law (allegedly) be broken.
What's at stake here is nothing less than the rule of law itself and whether the law is controlled by the People or by the corporations.
Think about the consequences if fucking telecommunications companies for God's sake get away with (allegedly) violating our rights to privacy guaranteed by the FISA laws...
Think about the consequences if the (alleged) pressure to break the law from our own government never is fully exposed...
Think of the consequences if justice is not served to those who deserve it...
If they get away with this, the grand experiment that is America has failed.
Allegedly.
Well, if we delegated the power encompassed by the IRS, the SSA, and the various other control mechanisms in place from the Fed to the states, we could undo a lot of arguably wrong-headed old precedent.
Creating a "new" tradition of un-intrusive Federal government would really put the "P" in Progress for many of us.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
49 D - 49 R - 2 I
Reid is the majority leader by virtue of Lieberman's two-timing hide. Care to guess which side of the isle he votes on FISA and telecom immunity?
You also need to consider that cloture votes (an agreement to end debate and go to a vote on a bill or specific debated issue in a bill, requires a super-majority of 60%. Back when the Democrats used this to block a handful of Bush's most activist of right-wing judge appointees, they were criticised as being undemocratic. Now that Republicans have have used the tactic to effectively shut down any attempts by Democrats to right wrongs from the last 7 years, the Democrats are called inept or in collusion.
A fine example of this tactic is : Roll Call Vote #340 on September 19, 2007. It was a cloture to vote on Senator Specter's Amendment #2022 to The Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 - the purpose of which was to restore habeas corpus for those detained by the United States. The voted count was 56-Yea -- 43 Nay -- 12 NoVote. The Party affiliation of the vote was:
Yea - 49 D - 6R - 1 I (Sanders)
Nay - 42 R - 0D - 1 I (Lieberman)
Habeas corpus is a Natural Right, which the Constitution states can only be suspended in times of domestic invasion or public insurrection. To assert that a sneak attack by 20 detemine F**ks, which to this Nation's great misfortune, coincided with an administration so arrogant, ignorant and derelict, it failed at its primary duty to defend America constitutes an "invasion", is to chase after a well dressed bunny down into a dark hole in the ground. This should not be a partisan issue, and REAL conservatives understand this clearly. Read Kenneth Starr's written opinion to The Senate.
My question to you is: did you actually look last time or did you just accept what you were told?
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
There are indeed valid, substantial questions regarding Jay Rockefeller's campaign contributors and the FISA Bill's telecom immunity clause. My questions about him go back farther to when he was minority committee leader, and was being pussy-whipped by Sen. Roberts (Can's-Ass) about Robert's promise to have the Intelligence Committee investigate the administration's use of pre-Iraq War intelligence, and even get around to issuing subpoenas, so Feith and Wolfowitz would get their asses hauled down to assert their 5th Amendment rights under oath while being televised nationwide. There are several Democratic Senators whose defense of civil liberties is very questionable.
However, your intimated assertion of a partisan parity is absurd, and a wild flight of fantasy from reality.
Let's investigate reality without the rosy-tint of you blurry lens:
Senate Roll Call Vote #20 on February 12, 2008, The FISA Amendments Act
Clearly, The Democrats are The Lamer of Two Evils.
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
I am one who has for many years believed that the two party system was the ultimate root cause for the Nation's ills, and have also loudly asserted that if your vote was based on a "lesser of two evils" decision, without question, you have voted for evil.
The Bush Administration, and concomitant GOP Congressional dereliction, has taught me a bitter lesson though. I must now choke back the bile that rises in my throat, whenever I long nostalgically for the time in America's past, when a President's lies were only about acts of consensual sex, a cum-stained blue dress, and tobacco products with odd exotic aromatics; instead of a President's lies about Natural Liberties, Immoral War, and the Blood-stained Iraqi Sands.
This is the cause for a correction in my analysis. While it is wrong to vote for a lesser of two evils; a very good argument can be made to support a vote for the lamer of two evils. The GOP has not yet begun to experience the pain that is necessary to purge the excessive resident evil within. There need be a return to a state of polar equilibrium in quantities of evil, or there need be the end to the Republican Party, as a clear and present danger to the people's liberty. There is no third way.
The oath was: against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic, or to condense it down to a Bushified black and white: are you with the Friends of Liberty or Against Us. Choose wisely...
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
STAHL: If someone's in custody, as in Abu Ghraib, and they are brutalized, by a law enforcement person -- if you listen to the expression "cruel and unusual punishment," doesn't that apply?
SCALIA: No. To the contrary. You think -- Has anybody ever referred to torture as punishment? I don't think so.
STAHL: Well I think if you're in custody, and you have a policeman who's taken you into custody-
SCALIA: And you say he's punishing you? What's he punishing you for?
Oh, that's great, you have dishonest monsters deciding what is equal protection and what isn't! Fantastic!
You can't take the sky from me...
There are a few bad apples on SCOTUS. There are a few bright moments, too, including some handed to the Bush administration. All is not lost, but it certainly isn't balanced well, we'll agree. Nonetheless, it's the law of the land. Civility demands respect, even if we don't agree. It's then incumbent upon us to vote to ensure our sentiments are hopefully followed on the next appointments. Sometimes, they are.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
SCALIA: And you say he's punishing you? What's he punishing you for? ... When he's hurting you in order to get information from you, you wouldn't say he's punishing you. What is he punishing you for?
Damn! I mean DAMN!
It should be blatantly obvious, he's punishing you for not giving him the information he wants!
It is absurd that a person who refused to accept the democratic vote of his own party in the primaries, and then reentered the election as an independent who accepted major contribution from the other main party, and pulled all party support out from under their own candidate, would be referred to as being democratic.
Liegberman subverted the democratic process of his own chosen party, The Democrats. He aligned with the Dem. side, because the Senate rules force third party and independent members to pick one or the other, and all committee assignments come from affiliation. Lieberman would have aligned with the Republicans if they would have offered him a good enough deal on committees, but the didn't care about the weasel to toss him a decent bone. They know he's a solid pro-Iraq vote, and is a firm believer in giving extra-power to the government. He has at least been consistent in this, contrary to the Republicans who believe in empowering and supporting Republican President's overreaches, while castrating Democratic Presidents before he even has been inaugurated.
When even Bob Barr can no longer stomach being a Republican, you know the GOP has sunk far below the horizon on the field of honor. Moral Relativism is The Rectaltude of Republican Intent manifest obscenely in reality. What else can be expected from The Party of Public Potty-Peepers, who claim after their performances of soft-shoe routines at TeaTyme has become public knowledge, that they are not gay.
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
So I could paraphrase what you're saying as "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."?
http://marriedmansexlife.com/
Andrew McCarthy, the former Assistant United States Attorney who prosecuted the 1993 World Trade Center bombers (including the "Blind Sheik"), has written The Case for Telecom Immunity . Worth reading.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell