Fisa @ MindSay

Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments before the US House of Representatives, June 20, 2008

Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.

President Bush has put, protecting the Telecom giants from the laws...ahead of protecting you from the terrorists.

He has demanded an extension of the FISA law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but only an extension that includes retroactive immunity for the Telecoms who helped him spy on us.

Congress has given him, and he has signed, a fifteen day extension, which simply kicks the time bomb down the field, and has changed nothing of his insipid rhetoric, in which he portrays the Democrats as 'soft on terror' and getting in the way of his Superhuman efforts to protect the nation... when, in fact, and with bitter irony, if anybody is 'soft on terror' here it is Mr. Bush.

Put pressure on your Senators between now !

• Call them!
• Write them!

There is a chance we can win this thing

As I do every day, I read Glenn Greenwald's blog, where he talked about how when Democrats in the Congress cave in to the Bush Administration, it's both bad politically for the Left and for the Constitution.

Last week's cave-in was an altered FISA law, which effectively legalized Bush's criminal breaking of that law from 2001-2007.

Like Nixon said: Hey, if the President does it, it's not illegal.

Here's an idea: if you are the opposition party, and the President has a 65% disapproval rate, you should not do a damn thing that he says, regardless of the implications. And when you cooperate with such a deeply, deeply unpopular President, the citizenry will dislike you, since you are colluding with the Worst President Ever.

In an abusive relationship, does the abuser like the abused more after the abused caves in again and lays prostrate, receiving abuse? No, that only makes the abuser dislike the abused more, and ensure more abuse. This describes the Bush Administration/Democrat Congress relationship.

As I noted in my review of The Bourne Identity, people that hold absolute power in secret are not protecting the populace's best interests. They're saving their own asses, especially when they're hanging on the string of a 65% disapproval rate.



What would prevent Bush from finding dirt on the strongest war critics out there, if he can look at their bank accounts, phone records, e-mails, and so on without having anyone but the purest loyalists know? Uh, nothing.

Would you put it beyond Bush, Cheney, Rove, or their lackeys? I would not. We know they broke the law in outing Valerie Plame, because her husband undercut a key WMD claim in 2003.

Our politics are not the same damn thing as the Fox show 24! Why is this so hard for the Congressional Democrats to understand?




In the context of power and control, how can we read this:

We should all breathe a sigh of relief that sanity prevailed when Congress enacted emergency legislation over the weekend to address a national-security crisis: the hamstringing of our intelligence community’s ability to eavesdrop on agents of foreign powers situated overseas and bent on killing Americans.

Yes, we should also "all breathe a sigh of relief" when that woman got slapped for burning the potatoes, too.

If you do not understand the problem than read this.

 

With Open Borders it is absolutely required to monitor those here illegally and legally who jerked the system and have some legal status here.

 

We have 20 million Illegals and no  Terrorists ?

 

Some Options :

 

1. Close Borders

 

2. Deport Illegals

 

3. Wire Tap Americans

 

4. Impeach Bush

 

5. Grand Jury Inditment of Clinton

 

6. Let the New Word Order take over

 

7. Find out the truth " Able Danger "

 

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fisc051702.html

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007734