The KGB Is Alive And Well And Living In Fort Meade, MD.
Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well today.
Today's post concerns a recent story I read in the Washington Post.
It would seem that our cluless leader, one George W. Bush (male, caucasian, no distiguishable intelligence or scars), authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans here at home. He did so in 2002 via an executive order and then renewed the order a further 36 times!! Since the authorization, the NSA has been surveilling hundreds (possibly thousands, the exact number is classified [like most things in the Bush Admin.]) of Americans, not overseas where the NSA is allowed to operate, but domestically. The NSA has been gathering intelligence on Americans who communicate with individuals overseas. The NSA has been conducting both electronic and physical surveillance of people through various military intelligence agencies. The spying has been conducted without the judicial oversight required by the Patriot Act, FISA, or the Constitution. Whatsmore, during the entire time that this has been going on, the information has been released on a need-to-know basis. That means that only two people outside of the Bush Administration, and those directly involved, knew about this. Both of those people were sitting judges on the ultrasecret Intelligence Court (see unconstitutional "Star Chamber"). They were briefed in about the operation by then-AG John "I admire Himmler" Ashcroft. His succesor in the post as Reichsfuhrer Attorney General Alberto "I wanna be like 'Iron Felix'" Gonzales is quoted as saying that terrorism is a war of information and that the DOJ will be aggressive in gathering that information, but "...we will always do so in a manner that's consistent with our legal obligations." Yeah, ok, this from a man who composed a memo stating that torture was legal! I don't think Al would know constutionally legal if it bit him in the ass!
Now all this might not sound to bad until you consider that the surveillance could have been requested (without too much trouble) under the Patriot Act. However, the Bush Administration decided that it would be too much bother to follow the rules (or at least to comply with the law) in this case. So in classic Bush style, it was decided "the hell with the law, we'll do what we want! It is secret, who'll be any the wiser?!!?" On top of that, the memos discussing this basically have said that the President has unlimited powers to fight terrorism. Unlimited powers...hmmm, what about the law? What about the limits on Executive power contained in the Constitution? Unlimited power my ass! Of course given the Bush Administration's propensity for flippantly ignoring the law, I guess GW would have unlimited power.
Of course this brings up several issues. The first issue is, if the NSA has been surveilling people using military intelligence, isn't that a violation of the Posse Comitatus prohibition on using the Armed Forces to maintain domestic order? For those of you who don't know what I am talking about, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military in performing domestic law enforcement. Posse Comitatus is the reason that FBI is the federal government's chief law enforcement agency and not the Army.
The second issue raised is that this spying has gone on without judicial oversight. This intelligence gathering has been done with no warrants. Thus, this has been a warrantless surveillance. That makes the surveillance patently illegal. Under the rules, intelligence gathered from a warrantless surveillance is considered to be tainted and, therefore, inadmissible in any court case. Since there is a veil of secrecy around who was surveilled and what was gathered, it can be argued that it is possible that any terrorist trial held since 2002 could have used evidence gathered through this operation, therefore the evidence was inadmissible. That makes all terrorism convictions from 2002 to present suspect and in need of review. Furthermore, it can be argued that, if indeed intelligence from this operation was used in the government's cases, the convictions should be overturned, AND under the rules of double jeopardy, the terrorists should go free without the government getting another shot at the prosecution.
Another issue that is highlighted by this whole mess is the fact that the Bush Administration is treating the "War on Terror" as exactly that, a war. Now the last time I checked the Constitution, only Congress had the power to make war. If the Bush Administration wants to treat this as an actual war, then GW's powers are (Constitutionally) very limited in what he can do. If he wants to treat this as a limited military operation, then his powers are (legislatively) very limited. Either way, the President's is not omnipotent in fighting terrorism. However, as long as Bush continues to think he is all powerful, abuses like this will continue to be exposed.
Back in the 90's, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about an extramarital affair. At the time, I supported the impeachment because no person, President or otherwise, should be above the law (and Bill did lie). Bill was also indicted on "abuse of powers" charges. Now it is 2005 and we have the Bush Administration showing everyone exactly what "abuse of power" is all about. George W. Bush should be impeached immediately! He should be brought up of charges of abuse of power, criminal facilitation, criminal conspiracy, lying to congress and treason. It is clear that Bush views his power as unlimited with no constitutional or legislative bounds, it is also clear that he abuses that power on a regular basis. Mr Bush and his administration did work to criminally facilitate warrantless searches, he conspired with others within his administration to circumvent legislative and constitutional protections and guarantees (concerning civil liberties). And lastly, he committed treason by conspiring with at least 2 others within his administration is violate several Constitutional amendments and provisions.
Will GW be impeached, well let me put it this way...NO! Not with the gutless Congress currently being run by the Nazi, er, Republican Party. To show you how gutless these guys are, and after all this about domestic spying by the NSA, when asked about the whole affair, Sen. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) said "I don't agree with the libertarians. I want my security first. I'll deal with all the details after that." Well, Senator Lott (by the way how are things in the Klan nowdays?), a man with more wisdom in his little finger than you have in your entire body (and a man who had a helluva lot of guts) once said "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" The man who said this was none other than Benjamin Franklin (scholar, inventor, and Founding Father). Given that Ben went through a revolution against the most powerful nation on earth at the time (Britain), I think he had a bit more balls than you, eh, Senator?
Well, time to go.
As always I am Chuck, and in the words of 80s one hit wonder Rockwell, "I always feel like somebody's watching me..."
Today's post concerns a recent story I read in the Washington Post.
It would seem that our cluless leader, one George W. Bush (male, caucasian, no distiguishable intelligence or scars), authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans here at home. He did so in 2002 via an executive order and then renewed the order a further 36 times!! Since the authorization, the NSA has been surveilling hundreds (possibly thousands, the exact number is classified [like most things in the Bush Admin.]) of Americans, not overseas where the NSA is allowed to operate, but domestically. The NSA has been gathering intelligence on Americans who communicate with individuals overseas. The NSA has been conducting both electronic and physical surveillance of people through various military intelligence agencies. The spying has been conducted without the judicial oversight required by the Patriot Act, FISA, or the Constitution. Whatsmore, during the entire time that this has been going on, the information has been released on a need-to-know basis. That means that only two people outside of the Bush Administration, and those directly involved, knew about this. Both of those people were sitting judges on the ultrasecret Intelligence Court (see unconstitutional "Star Chamber"). They were briefed in about the operation by then-AG John "I admire Himmler" Ashcroft. His succesor in the post as Reichsfuhrer Attorney General Alberto "I wanna be like 'Iron Felix'" Gonzales is quoted as saying that terrorism is a war of information and that the DOJ will be aggressive in gathering that information, but "...we will always do so in a manner that's consistent with our legal obligations." Yeah, ok, this from a man who composed a memo stating that torture was legal! I don't think Al would know constutionally legal if it bit him in the ass!
Now all this might not sound to bad until you consider that the surveillance could have been requested (without too much trouble) under the Patriot Act. However, the Bush Administration decided that it would be too much bother to follow the rules (or at least to comply with the law) in this case. So in classic Bush style, it was decided "the hell with the law, we'll do what we want! It is secret, who'll be any the wiser?!!?" On top of that, the memos discussing this basically have said that the President has unlimited powers to fight terrorism. Unlimited powers...hmmm, what about the law? What about the limits on Executive power contained in the Constitution? Unlimited power my ass! Of course given the Bush Administration's propensity for flippantly ignoring the law, I guess GW would have unlimited power.
Of course this brings up several issues. The first issue is, if the NSA has been surveilling people using military intelligence, isn't that a violation of the Posse Comitatus prohibition on using the Armed Forces to maintain domestic order? For those of you who don't know what I am talking about, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military in performing domestic law enforcement. Posse Comitatus is the reason that FBI is the federal government's chief law enforcement agency and not the Army.
The second issue raised is that this spying has gone on without judicial oversight. This intelligence gathering has been done with no warrants. Thus, this has been a warrantless surveillance. That makes the surveillance patently illegal. Under the rules, intelligence gathered from a warrantless surveillance is considered to be tainted and, therefore, inadmissible in any court case. Since there is a veil of secrecy around who was surveilled and what was gathered, it can be argued that it is possible that any terrorist trial held since 2002 could have used evidence gathered through this operation, therefore the evidence was inadmissible. That makes all terrorism convictions from 2002 to present suspect and in need of review. Furthermore, it can be argued that, if indeed intelligence from this operation was used in the government's cases, the convictions should be overturned, AND under the rules of double jeopardy, the terrorists should go free without the government getting another shot at the prosecution.
Another issue that is highlighted by this whole mess is the fact that the Bush Administration is treating the "War on Terror" as exactly that, a war. Now the last time I checked the Constitution, only Congress had the power to make war. If the Bush Administration wants to treat this as an actual war, then GW's powers are (Constitutionally) very limited in what he can do. If he wants to treat this as a limited military operation, then his powers are (legislatively) very limited. Either way, the President's is not omnipotent in fighting terrorism. However, as long as Bush continues to think he is all powerful, abuses like this will continue to be exposed.
Back in the 90's, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about an extramarital affair. At the time, I supported the impeachment because no person, President or otherwise, should be above the law (and Bill did lie). Bill was also indicted on "abuse of powers" charges. Now it is 2005 and we have the Bush Administration showing everyone exactly what "abuse of power" is all about. George W. Bush should be impeached immediately! He should be brought up of charges of abuse of power, criminal facilitation, criminal conspiracy, lying to congress and treason. It is clear that Bush views his power as unlimited with no constitutional or legislative bounds, it is also clear that he abuses that power on a regular basis. Mr Bush and his administration did work to criminally facilitate warrantless searches, he conspired with others within his administration to circumvent legislative and constitutional protections and guarantees (concerning civil liberties). And lastly, he committed treason by conspiring with at least 2 others within his administration is violate several Constitutional amendments and provisions.
Will GW be impeached, well let me put it this way...NO! Not with the gutless Congress currently being run by the Nazi, er, Republican Party. To show you how gutless these guys are, and after all this about domestic spying by the NSA, when asked about the whole affair, Sen. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) said "I don't agree with the libertarians. I want my security first. I'll deal with all the details after that." Well, Senator Lott (by the way how are things in the Klan nowdays?), a man with more wisdom in his little finger than you have in your entire body (and a man who had a helluva lot of guts) once said "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" The man who said this was none other than Benjamin Franklin (scholar, inventor, and Founding Father). Given that Ben went through a revolution against the most powerful nation on earth at the time (Britain), I think he had a bit more balls than you, eh, Senator?
Well, time to go.
As always I am Chuck, and in the words of 80s one hit wonder Rockwell, "I always feel like somebody's watching me..."
posted by Chuck | 04:45
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home