Greetings, gentle Readers...
Here in the U.S. we have had a good run. A country founded on the rule of Law, not men, protected freedoms and liberties, checks and balances holding it all together.
Not any more.
This weekend, the Democrats of both the House and Senate showed the huge yellow streak on their backs (and shorts) by caving in to the Administration when it comes to protecting citizen's Rights for having a member of the Judicial Branch perform oversight and review when it comes to certain types of warrants.
Some may not see this as any big deal, others think it's fine because the Administration claims it's only about foreign terror suspects, and yet another faction says that if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.
Your humble Commentator calls ...bullshit.
Let's recap, shall we?
Our Constitution says - The extraordinary government power to curb civil rights and liberties during crisis periods, such as times of war, lies with Congress and not the President. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, and not the President, with the power to suspend the right of habeas corpus during a period of rebellion or invasion."
This is important because of the case history involving Jose Padilla who was held for about 3 years, without being charged, and without trial or even appearance before a court, about 2 years of which was spent in solitary confinement. Held because the Administration classified this American Citizen as an "enemy combatant". This was never proven, nor established by any member of the Judicial branch, but a proclamation by the Administration alone.
So, yes Virginia...the government can now lock you up with no recourse, merely by saying you are an "enemy combatant" and never have to prove a thing against you.
This was the first step in destroying the Rights of Citizens to be protected against our government.
The next step has been the circumventing of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) passed in 1978. This set of laws and regulation was created in the aftermath of some scandals involving the government wiretapping folks without a warrant, and was meant to provide rules, guidelines and oversight for the interception of foreign communications in the name of National Security.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Glen Boyd
It should be noted here that most Democrats in the Congress voted against this, but that a handful of guys like Joe Lieberman sided with the Republicans, who voted overwhelmingly for it. That said, I am every bit as horrified as the writer here as our constitution continues to be shredded to bits by the band of theives currently running the show.
Impeach them all!
-Glen
2 - gonzo marx
well Glen, thanks for stopping by...as for the totals of House and Senate on the vote...
the House of Representatives voted for the bill, 227-183, a day after it won Senate approval, 60-28
the politics of this one are slimy in the extreme all the way around...but i give credit to those who voted against this piece of shit legislation...and nothing but derision to those who voted for it, wrote it, or signed it into Law...
a good start, but it might be past time to run them all out of town an rails...save the tar and feathers for the worst offenders...
well, i can Dream...can't i?
Excelsior?
3 - Doug Hunter
Glad as always to read a bit from the mind of GM. Regardless of your position you always seem to take a logical and conciliatory tone while bridging the gap between sides. I find that rather refreshing.
As to the thrust of your article, yes this is government taking liberties and overstepping it's bounds, but what else is new? In the grand scheme of things the government listening in on phone calls to Torra Borra is far down on the list of its depraved functions.
I see a clear danger from the Padilla precedent, but is there some serious threat to society I'm missing with the overseas-domestic wiretap protocol?
Even with the previous arrangement the public was only offered slightly better protection. There's certainly more independence with a judge backing the decision but it still only required a limited number of people (2) to abridge ones rights. I don't have any more expectation of professionalism, conduct, or protection from judge as I do from legislators or executives.
4 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo,
Nice to read your pearl shaped tones again. Just a thought or two. An acquaintance of mine, a convert originally raised within the ruling Protestant establishment that runs your country behind the scenes, a fellow very familiar with its mentality, gave 50-50 odds that your government would move from the sham democracy it is now to an open dictatorship. Given the behavior of the Congress concerning your rapidly diminishing constitutionally protected rights, they might not have to do such a thing at all...
Stay safe, my friend.
5 - bliffle
I guess the Conservative Champions of Liberty would rather we surrender our freedom to them than to those islamo-fascist-commie AQ folks. Oh well, it'll make it easier for them to collect taxes from the few remaining taxpayers when the bill comes due for Bushes extravagances.
6 - Doug Hunter
"gave 50-50 odds that your government would move from the sham democracy it is now to an open dictatorship"
That's funny. My contact, a recent convert to nihilism who was raised an orthodox Jew within the Jewish power elite who control the protestant figureheads that run the sham democracy, says there's a 100% chance you're experiencing paranoid delusions as a result of your childish apocolypse fantasy blurring the line between reality and fiction.
7 - gonzo marx
for Doug - glad i can provide a moments Thought and Reflection...as for why i think it's beyond dangerous...
it's the *we don't know* factor, the lack of oversight..the fact that even with a cursory examination of the TSP previously, the FBI found over 200 cases of purely domestic wiretapping (that they could find, and would admit to)... with no Judicial review, and sketchy Congressional oversight (long after the fact, and completely dependent on the folks doing the tapping to tell the Truth..NO WAY to check up on them)...
as i stated, all the Administration has to do is point their finger and say "enemy combatant"..and just about ALL your Rights and Protections are gone...you know what an *unperson* is, yes?
go ahead and google "carnivore" and "echelon"
Ruvy - i'll take the bet...imo, far too many cranky Individualists to let it go too far, for too long...but i do admit the slow erosion if far worse than any attempted coup
bliffle - don't i Wish that was all we had to worry about...tax collectors are the least of it, imo
well..this is how my mad peckings come out when i type all normal like...not as much Fun as my usual Stylings..but it fulfills an olde bet with Mark about me being able to do 2 *straight* articles
pay up Schannon......
heh
Excelsior?
8 - Dave Nalle
The surprise for me is the wide margin it won by in the Senate. That took more than a few democrats.
Dave
9 - Dr Dreadful
So Lumpy, what do you think?
...Lumpy?
10 - gonzo marx
hence the title of the Article
piss poor "leadership" in both House and Senate, this was a completely blown call made by the DLC types and their strategists...
when will these shitweasels we elect realize that we elect them usually to fix something the guy before them fucked up?
i mean, come the fuck on, when you win both House and Senate, you should know you won to reverse some directions...or at least alter course...
to me, everything can be summed up with the phrase *checks and balances*...and the Ds have been woefully incompetent so far...
but all that aside...as i said, it's what we don't know that causes the most concern, and sets off the alarms...
and there may indeed be no abuses....yet
but that doesn't change the fact that what makes the American Experiment unique has suffered a possibly fatal Affliction...only Time will tell if "We the People" can correct it, or become the sheeple that some think of U.S.
Excelsior?
11 - gonzo marx
geez...O dreadful Phd!!
thas it? one crossthreaded Jest...no Critique...not even poking Fun at my poor English?
/disappointed
heh...
Excelsior?
12 - Dr Dreadful
Your English is fine, mate. I'm just waiting to hear from the Lumpenator is all.
Frankly this is all too sickening. In some ways I'm glad I'm not a US citizen so I don't have to take personal responsibility for the clueless shits in Washington. But on the other hand, I live here. I feel the distress a parent feels towards a wayward child. I also know that even if I move away, whatever the US does is going to affect me wherever in the world I park my bum. It's just so sad and depre
...You see, that could have been Georgie Boy or one of his cronies deciding I'm an enemy combatant and whisking me away from my keyboard in mid-rant at dead of night, never to be seen again.
I suppose one may hope for poetic justice, however, namely that Hillary, once elected Prez, decides GW is an enemy combatant and whisks him off never to be seen again.
Feh.
13 - Dr Dreadful
...And it's MD, gonzo. I didn't spend six years at Dreadful Medical School to be called PhD, thank you very much.
Riiiight...
14 - STM
Times change. Extraordinary situations call for extraordinary measures. That doesn't mean you have to have all your rights taken from you, however. But haven't US governments enacted this legislation before, though? Like in WWII?
My understanding also is that US citizens are still entitled to the protections of the criminal justice system, even under this legislation, while non-citizens aren't.
If it's any consolation, those of us living in other countries that also value personal freedoms and liberties are going through a similar thing.
You can now be held almost indefinitely in Australia provided a magistrate or judge agrees to regular reviews of your detention and the police can present a reasonable case for keeping you. Some courts won't, as was the case recently with Mohamed Haneef, the Indian doctor working on the Gold Coast who had alleged links to the would-be UK terror bombers (you know, the one that just happened).
He was held for nearly a month, and eventually the courts let him go after agreeing on three occasions to his continued detention under anti-terror legislation. There is, however, a suggestion that he may actually know more than he is letting on - and lo and behold, now he is gone.
Like I say, we are living in extraordinary times, and extraordinary measures may be required for the time being.
And I would have thought the people who'd be really pissed off at losing their rights would be the 3000 killed on 9/11, the victims of the London bus and underground bombings, and the Bali victims.
Perhaps if some of this type of legislation had been in force at the time, they might still be alive.
I reckon my right to go to work without being blown up negates the rights of any terror suspect just now.
It's also worth noting that these western governmenst whose people have fallen victim to these idiots may be in receipt of information right now that the rest of us aren't party to.
15 - gonzo marx
for #8...here's the breakdown of the Senate vote
YEAs ---60
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
NAYs ---28
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 12
Alexander (R-TN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Bunning (R-KY)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Gregg (R-NH)
Harkin (D-IA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
Murray (D-WA)
and there's the list...interesting that the D presidential contenders voted against this piece of shit legislation...and McCain not voting on it
but the Record stands for itself, i guess
Excelsior?
16 - gonzo marx
for Doc D - well then , excuUUUuuuUuuuuse me!
but you do get high marx for the Dr. Evil clip...
Stan the Man - see the (alleged) Ben Franklin quote in the Article...
nuff said
Excelsior?
17 - STM
Geez, I dunno Gonz.
Normally, I'd find it difficult to argue with any sentiment proferred by one Benjamin Franklin, and in this case, I like the sentiment - but there are some REALLY bad bastards out there just now.
They didn't have suitcase nukes in 1776. The worst that could happen was having the Royal Navy send a few shells over (OK, then, a lot of shells).
Still, this is very different, IMO
18 - gonzo marx
dead is dead...where's the difference?
there's ALWAYS some really bad bastards *out there*, no excuse for relinquishing an iota of our Rights...
all i'm Asking is get a fucking warrant, provide oversight for what ANY Administration and it's appointees do...that's the problem here, it's all in the hands of the Executive, the Judicial is bypassed, and any Legislative oversight is subject to the whims of the Administration telling them about everything...you know..the *honor* system
checks and balances, all three branches need to be in on this kind of shit, otherwise it's an Abuse by definition
it's really that basic at it's core, imo
Excelsior?
19 - STM
Like I say, it's happening here too. I must say, when the Feds couldn't find anything to pin on Haneef other than suspicion of supporting a terror act by providing a SIM card to the bungling Glasgow/London bombers, I was extremely dubious.
So, anyhow, eventually the public, the Opposition, the media and the judiciary - one judge said even he'd fail the federal government's "character test" for cancellation of a visa because he'd been associated with criminals all his life - all kicked up a stink about holding him, and they let him go.
But now it turns out that there might be more to it than meets the eye - although "might" is still the operative word. I still think safe is better than sorry.
20 - gonzo marx
so you say it's better to hold folks until you are certain...one way or another...just to be safe, you know?
that works for you?
i like due process, what's the charges? and take it to the Judge approach
Excelsior?
21 - STM
Yes, by all means take it to the judge, observe due process, and stick with Habeus Corpus, which must always remain the cornerstone of our justice systems. We won't at any stage in societies like ours be talking about holding people for years (the Guantanamo nonsense being the exception) but just a matter of weeks, or months at the most. And in these uncertain times, I say balance the ledger sheet a bit give investigators a bit of time as well and then allow a judge to say yay or nay in regard to whether the detention without charge can continue.
22 - Dave Nalle
What's significantly absent in this article is a link to the acutal legislation in question. It's short, why not let people read it?
The changes it makes to FISA could easily be written off as pretty minor - after all, it's FISA which violates our rights, and once you've accepted it, what difference does changing a few nuances as this law does really make?
What's most significant here is the partisanship this article brings to the forefront, with its 'republicans are evil' mentality, and playing up this modification to a policy which originated in the Carter administration as if the changes were the problem rather than the original law itself.
Another manufactured crisis from the culture of perpetual outrage.
Dave
23 - STM
That seems like a dud link Dave
24 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"That's funny. My contact, a recent convert to nihilism who was raised an orthodox Jew within the Jewish power elite who control the protestant figureheads that run....blah blah blah, bullshit bullshit bullshit...
Doug,
Elsewhere I told zing,
"And when I say these things, I do not prattle emptily. I have to live - or die - by the consequences of what I say."
Gonzo, the author of this piece, also knows that a true man lives or dies by the consequences of what he says.
But what I say is wasted on the likes of you. A pity...
25 - Doug Hunter
"as i stated, all the Administration has to do is point their finger and say 'enemy combatant'"
True. That's an awesomely dangerous power and one which might be exploitable on a limited scale in today's climate. The public won't stand for a wholesale version, but you might be able to fuck a few who fit the stereotype.
Also, I didn't see a link to the new law, does it perhaps modify or influence the ability to declare a citizen an enemy combatant? As I understood it is a seperate issue from the phone tapping. (and one which I will more heartily agree with the danger of)