Tag: W Bush

Posted on

So much for “government for, of and by the people…”

Yet another group opposes/debunked the immunity for telecoms whom have willingly broken the law under the command of the commander in chief without concern for the rights of the people they compromise:

CCIA (Computer & Communications Industry Association which represents Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Sun, Oracle and other technology giants) dismisses with contempt the manufactured hysteria that industry will not aid the United States Government when the law is clear. As a representative of industry, I find that suggestion insulting. To imply that our industry would refuse assistance under established law is an affront to the civic integrity of businesses that have consistently cooperated unquestioningly with legal requests for information. This also conflates the separate questions of blanket retroactive immunity for violations of law, and prospective immunity, the latter of which we strongly support.

I’ve read quite a bit on this and our current laws afford the us government quite a bit of power to eavesdrop on the public with out the need for immunity from the telecoms that actually perform this. They’ve been doing it for years. The latest is that the Dems are going to lay down again and allow this to roll through per the W Bush plan. What a pathetic waste of limp dick politicians (again the dems) that can’t even stand up to citizen rights or their constituents whom strongly oppose this bill from passing…

Posted on

Intellegent Conservative People say FISA will suffice

For those that aren’t up on this issue. FISA is the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which prescribes procedures for the physical and electronic surveillance and collection of “foreign intelligence information” between or among “foreign powers” on territory under United States control. The act created a court which meets in secret, and approves or denies requests for search warrants which would be required to conduct electronic surveillance, physical searches or obtain access to business records. The act was amened with the US Patriot act of 2001 to include terrorism.

The Protect America Act of 2007, signed in August of 2007 was designed by the Bush Administration to ease restrictions on surveillance and allow for unchecked wiretapped of any communications that begin or end in a foreign country. The Act removes from the definition of “electronic surveillance” in FISA, and broadens the power to any surveillance of any individual “reasonably believed to be located outside the United States”.

Because of the broadening of the wording and that the amendment authorized oral approval rather than initial court checked approval, many suspect that this offers the government to conduct warrantless physical searches, wiretaps and even seizures of communications and computer devices and their data which belong to U.S. citizens.

The Act was set up as a temporary amendment, to expire on Feb 1st, 2008 with congress to provide final approval before that time. Within the final approval bill, Bush had added retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies who had cooperated with government on warrantless surveillance efforts since 9/11. The concern from the Administration seems to be protecting corporations from billion dollar lawsuits as a result of violating citizen rights when they offered up customer information without warrant or informing their customers that they were doing so. “It’s particularly important for Congress to provide meaningful liability protection to those companies now facing multi-billion-dollar lawsuits only because they are believed to have assisted in efforts to defend our nation” ~ President George W. Bush

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, noted technology experts from academia and the computing industry wrote an article “Risking Communications Security: Potential Hazards of the Protect America Act” which found significant flaws in the technical implementation of the Protect America Act. They said by implementing the procedures in this Act would create serious security risks, including the danger that such a surveillance system could be exploited by unauthorized users, criminally misused by trusted insiders, or abused by the government.

So today, one of the country’s most conservative papers, The Washington Times, reported that Analysts say FISA will suffice [and there is no need to implement the Protect America Act to improve national security]. This is building on many points that there is no direct correlation to open and warrantless surveillance and national security. The current FISA process works to protect American rights while at the same time preserve national security and this Act’s purpose only seems to broaden governmental power and control, while breaking down citizen rights to privacy.

Bush maintains that he will not allow the Congress to pass this bill without the additions of the retro active immunity for the telecoms, that the new Act is mandatory for National Security and adding that “the House’s failure to pass the bipartisan Senate bill would jeopardize the security of our citizens,” – This has been countered by industry think tanks, analysts, intelligence personnel and now the conservative right.

The excerpts from the Washington Times article:

“…today’s expiration of certain temporary domestic wiretapping laws will have little effect on national security, despite warnings to the contrary by the White House and Capitol Hill Republican leaders.” Washington Times Feb 16th, 2008

“There’s no reason to think our nation will be in any more danger in 2008 than it was in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006.” Said Timothy Lee, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute a a non-profit public policy research foundation headquartered in Washington, D.C. which seeks to broaden the parameters of public policy debate to allow consideration of the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, free markets and peace. Toward that goal, the Institute strives to achieve greater involvement of the intelligent, concerned lay public in questions of policy and the proper role of government.)

“We believe the president’s rhetoric is inaccurate and divisive, and an attempt to stampede the House of Representatives to rubber-stamp legislation by stoking the fears of the American people,” Mr. Hoyer said. “We will not be stampeded.”

Ben Wittes of the Brookings Institution (a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations that advance three broad goals: 1) Strengthen American democracy; 2) Foster the economic and social welfare, security and opportunity of all Americans and 3) Secure a more open, safe, prosperous and cooperative international system) made a comment that he was “somewhat bewildered by the apocalyptic rhetoric” of the White House.

The FISA question, the Right can not answer [Crooks and Liars]

Posted on

The Emperor Clearly has no Clothes but it seems that Nudity is now in Fashion.

On Dec. 3rd, the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) declassified a report that had been released to the current administration intelligence group as late as August of this year, that “with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program“. The next day, Tuesday the Prez stated that he was never forewarned of the current intelligence communities’ report on Iran. This coming out because the report was released to the administration in August, so what he’s saying is at no point in the last 3 months, did anyone let him know… “Uh W, there could be a chance that Iran hasn’t been working towards this nuke goal…” And during that same time, he continued to spout that the Iranians were hell bent on getting these weapons as well as we should be watching them to start WWIII (Bush speech Oct. 18th, 2007).

This intelligence report is now coming under fire from the GOP why? Well: 1) because it contradicts a 2005 report that stated Iran is 10 years from creating a nuke weapon and 2) because the GOP believe the NIE is now politicizing it’s reports (all of the sudden they are NOW favoring a political parties agenda… imagine that), OR 3) could it be that this contradicts the planned agenda and rhetoric the GOP has been throwing up all over America that Iran is a bigger threat than the reality?

The NIE defends it’s report (Vanee Vines, spokeswoman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), defended the report, saying that each NIE is a “group exercise” involving the “entire intelligence community.”) and white house stands by the intelligence communities information (this time) as it’s a coordinated and group effort made up of many agencies and people, and NOT created by just a few political hacks that ignore real intelligence and like a bad reality show, edit together a report to fit their own storyline.

This Bushian etymology was tracked by Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post’s website and shows a time line of his public statements, and how they have evolved as the evolution of intelligence on Iran has come to light – some interesting changes in message can be noted around the time the new intelligence was presented to the administration:

March 31st 2007: “Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon…”

June 5th 2007: Iran’s “pursuit of nuclear weapons…”

June 19th 2007: “consequences to the Iranian government if they continue to pursue a nuclear weapon…”

July 12th 2007: “the same regime in Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons…”

August 6th 2007: “this is a government that has proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon…”

Notice a pattern?

Then as Froomkin asserts around early August the rhetoric changes (McConnell, or someone, must have briefed him then, however, Bush only says that new information was available, however, he wasn’t told what it was):

August 9th: “They have expressed their desire to be able to enrich uranium, which we believe is a step toward having a nuclear weapons program…”

August 28th: “Iran’s active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons…”

October 4th: “you should not have the know-how on how to make a (nuclear) weapon…”

October 17th: “until they suspend and/or make it clear that they, that their statements aren’t real, yeah, I believe they want to have the **capacity**, the **knowledge**, in order to make a nuclear weapon.”

Before August 9th, it’s: Trying to develop, build or pursue a nuclear weapon.

After August 9th, it’s: Desire, pursuit, want…knowledge technology know-how to enrich uranium.

The National Intelligence Estimate this week talks of the Iranians suspending their nuclear weapons program in 2003, yet, still try to push the threat of Iran even though it’s become visible that his tone has changed and he may have lied to the general public about the threat of Iran…. sound familiar??? *Cough* Iraq…

It’s ultimately become clear though, (and if it hasn’t already) that this new information has irreparably damaged American credibility regarding international policy efforts. In my mind it looks like we have someone that has lied to the nation about the treat of violence from another nation, in a time where American resources are already drawn thin in areas of the world that are not immediately threating to home soil interests.

I knew one earlier president that lied and was impeached… he lied about the relationship between himself and an intern – something no where near the threat to civil liberties or American safety as would be lying about the threat of nuclear war.