Editorial: Spying and politics (Chicago Trib)

[struggle4progress]

Published July 14, 2007

~snip~ In January, the administration ceded ground to critics. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales declared the Justice Department had reached a deal for court oversight of the program, which allows the feds to intercept communications between people in the U.S. and individuals abroad who are suspected of terrorism links without first getting a warrant.

But case closed? Hardly.

The administration says that oversight by a special court has limited the intelligence that agencies can collect. It has proposed new eavesdropping powers, and it has stonewalled demands from Congress for more information on the existing program.

"We are actually missing a significant portion of what we should be getting," Michael McConnell, the director of national intelligence, said in congressional testimony. McConnell asserted that the law should be revamped to respond to dramatic changes in communications technology used by intelligence targets in this country. The White House has proposed to expand the power to spy on foreigners in the U.S. who are suspected of having links to terrorist activities. It also wants to provide retroactive legal cover to telecommunications companies that aided the government with such information as phone and e-mail records. ~snip~

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0714edit2jul14,1,4485350.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

[bullimiami]

1. the telecoms broke the law. they conspired with the executive brach

to usurp the power of the government for themselves in defiance of the constitution and the law.
this is treason.
and you can bet that they used the power for political gain.

[Peace Patriot]

2. The editorial is pretty good, but it doesn't go nearly far enough in condemning

government spying without a warrant, nor in indicting the Bush Junta as CRIMINALS for repeatedly breaking the law, and as thugs and scofflaws for bragging about it.

It says, toward the end, "...it is essential to retain court oversight of domestic spying efforts that could, if left unchecked, infringe on civil liberties."

But the editorial had previously pointed out that--according to an appeals court ruling--you don't have standing to sue for injury if you can't prove you were spied upon, and you can't prove that you were spied upon because the fucking spying program is SECRET--and the Bush Junta of course has bent and broken every law and rule of conduct it could to goddamn KEEP IT secret.

Why would the Bush Junta want to spy on many thousands of people without a warrant? They can get a warrant after the fact, in cases of emergency, or even at their whim. All they have to do is subject their spying to a SECRET COURT at SOME POINT. Not much to ask. Only guarantee that they are not spying on you and me and Nancy Pelosi.

So-o-o-o-o, it is fair and just to PRESUME that Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and others are using illegal, warrantless spying to monitor the lives and activities of their domestic political opposition, of Republicans they need to keep in line, and no doubt, business rivals of their corporate buds, and for all sorts of other completely illegitimate and unconstitutional purposes. I'd guess the same about torture. Who can believe that ANYTHING these murderers and thieves have done is to "keep us safe"? Nope. I figure the torture was to track down and kill anyone along their money trail to Al Qaeda, and witnesses/potential whistleblowers to their other crimes, and for business purposes, and maybe for fun.

The Trib says "if left unchecked," this spying program COULD "infringe on civil liberties." But it WAS left "unchecked"! It has been "unchecked" for years. The damage is done. The fallout is everywhere--in timid politicians, in silenced dissent, in the lapdog media. The country stinks with spying, blackmail and intimidation.

So I'd advise the Trib not to be so nice about it. This is not a policy issue. This is a CRIMINAL MATTER--that the criminals are in a position to keep covered up and secret.

[struggle4progress]

3. But it does note that the Administration demands more power while stonewalling oversight

And that may be a powerful criticism, that can be heard across the political spectrum