|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Vyan (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jul-23-06 01:59 PM Original message |
One Step from the Brink of Totalitarianism |
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 02:34 PM by Vyan
In May I wrote that we are fast approaching a defining moment for the future of our nation.
It appears now that the very moment I spoke of, may have already occured.This week one of the most signficant events in slowing the steady slide of America toward Totalitarianism took place in a San Francisco courtroom. The judge issued a 72 page ruling which took the Bush Adminstration to task for it's claims that "state secrets" could be divulged by the persuit of this suit by pointing out that the existence and many of the details of the NSA's warrantless spying program have already been confirmed by the government itself. "the very subject matter of this action is hardly a secret. As described above, public disclosures by the government and AT&T indicate that A&T is assisting the government to implement some kind of surveillance program" . . . Since 9-11, and possibly even before, the Bush Administration has sought to gather as much power until itself as it can. Rejecting both the oversight of Congress as well as the importants of the courts in keeping an even balance between the various branches of our government. We have to face the fact that Bush seeks TOTAL Power. He is a Totalitarian. He claims the ability to spy on anyone he chooses, without judicial review or congressional authorization. To detain them without an indictment, hearing or charges - including American citizens (Hamdi, Padilla) And yes, to torture them. The only thing missing is summary execution - but then again, after over 100 deaths in custody, that may only be a matter of semantics. Just look at what former State Dept Chief of State Lawrence Wilkerson has said about Bush. Wilkerson calls Bush an unsophisticated leader who has been easily swayed by "messianic" neoconservatives and power-hungry, secretive schemers in the administration. In a landmark speech in October, Wilkerson said: "What I saw was a cabal between the vice president of the United States, Richard Cheney, and the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, on critical issues that made decisions that the bureaucracy did not know were being made."But Bushco's aims have been increasing frustred by the courts. Following quickly on the drubbing the Bush Administration received with the Hamdan decision, this ruling has opened a wide crack in the door to the 36 various lawsuits against AT&T and the NSA for violations of privacy and the avoidance of the FISA court - and indicates that my own initial impressions of ramifications of Hamdan were right on the money. If the AUMF didn't authorize Gitmo, torture or Military Tribunals, it didn't authorize the NSA Spying program either!The judge makes this point by going not to Hamdan, but to the previous Gitmo detainee case Hamdi v Rumsfeld, where much of Bush's initial theory of executive power was first given a hard bitch-slap by the Supreme Court. "Even the state secrets privilege has its limit. While the court recognizes and respects the executive's constitutional duty to protect the nation from threats, the court also takes seriously its constitutional duty to adjudicate the disputes that come before it. See Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 US 507, 536 (2004) (plurality opinion) ("Whatever power the United States Constitution envisions for the Executive in its exchanges with other nations or with enemy organizations in times of conflict, it most assuredly envisions a role for all three branches when individual liberties are at stake").The issuance is this opinion is unfortunately not the end of the story. The government can still appeal the ruling with the 9th Circuit and yet again the Bush Administration could find itself again before the Supreme court on the issue of limits of it's own power. Also there is pending legislation authored by Arlen Specter which was effectively codify the current methods used by the NSA to avoid FISA, and also shift jurisdiction of all of these cases to that secret court and away from the 9th circuit. It can not be doubted that the Administration will use every tool in it's arsenal to fight this. As confirmed by Alberto Gonzales, Bush has already denied clearances to members of the Justice department's Office of Personal Responsiblity and effectively shutdown thier investigation of the NSA program, while simultaneously allowing the DOJ's Civil division full access in order to fight suits such as this one. Some commentary from Anonymous Liberal on this piont:
The likelyhood of Bush prevailing on this issue before the Supreme Court that just released the Hamdan ruling are somewhere between razor thin and nonexistant. The ramifications are that the Administration will respond to any future revelations of illegal wrong-doing under the cover of National Security with abject denial and obfuscation. In fact this may already be occuring. Just two weeks ago it was reported that Congressmen Pete Hoekstra (R), head of the House Intelligence subcommittee overseeing NSA had written a letter to the President on May 18 that: "alleged Intelligence Community activities" not described to committee members in classified briefings. "If these allegations are true," he wrote to Bush, "they may represent a breach of responsibility by the Administration, a violation of law and . . . a direct affront to me and the Members of this committee."These are apparently activities that go far beyond what has been revealed so far and have led to the suit against AT&T for cooperating with the NSA and granting them access to the phone calls and emails of tens of millions of Americans. Something so bad it made a Republican jump up and shout that Bush may have (again) broken the law. The details of this program have not been revealed, and by law - the Congressmen who have now been briefed on these additional programs can not speak about them without violating national security. However, there may be a clue to what this is via other sources - namely former NSA member Russell Tice who testified before Senate staffers concerning various Special Access Programs (SAP) that he was involved in at NSA on May 17th - one day before Hoekstra's letter to President Bush. Before his testimony Tice stated that what we had heard about so far was only the tip of the iceberg. After his testimony Tice said This "I am set to testify in closed session to the Senate Armed Services Committee about the SAP programs I was involved with at NSA and DoD on Wednesday, 17 May 2006. I am to meet with Senate staffers in the Russell Senate Office Building, in room 228, at 12:57pm EDT. From there, we will immediately be moving to a secure locations that is accredited for SAP level discussions. I apparently will not know where this location is until I am escorted to it on Wednesday."Actually I have concerns that this itself may have been questionable legally. I held a SAR (Special Access Required) Clearance for over a dozen years while working for a Defense Contractor, and SAP level access is literally program specific. It goes beyond "Top Secret Clearance" and requires that a person be specifically cleared for each individual program. Just because someone holds a SAP clearance to one program doesn't mean that they can be given information about a different SAP program. These programs are compartmentalized from each other. I worked along side others who worked on programs I had no knowledge of, this is standard operating procedure - those without a specific "Need to Know" - don't. Although Tice testified under Federal Whistle-Blower protection, the ability of those who he briefed to share that information - even within Congress - is severely limited. It still remains a question whether the new and even more illegal programs revealed by Tice to Congress are the same programs that prompted Hoekstra's letter and his eventual briefing. I would suspect they are - but one wonders, what if they aren't and the truth is that there thing going on at NSA and DoD that are beyond both Tice and Hoekstra's current knowledge? In all likelyhood what Tice revealed wasn't the Bank Data Program, since that was handled by the Treasury Dept, not NSA. Could it be the rebirth of the Total Information Awareness that was supposedly defunded by Congress or something far worse? Just how deep does the rabbit hole go, and even with this court decision - will we ever truly find out? Vyan Crossposted on Truth 2 Power Blog Update Breaking reports indicate that former Rep Randy "Duke" Cunningham used the secrecy of "black world" budgets to hide his own illegal activities directing funds to various defense contractors within the House Intelligence Committee. Cunningham's case has put a stark spotlight on the oversight of classified — or "black" — budgets. Unlike legislation dealing with social and economic issues, intelligence bills and parts of defense bills are written in private, in the name of national security. True enough, and he hasn't been the only one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
C_U_L8R (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jul-23-06 02:03 PM Response to Original message |
1. unitary executive = eine reich |
what else could it be
|
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vyan (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jul-23-06 05:17 PM Response to Original message |
2. Gen Michael Hayden |
also testified before Congress in closed session on May 17th, the same day as Tice, as part of his confirmation hearings for CIA Director. Just look at this exchange with Senator Levin over the question of whether the President has told the American people the entire truth concerning the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program:
LEVIN: Is that the whole program? vyan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 02:31 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC