There is something we MUST keep in mind about warrantless spying on Americans

[Frank Lemadeer]

We must all understand something. With warrantless spying we are on a razor's edge. There is only the finest of lines separating us from being targeted, harassed, punished, or retaliated against for thought or speech. And that line is easily crossed because our protection depends only on the will of those in office. There are no remaining checks and balances.

So our only security is the luck of choosing a "nice" person to be in charge. If we are lucky, that person won't abuse the power. And it comes down to pure luck, because seldom is a person what he or she represents themselves to be in a political campaign. And people can and do change. Nice people can become not-so-nice people.

And here is something very important that everyone should be aware of:

The very existence of warrantless spying is itself intimidation.

How many people will give second thoughts to expressing honest opinions, or resistance to encroachments on their liberties (or their wallets) if in the backs of their minds they know anything they say or type is archived permanently can be traced back to them? The numbers of voices that will speak out on any subject, whether it's abuse, human rights violations, torture, exploitation, denial of rights and civil liberties, or any other subject will diminish rapidly.

This is a bad, bad road we're on. It's not something to minimize or compromise on.

[Richard Steele]

1. Hello, Frank- welcome to DU!

Excellent post. Recommended.

[Frank Lemadeer]

6. Thank you for the welcome

And for the k&r. :)

[chimpymustgo]

2. It's NOT compromise. It's capitulation and collaboration. And I agree with you.

This what we go to the mat over.

[G_j]

3. Great Post, you are right on the money

& a big welcome!

[robinlynne]

4. so very true.

[stillcool]

5. it's not as though it hasn't already been...

going on. It's just now it is the rule rather than the exception. And it already has entered my subconscious. All phone calls, all emails, all letters are subject to interpretation. "They" know where I shop, what I buy, what I read. As long as I, and no one I've ever known in my entire life has not pissed anyone off I should be fine. But then, there are no guidelines as too pissed-offed-edness. Deaf, dumb, and blind is the new American Security Policy.

[Frank Lemadeer]

7. Those who say "If you have nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear"

Are simply saying "As long as what you say and think pleases the leaders you are safe."

And what pleases the leaders can be unpredictable and arbitrary. Leaders can be fickle just like everyone else, and maybe more narcissistic and therefore more threatened, sensitive, and volatile than most, and we all have experiences with such.

So warrantless eavesdropping and archiving communication is subtle intimidation from the get go.

We must understand the stakes are much higher than most people realize.

[Super Soaker Sniper]

26. I have nothing to hide

and just because I cannot think of a more mundane task for someone to do than to listen in on my infuriatingly boring conversations and reading my rambling, meandering, pointless emails it does not mean that my conversations (or those of every other American) are to be listened to by anyone. I am sure that there are other methods, just as effective, of surveiling those that need watching without trampling the rights of every American.

[SammyWinstonJack]

8. K&R

[mmonk]

9. Great post.

You nailed it.

[slipslidingaway]

10. Excellent points, thank you and welcome to DU...

"...And that line is easily crossed because our protection depends only on the will of those in office. There are no remaining checks and balances.

So our only security is the luck of choosing a "nice" person to be in charge. If we are lucky, that person won't abuse the power. And it comes down to pure luck, because seldom is a person what he or she represents themselves to be in a political campaign. And people can and do change. Nice people can become not-so-nice people..."

:hi:

[Canuckistanian]

11. Oh, yes. Definitely.

And if they've done this to the 4th Amendment, what's stopping them from going further?

We've all seen how relentless they are. The vote yesterday just encouraged more of the same behavior.

Excellent points.

K&R

[flyarm]

12. ahh it is illegal until Obama and crew signed away our rights ?????

yeah I thought so..all those lovely so called dwems who voted to shit all over our rights and our constitution!!

the NEW DEMOCRATS!

GOTTA LOVE THEM RIGHT?????

[slipslidingaway]

13. Keeping this kicked n/t

[windoe]

14. K & R How many terrorists have been caught by domestic surveillance?

It is a preemptive policy that can only lead to further erosion of personal liberties on multiple fronts.
Welcome!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Well said, and it is the fear they count on

I expect a few examples to be made and the rest will fall right in line

[Frank Lemadeer]

16. Glennzilla pulls no punches taking Obama to task on this

Obama's support for the FISA "compromise"

Warning, it's brutal, but I feel must be said. And I am an Obama fan.

Glenn speculates on the reasons Obama made the statement of support, a shift from earlier statements about opposing telecom amnesty.

as Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin asserts and Digby wonders -- Obama believes he will be President and wants these extreme powers for himself, no doubt, he believes, because he'll exercise them magnanimously, for our Own Good. Whatever the motives -- and I don't know (or much care) what they are -- Obama has embraced a bill that is not only redolent of many of the excesses of Bush's executive power theories and surveillance state expansions, but worse, has done so by embracing the underlying rationale of "Be-scared-and-give-up-your-rights." Note that the very first line of Obama's statement warns us that we face what he calls "grave threats," and that therefore, we must accept that our Leader needs more unlimited power, and the best we can do is trust that he will use it for our Good.

Pretty much my feelings in the OP. I hope the craziness subsides and reason prevails soon in all of this, so our Constitutional protections are honored and upheld. I'm not too optimistic, but I still hope.

[nashville_brook]

17. i remember talking about these issues on DU as a "what if" scenario -- like,

what do you think you'll do differently "if" this becomes a problem.

even if people aren't coming after us (currently), there is still the intimidation of "total information awareness." would you want your employer to read every post you've made on DU? how about the (republican) judge in your divorce case?

it's intimidation -- pure and simple. and it's impact might not be in "rounding us up" -- it's likely to be much more insidious than that.

[zeemike]

18. Welcome to DU

You kick but for a newbie

[Frank Lemadeer]

19. Best welcome compliment ever

Thanks! I've lurked since Katrina, so I feel like I've been here a while. :)

[Pooka Fey]

20. Great post, Newbie. Welcome to DU.

:hi:

[noise]

21. The program is being sold on the notion that Bush acted in good faith

What was the benefit of the secrecy? Did potential terrorists truly believe they were not being watched? We are expected not to question the idea that he truly believed that it would be beneficial to keep an illegal program from being debated in public. It also shows his contempt for the Constitution and the public in that his personal considerations were more important than 4th amendment protections.

If Bush (and any government official for that matter) doesn't want to do the job without the crutch of police state powers, then he should resign. Why should the United States alter Constitutional government simply because one corrupt, unqualified man claims that such alteration is required?

[Disturbed]

22. I still don't understand the need for "Spying without a Warrant".

Spying can be done for up to 72 hrs without a Warrant. After that permission must be sought for further investigation. Why does this need to be changed?

Why should Telcoms retroactively get Immunity if they have done nothing Illegal?

[roody]

23. Thanks for the reminder to return to saying,

F*** Bush, every time I am on the phone.

[kentuck]

24. Something else to remember...

It started before 9/11.

[Enrique]

25. the bill does not allow warrantless spying on Americans

according to Pelosi, that is misinformation.

Here's the text of the legislation:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c110IXEDRd:e2371:

[Frank Lemadeer]

27. According to the ACLU and Glenn Greenwald, it does

Glenn Greenwald:

It is absolutely false that the only unconstitutional and destructive provision of this "compromise" bill is the telecom amnesty part. It's true that most people working to defeat the Cheney/Rockefeller bill viewed opposition to telecom amnesty as the most politically potent way to defeat the bill, but the bill's expansion of warrantless eavesdropping powers vested in the President, and its evisceration of safeguards against abuses of those powers, is at least as long-lasting and destructive as the telecom amnesty provisions. The bill legalizes many of the warrantless eavesdropping activities George Bush secretly and illegally ordered in 2001. Those warrantless eavesdropping powers violate core Fourth Amendment protections. . . .

The ACLU specifically identifies the ways in which this bill destroys meaningful limits on the President's power to spy on our international calls and emails.

The ACLU page referenced by Glenn:

H.R. 6304, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 (6/19/2008)

The ACLU recommends a no vote on H.R. 6304, which grants sweeping wiretapping authority to the government with little court oversight and ensures the dismissal of all pending cases against the telecommunication companies. Most importantly:

• H.R. 6304 permits the government to conduct mass, untargeted surveillance of all communications coming into and out of the United States, without any individualized review, and without any finding of wrongdoing.

• H.R. 6304 permits only minimal court oversight. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) only reviews general procedures for targeting and minimizing the use of information that is collected. The court may not know who, what or where will actually be tapped.

• H.R. 6304 contains a general ban on reverse targeting. However, it lacks stronger language that was contained in prior House bills that included clear statutory directives about when the government should return to the FISA court and obtain an individualized order if it wants to continue listening to a US person’s communications.

• H.R.6304 contains an “exigent” circumstance loophole that thwarts the prior judicial review requirement. The bill permits the government to start a spying program and wait to go to court for up to 7 days every time “intelligence important to the national security of the US may be lost or not timely acquired.” By definition, court applications take time and will delay the collection of information. It is highly unlikely there is a situation where this exception doesn’t swallow the rule.

• H.R. 6304 further trivializes court review by explicitly permitting the government to continue surveillance programs even if the application is denied by the court. The government has the authority to wiretap through the entire appeals process, and then keep and use whatever it gathered in the meantime.

• H.R. 6304 ensures the dismissal of all cases pending against the telecommunication companies that facilitated the warrantless wiretapping programs over the last 7 years. The test in the bill is not whether the government certifications were actually legal – only whether they were issued. Because it is public knowledge that they were, all the cases seeking to find out what these companies and the government did with our communications will be killed.

• Members of Congress not on Judiciary or Intelligence Committees are NOT guaranteed access to reports from the Attorney General, Director of National Intelligence, and Inspector General.

[LVjinx]

30. Oh, according to Pelosi. That means it DOES allow warrantless spying on Americans.

Pelosi's word has no value whatsoever.

[MNDemNY]

31. And Pelosi's credibility on this issue is beyond reproach.

:sarcasm: She is complicit, and must be purged.

[TheWatcher]

28. Allow me to roll out the Red Carpet

And Welcome you to DU!

Excellent Post Frank. Good to have you here. :hi:

[Echo In Light]

29. No compromise. K&R