Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit 1 Share on StumbleUpon 1 Tell A Friend 2 (5 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   No comments

General News

Obama's Watergate?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 3 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 1   Supported 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to None 6/22/13

Become a Fan
  (25 fans)

Does it Matter Who's Rummaging Through Our Lives?  

By William Boardman   (6.17.13) 

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

 

When you have leaks, you need plumbers. by [Fox News]
 

National Security Agency (NSA) Covertly Inspects Anyone's Private Life

How many people do you know who, hearing that the NSA was busy obliterating privacy, have reacted to the effect of: well, duh, or that's old news, or worse: didn't we make that legal?   It's not as though the NSA is carrying out break-ins, is it? 

Forty-one years ago, on June 17, 1972, the break-in at the Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate Hotel evoked similar reactions along the lines of big deal, or who cares?  The Nixon White House officially dubbed it a "third-rate burglary attempt," with a secret irony that Oval Office operatives could enjoy right through the fall election and President Nixon's sweeping, landslide victory. 

Secretly (except from himself) taped six days after the break-in, the President asked: "Who was the a**hole who ordered it?"  Some take this to mean he didn't know about the break-in in advance, others think it means he was aware that he was taping himself and needed to sound innocent.  Either way, he ordered a cover-up that was effective for a time. 

Like current White House, with its record number of prosecutions under the 1913 Espionage Act, the Nixon White House could also behave obsessively about leaks.  In May 1969, when the New York Times revealed the secret bombing of Cambodia (not that it was secret to the Cambodians), Nixon ordered more than a dozen FBI wiretaps, but didn't find the leaker.  So the White house created its own secret team, called the Plumbers Unit, to stop leaks by wiretapping, burglarizing, and any means necessary. 

Thanks to Congress and 9/11, Obama Doesn't Need to Break the Law 

But just because the President may not need to break the law, that doesn't mean his administration hasn't broken the law anyway. 

The first wave of post-Watergate legislation in the early 1970s did much to make government more accountable and transparent, at least in principle.   But the second wave of post-Watergate legislation has had a counter-revolutionary effect, expanding the powers of government and curtailing the freedoms of citizens, most notably in the fear-driven and wildly misnamed USA PATRIOT Act, but in many less sweeping but equally freedom-inhibiting bills as well. 

Most characteristic of the relationship of Americans and the law over the past three decades is the response to the Bush Administration illegally wiretapping Americans -- about which the Congress did nothing but make the activities legal and give the phone companies retroactive immunity from prosecution.  This is what is generally referred to in popular demagoguery as "the rule of law."  

By Now American Discourse is Deep into Orwellian Obfuscation and Deceit

"Nobody is listening to your telephone calls," President Obama blandly and irrelevantly assured the American people after the NSA sweep of all our meta-data was revealed.  The assurance was irrelevant because the issue was the administration's secret interpretation of the law governing the secret workings of a secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. 

According to Obama, in an interview with Charlie Rose, the secret decisions of the secret court operating on the basis of a secret legal opinion all add up to a system that is "transparent."  Also, it's not eating your lunch. 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Vermonter living in Woodstock: elected to five terms (served 20 years) as side judge (sitting in Superior, Family, and Small Claims Courts); public radio producer, "The Panther Program" -- nationally distributed, three albums (at CD Baby), some (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Nuclear Perceptions Fight Reality

Fukushima Spiking All of a Sudden

Vermont Asks: "What the Fukushima"?

Fukushima Meltdowns: Global Denial At Work

Military-Industrial Complex Owns Vermont

Accountability in Vermont?

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments