Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite View Article Stats
1 comment

OpEdNews Op Eds

The Telecom Immunity Battle: A Red Herring?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It


Become a Fan
  (8 fans)

opednews.com

Red herring: An argument, given in reply, that does not address the original issue. Critically, a red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the subject or divert the argument.

As I sit and wonder if the vote I cast in NJs presidential primary for Barack Obama - strike that -  against Hillary Clinton actually registered, I am reminded of a senator whose brief run for president actually stood for something. From the outset, Sen. Chris Dodd had little chance of winning his party's nomination, but something he said in mid-October 2007, grabbed the attention of frustrated Americans nationwide. Regarding President Bush's "hold my breath 'til I turn blue" insistence that the U.S. Senate grant immunity to telecom companies, Chris Dodd said "Hell no." Okay, I just made that up - but I've been dreaming of members of Congress rising to the floor one by one declaring proudly "Hell no" when faced with the dangerous and self-serving demands of George W. Bush and his cronies.

Actually, what Dodd said last October was a bit more eloquent. He declared, "While the President may think that it's right to offer immunity to those who break the law and violate the right to privacy of thousands of law-abiding Americans, I want to assure him it is not a value we have in common and I hope the same can be said of my fellow Democrats in the Senate. For too long we have failed to respect the rule of law and failed to protect our fundamental civil liberties. I will do what I can to see to it that no telecommunications giant that was complicit in this Administration's assault on the Constitution is given a get-out-of-jail-free card."

To that, I said "Hell yes." When the senator threatened a filibuster, I even dropped some green in the bucket to ‘encourage his courage.’ When asked for another contribution so the good senator could continue to carry this message, I put on the brakes - for two reasons.

First, I don't subscribe to a coin-operated style of doing the people's business. Secondly, while Dodd argued against giving the telecoms a "get-out-of-jail-free card," he had already pressed one into the palms of both Bush and Cheney when he declared, "Impeachment proceedings suck all of the oxygen out of the room." Nevertheless, Chris Dodd stayed true to his commitment to fight telecom immunity and for that I am grateful.

The battle wages on in the Senate. When I watch these proceedings I think about how they...well... suck all of the oxygen out of the room. How can I say this about an issue as important as our constitutional right to privacy and one in which I regularly contact my senators? Because, clearly the air is very thin in those rooms. Why is so much time and effort being spent on arguing about immunizing phone companies when enough evidence exists to bring the Bush administration to account for their role in those same crimes? True, the telecoms were greedy and/or spineless players, but in the end they were no more than pawns to the dastardly duo that are the president and vice president.

Still, the American people have a right to recourse and we must continue to demand that the telecoms not be dipped in the same accountability repellant that coat both Bush and Cheney. Clue to Congress: It's water-soluble. Simply wet them down with Watergate-like impeachment hearings and you will easily strip them of their overreaching powers. Question for Congress: Have you forgotten your history? The second article of impeachment against Richard M. Nixon was for electronic surveillance he claimed was critical to national security.

Some will tell you that granting immunity to the telecoms will destroy our chances to learn what Bush and company were up to with their domestic surveillance. A letter recently addressed to Democracy for America (DFA) members penned by Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com goes like this:

"Dear DFA member, Today is a genuine opportunity - the first in a long time - for Senate Democrats to take a meaningful stand against the lawlessness of the Bush administration. If telecom amnesty were granted, it would result in the immediate dismissal of numerous lawsuits against the telecoms, thus extinguishing the only remaining means for discovering what our Government really was doing over the last seven years as it illegally spied on our telephone conversations and emails."

Really? The only remaining means? This coming from an authority on constitutional law? Here’s an idea. Subpoena the phone companies so they can discuss their role in illegal wiretapping in the confines of an impeachment hearing. You can shed light on their activities and indict the Bush administration all in one shot.

DFA has been sending out a lot of emails lately. Democracy for America is a political action committee committed to "rebuilding" the Democratic Party from the bottom up. It is led by Jim Dean, brother of Howard, former presidential hopeful and chair of the DNC. In addition to their usual activity of garnering support for progressive Democratic candidates, DFA has suddenly become a very vocal opponent of telecom immunity. A recent message from Jim Dean stresses the importance of fighting immunity. Like Glenn Greenwald, Dean tells members "[immunity] means we may never know the full extent of the administration’s illegal domestic spying programs."

That’s funny, because in my circles the administration’s involvement is common knowledge. Perhaps it’s because...They admitted to it! Constitutionally minded people around the country eagerly awaited for Congress to act on this discovery after the New York Times belatedly published the story in December 2005. And act they did - by granting the Bush cabal new and improved powers - temporarily of course...right?

Immediately following the NY Times disclosure, Bush fessed up. In a December 17, 2005 radio address, he explained that yeah, he did it and it was all to protect you and me. Not only that, he explained he had "reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks," and that he would do so "for as long as our nation faces a continuing threat from al Qaeda and related groups." Bush claimed that these actions were "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." Why? Because as President, he authorized it. Later, we would learn that domestic spying was initiated not as a direct response to the attacks on 9/11, but shortly after Bush was sworn in as President.

Last week on Rush Limbaugh’s show, Dick Cheney confirmed the telecom involvement by stating "retroactive liability protection for the companies that have worked with us and helped us prevent further attacks against the United States."

Yet there never seems to be enough evidence for our United States Congress to take definitive action that involves accountability. For that matter, there are many "progressive" groups that have been unwilling to utter the word impeachment.

Jim Dean of DFA has remained virtually silent on the issue of impeachment perhaps following the lead of big bro, Howard, who when asked about impeachment remarked "We don’t play gotcha politics." Impeachment is mentioned six times in the Constitution. Which article and section is entitled "Gotcha politics?"

Jim Dean though, offers us a solution beyond pressuring our senators. "What can you do?" he asks. "If you have a cell phone from Verizon or AT&T, you can keep on sending them your money and supporting them - and President Bush - in their cover-up. Or you can join DFA Wireless - DFA Wireless is powered by CREDO Mobile and 10% of your monthly charges can be directed to support DFA."

DFA invited Michael Kieschnick, president of CREDO Mobile to use DFAs list to ask members to "support a company that opposes - rather than enables - the Bush administration’s illegal wiretapping." He too warns that "Retroactive immunity would prevent us from finding out what the Bush administration asked these companies to do and who asked them to act outside of the law."

CREDO, a division of Working Assets has, over the last 20 years, donated more than $50 million dollars to progressive non-profits including the ACLU and Amnesty International. More recently, they have directed some funds to Iraq Veterans Against the War and the Center for Constitutional Rights
- two of my personal favorites.

As I sifted through numerous anti-immunity emails from DFA including personal messages from Jim Dean, Glenn Greenwald, Michael Kieschnick and Caroline Frederickson (director ACLU Washington Legislative Office), I realized there was something missing. While all these emails mention telecom giants AT&T and Verizon as privacy offenders, a third, Sprint Nextel is consistently left out of the discussion despite pending litigation.

From a February 5, 2006 USA TODAY article, Leslie Cauley reports that "The National Security Agency has secured the cooperation of large telecommunications companies including AT&T, MCI [now Verizon] and Sprint, in its efforts to eavesdrop without warrant..."

Next Page  1  |  2

 

http://bit.ly/birenpics

Cheryl Biren is a Philadelphia-based researcher, writer, editor and photographer with a focus on social justice. From 2007-2011, she served on the editorial board of Opednews.com.

Cheryl has also consulted for the Rob Kall Radio Show with (more...)
 
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
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.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

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

Breaking Camp: Veterans Occupy National Archives Building

Nancy Pelosi Book Signing: Know Your Power, Just Don't Speak Truth to It

Animal Rights Activists Confront Parents at Ringling Bros. Circus

Meet the Protester Who 'May Have Received a Minor Injury' at the Hofstra Debate

Veterans Want YOU for Civil Resistance!

NJ Congressman: Bush Admin. Will 'Gulf of Tonkinize' Iran

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  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Prior to reading this, I was going to switch my ce... by Chris Check on Thursday, Feb 7, 2008 at 1:15:42 PM

 

>

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend


Copyright © 2002-2014, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum