For all practical purposes, President Bush is now a lame-duck President. If that’s the case, then why is his administration working so hard to take away even more of America’s constitutional rights and his departmental heads are ramping-up their efforts to increase the spying on Americans? The common logic is that when Bush leaves office, some semblance of sanity will return to the United States and we will continue conducting whatever “war on terror” that needs to be undertaken without violating the constitutional rights of innocent Americans. We are all hoping the 2008 elections will bring back the rule of law to Washington, and these illegal and unconstitutional programs will be dismantled. That’s what we are hoping…
But, the signals coming out of Washington speak of a different story - one that is too horrific to imagine! Based on the rush to dismantle almost off of America’s rights to privacy - and these actions and initiatives are being carried out at a dizzying speeds, it would appear that Bush has no plans of leaving office or this Presidency fully expects the next President to follow in his footsteps of tyranny and oppression. The stage is being set for these violations of our civil rights to escalate and careen out of control until eventually - perhaps within months, nothing Americans use their personal computers for will remain private. No, I’m not being melodramatic.
I’ve warned people myself that S 1959, The “Thought Crime Prevention Bill”is being partially implemented even though its still in committee and hasn’t been passed into law yet. Yesterday, a brilliant essay was a written on exactly what privacy the government is attempting to negate by Elliot Cohen, and he describes why this is happening within America. People must be noticing that none of the Presidential candidates are speaking in depth in regard the way that Americans are losing some of their most basic constitutional rights, and none are pledging to stop the constant fear-mongering that our government is using to push its policies through, nor are they pledging to stop those policies that infringe on our constitutional rights. The following Op-Ed is powerful and covers many of the issues that seem to be intertwined with S 1959:
Amid the controversy brewing in the Senate over Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) reform, the Bush administration appears to have changed its strategy and is devising a bold new plan that would strip away FISA protections in favor of a system of wholesale government monitoring of every American’s Internet activities. Now the national director of intelligence is predicting a disastrous cyber-terrorist attack on the U.S. if this scheme isn’t instituted.
It is no secret that the Bush administration has already been spying on the e-mail, voice-over-IP, and other Internet exchanges between American citizens since as early as and possibly earlier than Sept. 11, 2001. The National Security Agency has set up shop in the hubs of major telecom corporations, notably AT&T, installing equipment that makes copies of the contents of all Internet traffic, routing it to a government database and then using natural language parsing technology to sift through and analyze the data using undisclosed search criteria. It has done this without judicial oversight and obviously without the consent of the millions of Americans under surveillance. Given any rational interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, its mass spying operation is illegal and unconstitutional.
But now the administration wants to make these illegal activities legal. And why is that? According to National Director of Intelligence Mike McConnell, who is now drafting the proposal, an attack on a single U.S. bank by the 9/11 terrorists would have had a far more serious impact on the U.S. economy than the destruction of the Twin Towers. “My prediction is that we’re going to screw around with this until something horrendous happens,” said McConnell. So the way to prevent this from happening, he claims, is to give the government the power to spy at will on the content of all e-mails, file transfers and Web searches.
McConnell’s prediction of something “horrendous” happening unless we grant government this authority has a tone similar to that of the fear-mongering call to arms against terrorism that President Bush sounded before taking us to war in Iraq. Now, Americans are about to be asked to surrender their Fourth Amendment rights because of a vague and unsupported prediction of the dangers and costs of cyber-terrorism.
The analogy with the campaign to frighten us into war with Iraq gets even stronger when it becomes evident that along with the establishing of American forces in Iraq, the cyber-security McConnell is calling for was, all along, part of the strategic plan, devised by Dick Cheney and several other present and former high-level Bush administration officials, to establish America as the world’s supreme superpower. This plan, known as the Project for the New American Century, unequivocally recognized “an imperative” for government to not only secure the Internet against cyber-attacks but also to control and use it offensively against its adversaries. The Project for the New American Century also maintained that “the process of transformation” it envisioned (which included the militarization and control of the Internet) was “likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.” All that appears to be lacking to make the analogy complete is the “horrendous” cyber-attack—the chilling analog of the 9/11 attacks—that McConnell now predicts.
It would be a mistake to underestimate the resolve of the Bush administration. But it would be a bigger mistake for Americans not to stand united against this familiar pattern of government scare tactics and manipulation. There are grave dangers to the survival of democracy posed by allowing any present or future government unfettered access to all of our private electronic communications. These dangers must be carefully weighed against the dubious and unproven benefits that granting such an awesome power to government might have on fending off cyber-attacks. (Emphasis added.)
Elliot D. Cohen, PhD, is a media ethicist and critic. His most recent book is “The Last Days of Democracy: How Big Media and Power-Hungry Government Are Turning America Into a Dictatorship.” He is a first-prize winner of the 2007 Project Censored Award. LINK
Only selected excerpts are published and this is an Op-Ed worth reading.
Using a rationale that can only be described as bizarre, the government’s position is that if we don’t allow them (NSA, CIA, etc.) unfettered access to our private computer activities, documents, searches, and downloads, it opens-up the United States and make us vulnerable to being hacked in a “terror attack” on a massive scale.
So the way to prevent this from happening, he claims Mike McConnell, is to give the government the power to spy at will on the content of all e-mails, file transfers and Web searches.
I am nothing more than a patriotic American that is doing whatever I can to further the cause of democracy, the rule of law, and am absolutely outraged on how the Bush administration is defying our Congress, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights! Footnote: I write in a style that I believe is appropriate in today's world where we can't trust the Mainstream News Media, and rather than concentrating on one article alone, which may or may not receive the exposure and emphasis it should, I prefer to meld several relevant stories together, that each taken alone may not expose the entire situation, but when taken-in as a whole, tend to give the reader a better understanding of the subject. One article or story alone does not represent the "Big Picture" - but when several are effectively tied-together it often reveals a trend or broader view of the subject matter that is important to completely understand any given situation. http://justanothercoverup.com/
While American slept their Democracy was swept from them. It makes no difference now whether it is Bush/Cheney or McCain or Clinton or Obama or Giuliani or Romney in the throng at the top. It is easier for this lame duck to do the bidding of whomever the corporations put in his place. The only change that will take place in the White House in 2009 is one of underwear of the incumbent.
by
Dennis Kaiser (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 149 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 9:07:52 AM
Isn't your article just a bit paranoid? Why don't you compare today during the Roosevelt-WWII era, where the government read every single letter and telegram coming and going out of the country. Yet democracy survived.
In any case, to answer your question, why is Bush doing this? First of all, it's not just Bush, but anyway he's doing it because he believes it's the right thing to do. He's not personally listening to your phone calls, and he doesn't personally profit by any of this. If you don't like it, vote for someone who doesn't support it. Simple.
Incidentally, if you are concerned about "thought crimes" bills, then I hope, to be consistent, you also oppose hate-crimes legislation. But somehow, I'm guessing you don't...
by
JR (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 9:38:31 AM
Why? The article is factually correct. It was recently revealed that the Bush administration lied in excess of 935 times - and you think I'm paranoid? Were those lies also "for our own good?" How is it that a President lies to the nation, breaks our own laws, holds Congress and the Constitution in contempt, and has bankrupted our country and people still support him?
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (111 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 276 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 10:12:22 AM
What Bush has done he is responsible! What he has done you under-state and misrepresent. What Bush has done is to dismantle every protection found in the Bill of Rights, the single document that stood between the individual and tyranny. But --maybe that's no longer required reading in schools. Consider as a package, what Bush has done gives him dictatorial powers. And yes --those powers are his PERSONALLY. If Bush deems one a terrorist, that person --even if he/she is a US citizen --may be held, in secret, without an attorney, with trial, indefinitely. In other words, you can be dissapeared. No one --least of a Republican --can be trusted with that kind of power over another person and the founders understood that if you don't.
by
Len Hart (119 articles, 153 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 454 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 5:06:48 PM
the NEXT president will have and will probably use those powers (if Busho doesn't pre-empt the election and do it first). Why do you think the candidates ain't talking about those laws (except Paul and Kucinich - who is no longer a candidate) nor are they making any pledge to rescind them.
This is not a dem vs repub issue. It is a government versus the people issue. And we are losing it.
by
richard (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 664 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 7:00:01 PM
laws are an ongoing project of the Establishment, not just the Bush administration, so the lame duck status of Bush is not relevant.
The leading candidates of both parties are CFR approved. Ron Paul is truly the only candidate of either party who is anti-establishmentand pro individual rights.
It took an all out effort by Andrew Jackson to 'root out' that den of vipers known as the Second Bank of the United States. Likewise, it will take Ron Paul an entire term to root out the Federal Reserve System and restore constitutional government again.
by
wraft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 33 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 10:16:57 AM
Please explain how Olberman is going to save us if the vote is on Monday at 4:30 and his program is at 6:00? And even if he were to have reported on it this past Friday, how's that going to effect anything? The whole world isn't watching Kieth Olberman and of those that do maybe 1% would take action and then the action itself is meaningless. You'd have to believe that petitioning these criminal bastards we refer to as our so-called representatives give a damn about what we the people have to say.
It's nice to have all this hope that phone calls, letters and e-mails have an effect, but reality of the situation dictates that they don't. Please mention one thing that they have done so far? Are we out of Iraq? Have the Patriot Act, Military Commission Act or the proposed S 1959 been trashed and the rights they destroyed restored?
Last week I watched Pelosi talking at a press conference about peoples efforts to get her to put impeachment back on the table and she laughed! She actually laughed at our at the overwhelming response she was receiving and then went on to tell us why we're wrong. See, she knows better than the people she's supposed to represent so we should not bother her before we become the blunt of more of her jokes. And these are the people you think are going to change their tune just because Keith Olberman does a news cast after the fact? Or even before? Do I have to remind you that even Olberman is still M$M? That although he has reported on issues others haven't, those reports are for the most part one shot 5 minute segments, or that he hasn't gone out on the big limb to report about Sibel Edmonds, election theft, or 9/11?
You can forget about Keith Olberman as Superman, nor any one person from the media, no presidential candidate, or anyone from this criminal organization we call our government saving us. Unless we save ourselves we're heading full-bore into a future of the likes not seen since Nazi Germany - only this time 100 times worse.
The only effective way to petition any so-called representative of the people now is to sigh your name on a brick and aim it at their God-damn heads!
What I'm seeing is opposite of what is being told to us. All of the democratic candidates say they will get us out of Iraq (eventually- and that's if Iraq is even discussed) and all of the republican ones seem to be saying we're staying a thousand years, all this while they've just ordered $20 billion more for anti-IED vehicles. So who are you going to believe? Them or your lying eyes? New York is going to get rid of all the E-voting machines after the 08' elections, mean while the rest of the nation, after being aware since 2000 that massive election fraud was taking place have hardly moved at all to right this wrong.
My spin, if we even have an election, and I'm saying this because it's more than just a paranoid suspicion that another false-flag 9/11 attack could very well occur before the election of a magnitude to cause Marshall Law to be enacted for "national security reasons" and have elections postponed or propel one of the war-mongering republican candidates into office. Or either Clinton or Obama, the two most unlikely to win against any republican candidate become the nominee, and democratic party once again snatches defeat from the jaws of victory. Not that it matters. There isn't but 0.05 degrees of separation between the two parties anyway.
Bitter? You bet I am. Angry? Who wouldn't be? A solution? I wish I had one that wouldn't most likely make me an early victim of our new National Security Policy.
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 1059 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 10:31:20 AM
is there to fool some of the people in to believing somebody on the M$M is actually telling the truth.... but the truth is that he is a left wing gatekeeper just about the same way The Nation is.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
by
richard (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 664 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 7:04:35 PM
It's a little too early to say if Bush is leaving.
There's still plenty of time left to attack Iran, declare martial law, finish off the dollar, have a nuclear exchange with Russia, etc. Let's face it, Bush and Cheney are loyal puppets with a mission, and that mission hasn't been completed yet.
But even if we get lucky and Bush doesn't attack Iran, he may still decide he's not ready to go, and if so, who or what is going to stop him?
by
Harold Smith (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 384 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 11:28:24 AM
You are absolutely correct, our rights to privacy are being dismantled as we speak and sadly, most of the American people in this country don't have a clue and the many that do could simply care less. It is precisely the reason why this nefarious administration and the corporate oligarchy currently running this once great country has gotten away with their sinister charade. The extreme measures they've taken, this affront on our Constitution isn't to "protect" the citizens of this country from the "evildoer's." Anyone who believes otherwise is living in a fantasy!
Mr. Cohen is also correct. It would indeed be a mistake to underestimate the resolve of this Bush administration. The American people, the mouse pad warriors of this country have to realize that we are no longer living in a Democracy or a Republic and any "change" which they are anticipating isn't going to come from our "elected officials," it must come from them.
Just look at what happened to two of our elected officials Senators, Lehey and Daschel who were calling for Congressional investigations of 9/11, when both Cheney and Bush were blocking those investigations? Anthrax was sent to both their offices.
And with regard to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow
by
Munich (0 articles, 47 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 676 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 12:47:01 PM
It seems the ccountry is divided into three camps;
1) Those who support Bush and Cheney
2) Those who think things will change in November
3) Those who believe impeachment is foolishness in a short-term presidency
The reason we must have an impeachment of this president and his vp, is because without that message, no future president will need to care about constitutional government. We will then have traded checks and balances for the hope of benevolent presidents. In fact, we may have already done so, if Nancy Pelosi is allowed to control the issue.
The founders were not worrying and arguing over these issues for nothing. They had a very clear idea of what boulders lay in the road of free government, because they were at personal risk for their audacity of purpose.
We're no longer there. Threats to our freedoms have never approached our shores, nor has there even been a war that put us at equal risk in the memory of most Americans alive today. We are dealing in abstracts.
Those who would gladly be done with the wavering loyalties of a constantly changing electorate are busy behind the curtain of a fear-based chimera of their own invention. Their short-term aim is to commit to a war with Iran before leaving office. Long-term, they're after a one party system of pretend democracy. (The other party will exist, but not be a player.)
Not a single candidate for president has leveled with the public on these issues. Nor will they. While the concerned among us lurch from frustration to despair, the great majority think it will be over when this president leaves office.
Good luck with that.
by
Jim Freeman (108 articles, 40 quicklinks, 160 diaries, 327 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 2:48:44 PM
Your help is urgently needed to help defeat a Senate bill to revise FISA, the warrantless wiretapping surveillance program and provide sweeping, retroactive immunity, requested by the president, for telecommunications companies that participated in this program.
President Bush is insisting that the phone companies need this immunity or we would be at risk of future terrorist attacks. I remain unconvinced that this is the case and the House passed bill did not include this measure. As I mentioned in previousemails about this issue, if the president was serious about keeping us safe from terrorism while advocating for this immunity, he would long ago have provided us with the necessary documents for Congress to review this program.
In the Senate today, the pressure is on from Republicans to end debate and force a vote to grant phone companies retroactive immunity before any details of their activities is revealed.
Your help is needed now. Contact your Senators today and ask them to vote no on today's FISA cloture vote. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an action page below that can help you reach your Senator now.
Tell Nancy your loyalty is to the American people and the CONSTITUTION which you both swore to uphold. Now start the impeachment let the chips fall where they may Nancy be damned as she has damned this country. Follow the law NOW!!!!!
Terry J. Beitl,One Pissed Off American
by
tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 179 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 5:51:54 PM
POWER EQUALS CONTROL. CFR TC GLOBALIST THATS POWER, = CONTROL OF MONEY OF THE WORLD, WARS OF THE WORLD, FOOD SUPPLY OF THE WORLD, ENERGY OF THE WORLD, MED-AND HEALTH OF THE WORLD, ELECTIONS OF THE WORLD INCLUDING OURS, AND COMING SOON TO A COUNYRY NEAR YOU POPULATION CONTROL BY WHAT EVER MEANS, AND AT THEIR PLEASURE.
by
RICHARD SHADE (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments)
on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 at 5:03:13 AM
I will be laughing so hard at so many people after January 2009. That will be after a new president is sworn in and the peaceful transfer of power once again takes place. And it will take place. Part of me doesn't care whether a Republican or a Democrat wins the election (but ONLY part of me). To all the voices who are claiming there will be no election in November: Yes, there will be. And then I will be laughing until my sides ache.
by
Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 394 comments)
on Monday, January 28, 2008 at 9:10:10 PM
