- How much do you want to bet that Jeff Rense and Alex
Jones, et all, are on the Bush/NSA wiretap list?
-
- Also, see letter from Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to
Vice President Cheney regarding NSA domestic wiretapping, July 17th 2003:
-
- http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/rock-cheney1.html
-
- Wouldn't it be nice to see Bush's enemy list....
-
- Why did he have to bypass FISA which has authorized tens
of thousands of wiretap requests since 1978 and only reject 4 in that time?
They can even wiretap if they really needed to urgently and then retroactively
get a warrant.... but why did bubble boy want to bypass fisa?
-
- 1.) Jeff Rense 2.) Alex Jones 3.) Paul Watson 4.) Cindy
Sheehan 5.) Wayne Madsen etc.... etc...
-
- Who's on Bush's enemy list? I'll bet no doubt, since
Rense.com is already monitored by the state department as being the #1
Misinformation site..... that Rense is on the list, as well as Alex, and
all other Real American Patriots...
-
- _____
-
-
- Bush's Enemies List. Why Did Bush Commit an
Illegal, Impachable Act When All His Lawyers Had to Do Was Walk Into a
Secret Court?
-
- A Buzzflash.com News Analysis 1
- 2-20-5
-
- Okay, so here's the real deal.
-
- In the wake of the Nixon abuses of our Constitution,
our liberties and our privacy, Congress (in 1978) set up a secret court
that the Executive Branch must -- by law -- go to if it is seeking wiretaps
or surveillance of foreigners or Americans "suspected" of terrorism
or espionage.
-
- This is the law.
-
- It was passed by Congress to prevent the kind of abuse
that the Bush Administration is guilty of. This law is called the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
-
- This secret court (the last we knew it was headed by
GOP hack partisan federal judge David Sentelle -- who got Poindexter and
North off the hook and put Kenneth Starr on the job -- but that may have
changed) has never been known to deny a government request for wiretapping,
surveillance or searches.
-
- So, if the secret court always approves the White House
requests for wiretapping, surveillance and searches, why did the White
House get its approval in some cases (with a dramatic increase of court
approved spying under Bush) but not others?
-
- Why did the Bush Administration need to engage in the
illegal spying of American citizens in hundreds if not thousands of cases
if the court so acquiescently approved of its requests?
-
- We know that Bush fashions himself a dictator who can
create the law as he sees fit. But why go to the trouble and potential
legal and political problems if all his administration had to do was go
to the secret court, which, we repeat, always approves the White House
requests? And no one's known of a leak coming out of this secret court.
-
- Ah, there's the rub.
-
- The answer is that the White House didn't go through
the legal process on these specific cases and, instead, committed a grossly
illegal violation of the U.S. Constitution and a Congressional law specifically
designed to protect such executive branch abuses for one reason -- and
that reason likely has to do with who was under surveillance, who was being
wiretapped and who was being illegally searched.
-
- In short, if the American public were to see the list
of hundreds -- and perhaps thousands of people according to the New York
Times -- the Bush Administration violated the law to spy on, we might see
names akin to Nixon's "enemies list." Only in this case, it would
be Bush's "enemies list."
-
- Why, we might see names like Joe and Valerie Wilson,
or Richard Clarke, or Cindy Sheehan, among others. The White House wouldn't
want even a secret court to know that it was spying on political enemies.
This was exactly why the FISA law was passed. To prevent just such illegal
political spying by the White House.
-
- Yesterday, the New York Times (which suddenly has awakened
from a decades long slumber) also reported that the FBI was spying on domestic
advocacy groups -- and let's just say that they weren't groups complaining
that "liberals are conducting a war on Christmas." They were
groups that are at odds with the Bush agenda, expressing their viewpoints
-- as is their Constitutional right -- under the American Constitution.
-
- So what we have here is a White House that is using illegal
actions to spy on American citizens who the same White House considers
not a threat to the United States, but a political threat to their one-party,
dictatorial rule.
-
- That, dear readers, is tyranny.
-
- It is why there was an American Revolution against King
George.
-
- It is why the Democrats would be enabling treason if
they reach any "compromise" on the UnPatriot Act.
-
- No one can anymore have an excuse for putting blinders
on.
-
- Bush has failed in his "war on terrorism."
It is only a political tool for him, not a national security goal. He uses
it as a cudgel of fear to cow wobbly, weak kneed Democrats into submission.
But, meanwhile, we are less safe as Americans because of Bush's incompetent
leadership -- and he is conducting a war on our Constitution and decent
at the same time. That is the war that really interests him.
-
- Those who would sacrifice our liberties and our freedoms
can be terrorists or they can be people in the White House.
-
- Both are a threat to our democracy.
-
- Right now, the Bush Administration is the one who is
dismantling our Constitution, spying on us, invading our privacy, denying
us our liberty, and acting illegally.
-
- If the Democrats don't push back with passion, courage
and conviction, we are doomed to live under the yoke of tyranny.
-
- It will take dedicated patriots to save us.
-
- This is not about business as usual. This is about law
breakers and preserving the legacy of the American Revolution.
-
- This is about letting the terrorists win by allowing
an administration to do their work of undermining democracy for them.
-
- This is about justice.
-
- A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
-
- Bush and Cheney are saying that the briefings
that HIll leaders got on his domestic spying operation demostrate how respectful
they are of oversight, checks and balances, advise & consent -- you
know, the kind of freedom stuff we're fighting for in Iraq.
-
- But take a look at this letter, just released by Senator
Jay Rockefeller, the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee (via
Josh Marshall).
-
- He wrote it to Cheney in 2003, after he learned about
the wiretapping-without-FISA-court-approval maneuver. It's handwritten
-- because no one in the meeting could tell anyone else about it, not even
a typist. Rockefeller told Cheney he could not endorse the program. He
said he was keeping a sealed copy of the letter -- for a moment just like
this.
-
- Doubtless Republican Pat Roberts, the Kansas toady who
chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, got with the Bush program; after
all, he's the one who's stopped the investigation of Administration misuse
of pre-war intelligence for nearly two years, until Harry Reid forced the
Senate into private session.
-
- Bush says we should trust him, because he swore an oath
of office. If his briefings of Congress on domestic spying are an example
of what he thinks it means to submit to oversight, maybe this will stiffen
the spine of some Democrats enough for them now to tell the White House
what advise and consent really means -- and the matter of Sam Alito provides
an awfully appropriate opportunity to do that.
-
- See:
http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/05/12/ana05054.html
|
