- With the final passage of the FISA reform bill this week,
the US Senate has reached a new low in its outright disregard for the constitution
its members are sworn to uphold. Simply put, Congress has no power to legislate
any law that violates any of the provisions of the constitution. Period.
In this case, the constitution is clear: no warrantless searches are permitted--none.
That's what constitutions are supposed to do: put strict limits on lawmaking
power so that individual rights are protected from evil minorities, evil
majorities, or in this case, insipid yesmen in Congress eager to please
those above them conspiring to use the phony threat of terrorism to dismantle
constitutional protections. Just hours after President Bush signed this
legislation the ACLU filed suit in federal court to have the law ruled
unconstitutional. There is a good chance the federal court will agree,
forcing a showdown at the Supreme Court.
-
- There is a arrogance on the part of trained lawyers in
Congress who defend this brazen evisceration of the 4thAmendment. They
all know it run against both the letter of the constitution and centuries
of case law. These apologists for stripping away a citizen's power to challenge
illegal surveillance in court seem to fall into two groups: those that
are knowing conspirators in the secret movement to dismantle the constitution
and those that are groveling at the feet of those in power. The first group
is imbued with the arrogance that comes from knowing they have effective
immunity from their illegal acts, protected by fellow conspirators in the
White House, Department of Justice, Congress and the courts. The second
group are foolish lapdogs hungry for acceptance and advancement in the
halls of power---which few will ever achieve because they aren't corrupt
enough for the highest echelons of evil. A good example is Senator Orrin
Hatch-(R)Utah who, with the tiniest of inducements, can be energized to
leap to the pulpit and excuse, defend, and rationalize the evil acts of
the Bush administration in the mistaken belief that he is upholding patriotic
or conservative values. He is unwittingly upholding an evil agenda. In
his eagerness to believe that everything is justified by 9/11 Hatch cannot
see that he is being played for the fool.
-
- Nothing is more symptomatic of the arrogance of power
in the Bush administration than the high-handed manner in which Attorney
General Michael Mukasey confronts those who dare challenge his prerogatives.
No other government gatekeeper of the "secret acts of government"
can compare to the audacity in which Mukasey deflects and puts off his
Congressional critics--most of whom are themselves playing a roll. That
is why they don't rigorously follow up on Mukasey's evasions. Kate Klonick,
writing for TPMmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com gives us a rundown on the
pattern of evasion since his evasive confirmation hearings:
-
- "There are a whole host of issues confronting the
Justice Department that remain unaddressed-- overall politicization, the
Office of Legal Counsel memos, torture memos, hiring and firing practices,
and selective prosecution. But when it comes to hard answers to Congressional
Oversight, Attorney General Michael Mukasey dances around the questions,
usually deflecting criticism that stems from the Gonzales era.
-
- 1. "When Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) requested
a listing of the OLC memoranda [on torture] that the DOJ chose not to review,
Mukasey stated that he didn't know that it 'would serve anybody's interest'
to do so [except the public].
-
- 2. "When Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) questioned him
about why Judith Miller was left in jail [for refusing to reveal her sources
in the Valerie Plame affair], he demurred, stating that it fell into the
responsibilities of special counsel.
-
- 3. "When Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) wanted to know
if anyone was planning on reviewing Gitmo detainee's files to see why they
were being detained [a habeas corpus issue], Mukasey deferred noting the
cases were before the D.C. district court.
-
- 4. "And when Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) demanded
accountability for the loss of valuable civil servants to the politicization
of the DOJ Honors Program, the Attorney General stated that it had already
been 'covered by the OIG [Office of Inspector General-in house DOJ investigator]
report' [which whitewashed the affair].
-
- "But when it was Sen. Joe Biden's (D-DE) turn to
ask questions, he took a more straight forward approach, tearing into Mukasey
as an 'enigma...acting like you float above up in the ether somewhere.'"
Indeed, that is what Mukasey acts like--that he is above the law. As a
certified insider in the service of the real Powers That Be (PTB), he's
untouchable and he knows it."
-
- The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly voted Wednesday to grant
retroactive amnesty to the telecoms that aided President Bush's secret,
warrantless wiretapping of Americans, which was cover for the fact that
indiscriminate surveillance had been going on for decades. In another of
his continual modifications of position, the Democratic presidential nominee
Barack Obama voted for the final bill, despite promising to oppose any
bill that included amnesty. Hillary Clinton voted against it, but that's
only because she is still positioning herself for a future run for the
presidency and must play the opposing role. Were she the nominee, I can
guarantee you she would have voted for it too. Senator Arlen Specter, whose
work for the conspirators goes way back to his role as legal counsel to
the Warren Commission, played his usual game of opposing the measure right
up to the end, and then switching sides and voting for it.
-
- We're going to see a lot of disappointed Democrats who
harbor the illusion that Obama really is going to change things. He won't.
And within the anti-war movement dissatisfaction with Obama is already
growing fast. His supporters mounted an intense lobbying campaign on Obama's
online organizing website to get him to stick to his promise on telecom
immunity--all in vain--just like his promise to get US troops out of Iraq
in a year and a half. It won't happen--especially with Obama joining the
mindless crescendo of politicians calling for military threats to Iran.
-
- Of course Iran isn't helping anything by rattling its
own sabers---launching over a dozen test missiles in two days as a show
of potential force to the ever-threatening Americans and Israelis. Actually,
it now appears that some of those missiles failed and the photo evidence
was altered by Iran. It is also possible that Iran did not want to use
up so many missiles in one exercise and faked several of the launches.
In any case, one wonders what suicidal vision Iranian leaders have that
provokes them to play into the globalist's hand, making themselves look
radical and helping the neocons justify attacking Iran with every provocative
speech and military exercise. I suspect Russia is partly to blame, whispering
in Iran's ear that it won't allow the US to attack--just like Russia promised
Saddam Hussein.
-
- Obama is destined to be a President full of regrets.
He's quick on the tongue and a little too candid which results in statements
that are unwise or run afoul of what his CFR handlers want him to say.
Luke Boggs of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution took note of this growing
list of regrets:
-
- "What jumped out at me was how quickly Obama regretted
his decision [to put his daughters on an interview with the TV tabloid
Access Hollywood]. And that, in turn, made me wonder how often the senator
has regretted other choices. Answer: pretty often. (Googling 'Obama' and
'regrets' yields more than a million hits.)
-
- "In November 2006, Obama said he regretted buying
property adjacent to his Chicago home from Tony Rezko, a longtime supporter
and big-time fund-raiser who has since been convicted of mail and wire
fraud, aiding and abetting bribery and money laundering [one of many instances
where the dark side of government uses evil and criminal elements to make
"deals" with up and coming insiders to provide them with instant
wealth].
-
- "In February 2007, as his presidential campaign
was beginning, Obama said he regretted saying that the lives of American
soldiers who died fighting in Iraq had been 'wasted.'
-
- "In April 2008, Obama said he regretted his choice
of words when he told some well-heeled donors in San Francisco that 'bitter'
folks in Middle America who have lost economic hope 'cling to guns or religion
or antipathy to people who aren't like them.' [Indeed, some Americans are
getting very angry with arrogant politicians who constantly lie to them
and make false promises of change.]
-
- "To be sure, these are choices worth regretting.
Anyone can understand why Obama would regret his land deal with a convicted
felon. And even liberal Democrats like Obama have been careful not to say
American lives have been 'wasted' in Iraq, even as they imply the same
thing when they dismiss the war effort as corrupt, inept, unnecessary and
worse.
-
- "Obama's most costly regret, however, may well prove
to be his condescending shot at those decent, hardworking Americans he
said were desperately clinging to God and guns and bigotry. It was a regret-worthy
statement that said volumes about Obama's easy contempt for those in what
elites call 'flyover country.'
-
- "Perhaps the American people are looking for a regretful
guy this time around. After eight years of George W. Bush, whose dogged
lack of regrets [absolute arrogance and stubbornness] continues to exasperate
his critics, perhaps this sort of intense self-scrutiny and navel-gazing
will translate into electoral victory." The only thing I can say with
total certainty is that America will regret electing either John McCain
or Barack Obama.
-
-
- World Affairs Brief - Commentary and Insights on
a Troubled World
-
- Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution
permitted.
-
- Cite source as Joel Skousen's World Affairs Brief http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com
-
|
