Home » Groups » Democracy for Utah » Blog » Stop FISA in its Tracks!

Democracy for America group blog for Democracy for Utah

Stop FISA in its Tracks!

Written by: David Reiter on Jul 5, 2008 11:10 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy for America Miami-Dade (DFAM), DFA-Link Organizers, Florida DFA, Blog For America, What are Progressive Values? Study Group

I ususally don't like reposting something I have posted in the past, but this issue keep rearing its ugly head, like a monstrous zit on the face of democracy.  As we join in with thousands of members and concerned citizens in writing, calling, and e-mailing our Senators ahead of this weeks vote for telecom immunity, I thought I would help arm us all with some vital information...again.

First, I'd like to thank Federal Judge, Vaughn Walker for correctly striking down Bush's claim of authority to spy on Americans.  I have not seen his official opinion, but it appears he has correctly cited a precedent set in 1972 (noted below).  Although this is a positive step in correcting illegal behavior by our Commander-In-Chief, it may protect those that abet him in this illegal activity--telephone companies.

The history behind citizen wiretapping is sickening. In the 1960’s and ‘70’s the FBI was wiretapping everyone from Martin Luther King, Jr. to New Left organizations that led to usurping the American peoples’ right to organize and redress the government of their grievances.

What is disturbing is to think that this right wing government is using the acquired information to further its political agenda and get the upper hand with its opponents.  As we know, the Nixon Administration severely abused his powers, and ultimately culminated in the Watergate break-into democratic headquarters (unrelated to his misuse of intelligence agencies). The President is pushing to make the Patriot Act permanent after he has already admitted to abusing its provisions by sidestepping the FISA court in order to direct the NSA to spy on citizens.  There is no doubt that Mr. Bush sees all those that are not for his policies must be against…and it is this philosophy that scares Americans most.  This philosophy generally lends one to believe that the 67% of Americans that are against his policies are subject to potential surveillance.  Common sense however, tells us otherwise.   

The President says he has the constitutional authority to conduct warrantless surveillance.  The Supreme Court, in the famous United States vs. United States District Court case of 1972, clearly stated that, “The President does not have the constitutional power to authorize warrantless electronic surveillance.”

Waste of Resources

What worries me most about his cavalier surveillance of political groups and selected citizens is that he is wasting intelligence resources on things that are ultimately not protecting our nation.  During the Vietnam war, domestic surveillance was a common practice.  The FBI had everyone from Martin Luther King Jr., the Black Panthers, and anti-war groups to local PTA meetings, women’s sewing clubs, and even a Halloween party with suspected anti-war activists under surveillance.  In addition to surveillance, the FBI was directed to ‘disrupt and otherwise neutralize’ the efforts of certain anti-war and pro-racial integration groups. Not only were all of these actions unconstitutional, but they were addressed by the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1976, and reforms were immediately mandated.

The reforms the Committee made were not only to ensure the privacy of American citizens, but also to ensure that the government did not waste valuable resources on constitutionally legal activities.  The Committee ultimately concluded that this infiltration of the American way of life and legal dissent weakened our national security. They felt that the shear mass of information gathered that needed sifting and analysis made it almost impossible to discern real threats to our security.

The 94th Congress, report number 94-755 clearly addresses many of the issues we are dealing with today in regards to violating Americans’ rights in the name of national security.These are the hearings that led to FISA.

Below are just a few excerpts of some findings from the report on ‘Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans Final Report of the Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities.’

Military Intelligence: “Beginning in 1967, the Army Security Agency monitored the radio communications of amateur radio operators in this country to determine if dissident elements planned disruptive activity at particular demonstrations and events…At a meeting held in 1968, the FCC advised the Army that such monitoring was illegal under the Federal Communications Act of 1934…Despite having been told that their monitoring activity was illegal, and the Attorney General (Ramsey Clark) himself disapproved of it, the Army Security Agency continued to monitor the radio communications of American citizens for another two years.”

“The Army’s nationwide intelligence surveillance program created files on some 100,000 Americans and an equally large number of domestic organizations, encompassing nearly every group seeking peaceful change in the united States including:

-The John Birch Society;

-Young Americans For Freedom;

-the National Organization of Women;

-the NAACP;

-the Urban League;

-the Anti-Defamation League; and

Business Executives to End the War in Vietnam”

NSA: “In short, virtually every element of our society has been subjected to excessive government-ordered intelligence inquiries.  Opposition to government policy or the expression of controversial views was frequently considered sufficient for collecting data on Americans.  The Committee finds that this extreme breadth of intelligence activity is inconsistent with the principles of our Constitution which protect the rights of free speech, political activity, and privacy against unjustified government intrusion.”

Political Abuse:  “The Committee finds that information has been collected and disseminated in order to serve the purely political interests of an intelligence agenct or the administration, and to influence social policy and political action…The FBI’s ability to gather information without effective restraints gave it enormous power.  That power was inevitably attractive to politicians, who could use the information on opponents and critics for their own advantage, and was also an asset to the Bureau, which depended on politicians for support. In the political arena, as in other facets of American life touched by the intelligence community, the existence of unchecked power led to its abuse.”

House Majority Leader, Hale Boggs said, “Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of action for men in public life can be compromised quite as effectively by the fear of surveillance as by the fact of surveillance.”

“The FBI attempted to influence public opinion by supplying information or articles to ‘confidential sources’ in the news media.  The FBI…was responsible for covert liaisons with the media to advance two main domestic intelligence objectives: 1)Providing derogatory information to the media to generally discredit the activities or ideas of targeted groups or individuals; and 2)disseminating unfavorable articles, news releases, and background information in order to disrupt certain activities…-FBI headquarters solicited information from field offices ‘on a continuing basis’ for ‘prompt…dissemination to the news media…to discredit the New Left movement and its adherents.’  Headquarters requested among other things, that: ‘specific data should be furnished depicting the scurrilous and depraved nature of many of the characters, activities, habits, and living conditions representative of New Left adherents…Every avenue of possible embarrassment must be vigorously and enthusiastically explored.’”

Findings and Conclusions:  “Domestic Intelligence Activity has threatened and undermined the Constitutional Rights of Americans to free speech, association, and privacy. It has done so primarily because the constitutional system for checking abuse of power has not been applied.”

“The Committee finds that domestic intelligence activity has been overbroad in that 1)many Americans and domestic groups have been subjected to investigation who were not suspected of criminal activity and 2) the intelligence agencies have regularly collected information about personal and political activities irrelevant to any legitimate governmental interest…Intelligence agencies pursued a ‘vacuum cleaner’ approach to intelligence collection-drawing all available information about groups and individuals, including their lawful political activities and details of their personal lives.”

“..it is not at all clear that our hypothesis about foreign intentions, capabilities, and activities improve commensurately in scope as more data comes from modern collection methods…what matters most is the question of whether this quantity of information is degrading the quality of all our work.”

DReiter 05/06

Tags:

Discuss
 

Show: Expand All Reply

+1 Rating
167t236061

- Sure can stay on topic with that...gives courts "superficial" power

By floridagal . on Jul 5, 2008 2:18 PM EDT

The Democrats are starting to look foolish in their unyielding support of this mess of a bill.

ACLU says it’s Christmas morning at the White House thanks to this vote.

+1 Rating
Sharon_christmas_angel_119_tinythumb

-

By Phil Specht on Jul 5, 2008 4:29 PM EDT
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul-04-08 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #65
<!-- google_ad_section_start -->68. No you're not telling me the truth. You're spinning for a clay hero<!-- google_ad_section_end -->
If the last eight years haven't shaken you out of your complacency about the Congressional rush to destroy our basic civil liberties with doublespeak and outright lies, you're not just in the Matrix, you've made a conscious decision to embrace it.

You'll be sitting here in a year wailing and moaning "what happened to Barack? How could the steal it?" I'm telling you right now what's happening to Barack in time to fix it but you don't care because you've bought into the terror line and think it's ok to spy on people all over the world, go snatch them wherever they are and dump them in a shameful place like Guantanamo.

If this is the sort of political spinelessness and double-speak you support for a win, do so with open eyes that many people won't be interested in what you're trying to "win" here.

People want the war to end. They want affordable healthcare for all. The want to be able to feed their children. Nobody, not a single voter asked Obama or any other Democrat to reward the criminals in the White House and lawbreakers like ATT and their secret room in San Francisco with MORE than the Republicans had been able to deliver when they were a majority. The capitulation exceeded the neocon's wildest dreams but you're ok with continuing this terror charade that's fleeced the public out of BILLIONS of dollars and destroyed our basic civil liberties?

I'd like to congratulate all the apologists for FISA in advance. You're contributing to the erosion of our civil liberties and the dangerous expansion of executive powers. Good luck with the legal precedent you're allowing them to set. If McCain is sworn in he'll have them as will future Presidents.
+1 Rating
Default_user

- Howard is always first here

By on Jul 5, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
-1 Rating
Sample_tinythumb

- not widgets (???)

By FormerT on Jul 5, 2008 2:48 PM EDT

By Sandra Verthein on Jul 5, 2008 11:22 AM

Sometimes I feel like Republicans/neocons treat every economic problem like it is the classic "widget" example from their college economic textbooks. There are many, many things that don't follow the rules of the mythical "widget." As you so thoughtfully point out, houses are definitely one of them -- they can't be put back into inventory or shipped somewhere else for sale. People are another thing that definitely doesn’t fall into the widget category! If you own a bunch of grain and the price of grain goes down you can store some in a grain silo until the market improves. But you can't store people in a silo until the wage market improves! It is this really simplistic view of the economy, in particular they idea that all markets work the same, that allows them to get away with so much lunacy.
------------------

Our analyses are getting “much closer to the body” (just an expression, which means getting much more substantive). Good sign!

Andrea, the rules modern market have successfully deploying for about a century already, go far beyond those really simplistic “widget rules” you’ve mentioned above. These advanced rules do allow using people themselves as widgets, more precisely as a commodity!

Let’s take a look at how modern consumer economy and culture is functioning.
We already know and it is getting obvious that consumption, consumerism is what keeps this economy afloat. You may recall Bush’s “go shopping…., we’ll not change our way of life…, etc.” comments at the very high of this “war on terror”.
However if you try to think further and deeper you may find out that consumption OF goods and services BY people is just one side of the story. Another side is consumption OF people BY goods and services!

Just look closer, the PROCESS of consumption first and foremost requires people having TIME. Applying more and more of their time toward all kinds of consumption MAKE people TURNING INTO goods (commodities) THEMSELVES! What this economy needs IS EVER ACCELERATING process of RECYCLING (e.g. re-production) of consumption.

Both (goods and service on one side and people on another) are just complementing each other for the sake of finishing the RE-PRODUCTION CYCLE on the output of which is the final product – the PROFIT appropriated by cycle’s owner. From the CYCLE and its owner point of view the goods, the row materials, the people themselves ARE just EQUAL participants of this process and ARE EQUALLY consumed by it! The faster the cycle’s lifetime the more profit it’ll yield on the output side. The row material, the people consumed during the cycle will be replenished (war for oil will be waged, abortion will be banned, etc.) all under the moral “values” tag. The cycle (the same as Broadway show…almost lol) must go on!

That’s just short attempt to show how we, the People have been turned by this [system] ALREADY (!!!) into the goods, the commodities, the widgets.

+1 Rating
Default_user

- What does this have to do with FISA?

By on Jul 5, 2008 3:58 PM EDT
+0 Rating
Sample_tinythumb

- Nothing.....and everything!

By FormerT on Jul 5, 2008 5:47 PM EDT

Whatever "issue" you take, whatever "topic" you discuss, to understand it correctly you have to apply rules of economy, how it works and who whom.

All of the rest derives from that including FISA or anything else. 

+0 Rating
Sample_tinythumb

-

By FormerT on Jul 5, 2008 5:48 PM EDT

who whom = for whom

+0 Rating
Photo_124_tinythumb

- trade and exchange

By Monica Smith on Jul 5, 2008 6:08 PM EDT

Perhaps if you referenced the functions (trade and exchange) rather than the catch-all term "economy," your explanation would be clearer.

Trade and exchange imply a recognition of private property.  If everything were held in common, there would be nothing to trade.  If no-one were entitled to private information, there would be nothing to extract.  Privacy and ownership are central to economy and civilized behavior.  What Bush/Cheney are trying to argue is that their exalted position gives them the power to take whatever they want.

+0 Rating
Sample_tinythumb

- trade and exchange ???

By FormerT on Jul 5, 2008 9:00 PM EDT

By Monica Smith on Jul 5, 2008 6:08 PM

Perhaps if you referenced the functions (trade and exchange) rather than the catch-all term "economy," your explanation would be clearer.

Trade and exchange imply a recognition of private property.  If everything were held in common, there would be nothing to trade.  If no-one were entitled to private information, there would be nothing to extract.  Privacy and ownership are central to economy and civilized behavior.  What Bush/Cheney are trying to argue is that their exalted position gives them the power to take whatever they want.

----------------------

Not Monica,

Trade and exchange is the only one part of the economy (imo, not the largest and not the most important part of it).     

The most important part of it is the "production" part, imo, - it's where (HOW and BY WHOM) the additional value (the wealth) is been created (you surely may guess, that it does not created by trade and exchange but, however, by only LABOR).

Another the same as important as production part is the GOAL of production.     There are two basic goals of production: the PROFIT (for a few) and the NEEDS SATISFACTION (for many).   

Those two goals were synchronized only at the beginning of the "trade/exchange" era (about  century ago) but have fallen apart and out of sync since then and now only continue to increase its conflict causing separation.   Anf the conflict is between "common" character of production and "private" character of appropriation of the production's result.     Yes, it is based on private property, more precisely on its non-arguable saintliness.    

In other words today from major engine, major stimulus private property turned into major obstacle, major breaks on the economy's turning around from profit to needs satisfaction.    It is unresolvable peacefully conflict...besides BO's genius of political art...lol.

 

+1 Rating
Default_user

- Before the Nixon administration

By Marty S on Jul 5, 2008 3:58 PM EDT

wiretapped anti-war groups the Kennedy administration illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King, Jr. but that piece of trivia was not cited.

+1 Rating
Photo_124_tinythumb

- Do we know for certain that no secret warrant

By Monica Smith on Jul 5, 2008 4:34 PM EDT

was issued on the basis that MLK might be wanting to foment a revolution?

Besides, the only enforcement mechanism then and now is that information collected without proper authorization can't be used against the target in a court of law.  That's what makes the collection a violation of a civil right.  The individual human right to privacy is another matter and still not firmly anchored in our national psyche.

+1 Rating
Photo_124_tinythumb

- What's more concerning to me

By Monica Smith on Jul 5, 2008 4:28 PM EDT

is that the communications intercept program isn't designed to spy on particular individuals or groups, but rather to map the communications network in order to facilitate the waging of warfare in cyberspace. This is not a new interest. You'll recall that much was made during Gulf One of the ability to target and take down the enemy's "command and control" facilities--telephone lines, radar installations, radio communications (i.e. electric generation and transmission facilities. The mechanism then was the equivalent of blunt force trauma, which is to be corrected with more precise and surgical methods "taking" the relevant communications nodes.

To the extent that this strategy involves the communications of financial and commercial interests, the program can't but be destabilizing. Who's going to want to do business with a country where the communications networks are subject to military targeting?

The reality is that American enterprise of all kinds has become dependent on the backing of military power to "level" the playing field by threatening or eliminating the competition. That, after all, is the issue in Iran's program to enrich its own uranium. What the U.S. wants is for this "service" to be provided by USEC or its Russian subsidiary. Iran risks being bombed, if it doesn't comply and facilitate the creation of a new fuels monopoly.

+1 Rating
Sharon_christmas_angel_119_tinythumb

- the potential for corruption is enormous

By Phil Specht on Jul 5, 2008 4:38 PM EDT

If you have inner-office communications from a competitor and can achieve the ultimate in insider trading

but I have a much different concern, the precedent for eliminating redress for damages from every form of liability

trial lawyers might as well just line up at the unemployment window

what makes telecoms special?

The Chamber of Commerce has spent billions over the decades defeating Democrats over this issue(liability) and the current crew just gives it away?

precedence for disaster

+1 Rating
Photo_124_tinythumb

- liability is indeed central

By Monica Smith on Jul 5, 2008 6:00 PM EDT

Ever since the passage of the Federal Tort Claims Act and similar state statutes, there has been an effort to restore to public officials the immunity from accountability that they enjoyed under the doctrine of "sovereign immunity."  If a public official can be held personally accountable for his/her actions, then that official is, in effect, powerless--a public servant, rather than a ruler.  What fun is that?  After all, we have a long tradition of sending second sons, who had no prospects in business, into the public realm to "protect" the interests of family or clan--behavior that we now consider corrupt.

+1 Rating
Sharon_christmas_angel_119_tinythumb

- Roe v Wade and FISA

By Phil Specht on Jul 5, 2008 4:59 PM EDT

is based on an expectation of privacy

all privacy rights will be eroded by this bill

+1 Rating
N734823365_4437_tinythumb

- Privacy rights are a huge issue in my area.

By Susan Rowe on Jul 5, 2008 6:42 PM EDT
Rural folks are really into their privacy.  It is extremely difficult to get them to join any online social network.  If they have an email address and they give it to you.  It is wise to keep your list private.  Folks have trusted me with their email addresses for several years.  Our local Democratic Club members don't even want the State and National Party to know their mailing addresses.  I give them all the information on how to join groups but they don't like them. They like their privacy.

---

A very dear friend of ours is in private practice. He had over 10 individuals walk into his office the morning after all the wiretapping information first hit the internet news. They all wanted to file law suits. These were very good folks too. They were not litigious in their nature. They were just regular folks who were very concerned. Their political persuasion didn't have anything to do with thier concern. He looked up what they were all talking about.  He was one of the first attorneys in the country to file a class action.  Now there is a huge coalition of them.
 
This Senate FISA bill is extremely dangerous to the liberty of every American.  Sens. Feingold and Dodd are both very correct.


---

Minors don't have much in the way of privacy rights.  For the most part their rights belong to their parents.  This can be a problem if their parents are abusive.

It's a huge problem for young people who want to know about birth control.  It's also one of the reasons why Madera County has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the state.  STDs rates are very high here too.
+1 Rating
Sharon_christmas_angel_119_tinythumb

- Journalists

By Phil Specht on Jul 5, 2008 5:07 PM EDT

don't you rely on privacy expectations ?

+1 Rating
Heyhey_tinythumb

- Thank you David for this very nice post.

By puddle on Jul 5, 2008 5:16 PM EDT
+1 Rating
Heyhey_tinythumb

- I won't forget my $20 pledge to the ACLU

By puddle on Jul 5, 2008 5:16 PM EDT
+0 Rating
511t233735

- A new thread --Already?

By Huron John on Jul 5, 2008 6:20 PM EDT
+0 Rating
Default_user

- Nice post, David!

By JudyforDean on Jul 5, 2008 8:33 PM EDT

Add your comment

(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)

Post closed to commenting
star My DFA
star Members
star Groups
star Events
star Candidates

Countdown to Victory

DFA Wireless

Blog for America

Recommended Blog Posts

Recent Blog Posts

The Watercooler