Blog Flux Directory Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines http://www.wikio.com Blog directory
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Mandy: Great blog!
Mark: Thanks to all the contributors on this blog. When I want to get information on the events that really matter, I come here.
Penny: I'm glad I found your blog (from a comment on Think Progress), it's comprehensive and very insightful.
Eric: Nice site....I enjoyed it and will be back.
nora kelly: I enjoy your site. Keep it up! I particularly like your insights on Latin America.
Alison: Loquacious as ever with a touch of elegance -- & right on target as usual!
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
- Noam Chomsky
Send tips and other comments to: profmarcus2010@yahoo.com

And, yes, I DO take it personally

Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Let's all join hands and say a silent prayer lamenting the demise of the 4th amendment [UPDATE]

we're so screwed...

rachel maddow and jonathan turley on countdown...




[UPDATE]

yeah... kiss the 4th amendment and any semblance of government accountability goodbye...
Senate Approves Immunity for Telecom Companies in Wiretapping

By a vote of 69-28, the Senate approved a bill overhauling
the rules covering secret government eavesdropping and
granting immunity to telecommunications companies that aided
in the wiretapping of Americans without warrants.

i thought it was a dark day when the military commissions act passed, but this is just as dark or darker... i never thought i would come to a point where i am so profoundly ashamed of my country and its government...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Russ Feingold describes the pending FISA bill as an "impeachable offense" and says he will filibuster

from democracy now...

“One of the Greatest Intrusions, Potentially, on the Rights of Americans Protected Under the 4th Amendment”–Sen. Feingold Blasts Telecom Spy Bill


here's some of the meat...
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: Well, this is a great blow to the rights of the American people. And much of the publicity has been about a very important aspect: giving these telephone companies immunity that cooperated with the President’s illegal program. We think that should be decided based on current law, not some kind of a retroactive immunity. But that’s essentially what this bill does.

But you know what? Even worse are the provisions of the bill that will make it very easy for the government to essentially suck up the communications, all communications of Americans that go overseas, whether it’s an email or a text message or a phone call to a daughter, junior year abroad, or a child who’s in Iraq or a reporter or a business associate. This is one of the greatest intrusions, potentially, on the rights of Americans protected under the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution in the history of our country.

And unfortunately, it’s going to go through with the help of some Democrats. So this is a very, very sad day for our Constitution and for our rights, and it’s not justified by the terrorism issue, because we do not have any problem at all with going after anybody that we have reasonable suspicions about. It has to do with sucking all this information into a huge database in a way that is very intrusive on the privacy of all Americans.

[...]

The President takes the position that under Article II of the Constitution he can ignore the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. We believe that that’s absolutely wrong. I have pointed out that I think it is not only against the law, but I think it’s a pretty plain impeachable offense that the President created this program, and yet this immunity provision may have the effect not only of giving immunity to the telephone companies, but it may also allow the administration to block legal accountability for this crime, which I believe it is.

[...]

AMY GOODMAN: Senator Feingold, explain exactly what you think is an impeachable offense.

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: Well, you know, this is one of the things that’s been debated over the centuries, but I believe that when—it has to do with the rule of law and the very structure of our system of government, in other words, not just the issue that many have been concerned about, misleading the country into war, the Iraq war. That was a terrible thing, and, you know, some say that’s an impeachable offense. But to me, when the law is clear, when it’s absolutely clear that there is a clear statute and the President creates his own idea of a law and says he doesn’t have to follow the duly elected laws of the land, to me, that’s right at the core of what the founders of this country meant when they talked about high crimes and misdemeanors.

[...]

AMY GOODMAN: Senator Feingold, will you filibuster this bill?

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: We are going to resist this bill. We are going to make sure that the procedural votes are gone through. In other words, a filibuster is requiring sixty votes to proceed to the bill, sixty votes to get cloture on the legislation. We will also—Senator Dodd and I and others will be taking some time to talk about this on the floor. We’re not just going to let it be rubberstamped.

AMY GOODMAN: Would you filibuster, though?

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: That’s what I just described.


hey, russ... when is your buddy, chris dodd, going to speak out publicly...?

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, June 20, 2008

clammyc on Nancy P and the odious FISA bill "compromise"

nancy and her esteemed congressional colleagues obviously believe in their dark little hearts that there aren't people out there who are actually paying attention to this shit and have memories of events that stretch back longer than last night...

You have got to be kidding me, Nancy Hotlist

Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 06:01:57 PM PDT

Over in the comments at Swampland, there is the text of a statement by Pelosi regarding the abomination that is the FISA compromise coming to a vote tomorrow. And, assuming that this statement is Pelosi’s, there is this head smacking passage in the statement (emphasis added):

Tomorrow, we will be taking up the FISA bill. As you probably know, the bill has been filed. It is a balanced bill. I could argue it either way, not being a lawyer, but nonetheless, I could argue it either way. But I have to say this about it: it's an improvement over the Senate bill and I say that as a strong statement. The Senate bill is unacceptable. Totally unacceptable. This bill improves upon the Senate bill.

But you probably know that. What you may not know is that it's improvement over the original FISA bill as well. So it makes progress in the right direction. But these bills depend on the commitment to the Constitution of the President of the United States and of his Justice Department. So while some may have some complaints about this, that, or the other about the bill, it is about the enforcement, it is about the implementation of the law where our constitutional rights are protected.

Now, if I may ask, Madame Speaker, "what the fuck?"

What, over the past 7 years, makes you think that there is any way in hell that Bush or his Justice Department will do anything other than scoff at the rule of law or the Constitution? Look at each of the three Attorneys General, just for starters. The BEST thing that can be said about any of them is that John Ashcroft had a moment of clarity when he was gravely ill.

Once.

What happened to your statement about the big difference between your Congress and the prior ones is subpoena power. And how did that work out for you?

This administration has ignored subpoenas, destroyed email servers, illegally disenfranchised voters by the tens of thousands, approved of torture, illegally manufactured "evidence" to invade one country and wants to do the same to another, shredded the very Constitution that you "hope" that they will uphold, illegally politicized the US Attorneys, blew the cover of a covert CIA operative, negligently (at best) allowed a major city to be drowned by a natural disaster that was foreseen by everyone, and has engaged in rendition, just to mention a few things.

But that isn’t even the point.

The so-called "leadership" that was entrusted to you was abrogated the moment that you took impeachment off the table. The fact that some of the better successes of the Democratic "led" Congress, such as the minimum wage increase, the extension of unemployment benefits and some other bills are now just the lipstick on the pig that is a horrific occupation funding bill and an unacceptable FISA "compromise".

On what planet will this President abide by anything - the same President who lied over 900 times in the run up to the Iraq invasion? The same President who ignored hundreds of bills with signing statements. And if John McCain wins in November, do you really think that he will abide by the Constitution?

Actually, you probably do think that he will, so never mind there.

This is an issue that the American people are very clearly against. Yet, you seem to think that by trusting a President and a Justice Department to "do the right thing", that you can wash your hands of your responsibilities to America and the Constitution.

That is completely unacceptable, and stunning that someone who made it all the way to third in line for the Presidency would say something that is so very ignorant.

Update [2008-6-19 21:31:52 by clammyc]: For great in depth analysis, check out Greenwald (as always).


doubtlessly, among the TONS of people out there who are clueless about the unconscionable damage that is being done to our republic, our constitution, and the very fundamentals upon which our nation was founded, there are those who believe this is yet another demonstration of congressional democratic spinelessness... to those people i say, WAKE THE HELL UP...!

repeat after me...


THESE ARE NOT ACTS OF COWARDICE...!

THEY ARE NOT CAPITULATIONS...!

THEY ARE FULL-BLOWN, DELIBERATE COLLABORATIONS...!

THEY ARE BEING PERPETRATED ON THE BELIEF THAT PERSISTENCE AND THE DELIBERATELY ENGINEERED MICRO ATTENTION SPAN OF AMERICAN CITIZENS WILL ULTIMATELY ALLOW THEM TO GET THEIR WAY...!

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

"Deal" on the FISA law...? "Deal"...? For whom...? Not the American people, that's for DAMN sure...!

from today's nyt...
Deal Is Struck to Overhaul Wiretap Law
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
The deal reached by leaders in Congress overhauls the rules on the government’s wiretapping powers and provides some immunity to the phone companies.

whatever thread you choose to follow, money or power, it all leads to the same place, a place that has absolutely NOTHING to do with constitutional protections, civil liberties or the common good of u.s. citizens...

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Bushco advised telcos on how to lobby for retroactive immunity

just more gag-me-with-a-spoon-but-why-ain't-i-surprised news from the criminals occupying the white house...
Newly disclosed court papers confirm for the first time that the representatives of the nation's largest telecommunications companies reached out to the White House for advice on how to lobby Congress over a Bush administration proposal to give them retroactive immunity.

The Bush administration is refusing to disclose the contents of those communications, which include e-mails, letters and notes showing lobbying strategy.

and what do you suppose they're claiming as the basis for their refusal...?

aw, c'mon now...

you CAN'T be serious...!

ah, THAT'S better... i KNEW it would come to you...

Administration officials claim

their refusal is based on national security concerns,

but if they were to comply with the Freedom of Information Act request seeking those internal records, it would almost certainly show a deep and unseemly level of coordination between President Bush's advisers and the telecommunications companies they contracted to carry out his warrantless wiretapping program, critics say.

[emphasis added, in case you didn't figure that out already]

the united states doesn't have any more national security... bush and his criminal compadres have pissed it all away...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Do NOT - I repeat - DO NOT believe a single word that comes out of the White House

how many times have we read news stories about bush "backing down," "softening up," taking a "conciliatory stance," "signaling a willingness to 'cooperate'"...? huh...?? how many times...? and how many times was it nothing but a goddam smoke screen*, a deliberate red herring* to make everybody let down their guard...? huh...?? how many times...?

(* apologies for the mixed metaphors...)

from raw story...

After months of using politically loaded rhetoric and hyping "bogus" terror threats to push Congress to give him the domestic spying bill he's demanding, President Bush seems to be backing down.

The Wall Street Journal reports Tuesday that the White House is softening its hard-line approach to updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The steps toward moderation and compromise come as House Democrats proved last month that they have enough votes to pass a FISA bill that includes more oversight of surveillance efforts within the US than Bush would like and also to block the immunity he has demanded for telecommunications companies that facilitated his warrantless wiretapping program.


the last time i posted a run-down on the bush administration's insatiable need for power and its absolute unwillingness to compromise on ANYTHING was back in mid-december... i think it's time to trot it out again...

take your time... read it carefully... NOTHING has changed... i repeat... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING HAS CHANGED...

harry on george (december 2007)...

[Senator Harry Reid] said that in 40 years of public service he had not had a tougher relationship.

“He is impossible to work with,” the senator said. “There are times I say: ‘Is there something more I can do? Have I done something wrong?’ But even his own people tell me he won’t compromise.”

nancy on george (december 2007)...
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., admitted Thursday that she had underestimated the willingness of Republicans to stand behind President Bush’s Iraq policy despite the drubbing the GOP took in the polls in 2006.

"The assumption I made was that the Republicans would soon see the light," she said. Instead, the minority stuck to the president’s war policy in the face of unrelenting pressure from congressional Democrats and powerful lobbying campaigns by anti-war groups.

kagro x on george (february 2006)...
So, is warrantless surveillance illegal or not? Well, not if you believe that the president has "inherent powers as commander-in-chief." That would answer the entire question.

"But there are no unwritten 'inherent powers,' or at least none that would simply justify warrantless surveillance on the president's say-so," you may object.

"Says you," answers Alberto Gonzales.

And you think he's nuts for saying so. But the problem is that you're still working under the old (albeit commonly understood) constitutional order, whereas Gonzales is proposing a new one. One under which there are such "inherent powers."

And that's when it hits you: If five Supreme Court Justices side with Gonzales, everything you knew (or thought you knew) about the Constitution is wrong. By which I mean, it now is wrong. It wasn't wrong yesterday, but now it is.

jack balkin on george (july 2006)...
What the press and the public must understand is that this Administration does not play by the rules. It does not take a hint. Instead it will continue to obfuscate and prevaricate, as it has so often in the past on issues ranging from detention to prisoner mistreatment. This Administration will not conform its actions to the Rule of Law unless it finds doing so politically infeasible. As a result, the Congress, the courts, the press and the public will have to object-- repeatedly and strenuously-- if they want the Executive to abide by its constitutional obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

time magazine on george (october 2006)...
In fact, when it comes to deploying its Executive power, which is dear to Bush's understanding of the presidency, the President's team has been planning for what one strategist describes as "a cataclysmic fight to the death" over the balance between Congress and the White House if confronted with congressional subpoenas it deems inappropriate. The strategist says the Bush team is "going to assert that power, and they're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

sidney blumenthal on george (november 2007)...
[T]he Bush doctrine: The president as commander in chief can do whatever he wants regardless of Congress. There must be no checks and balances, no accountability. There must be no disclosure to other branches of government, whether legislative or judicial. Oral findings, or, if necessary, secret memos, make the illegal legal merely by saying they are legal in the name of presidential authority. The operational need to know determines who knows.

sheldon whitehouse on george (december 2007)...
“To give you an example of what I read,” Whitehouse said on the Senate floor, “I have gotten three legal propositions from these secret OLC opinions declassified. Here they are, as accurately as my note-taking could reproduce them from the classified documents”:

1. An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.

2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President’s authority under Article II.

3. The Department of Justice is bound by the President’s legal determinations.

slowly, now... repeat after me...

N O T H I N G..H A S..C H A N G E D . . . !

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, March 16, 2008

The House FISA bill would allow Americans to finally see the breathtaking extent of Bush's lawless behavior

so says the nyt...
What Mr. Bush wants is to be able to listen to your international telephone calls and read your international e-mail whenever he wants, without a court being able to prevent it or judge the legality of his actions.

[...]

The purpose of [telecom] amnesty is not to protect national secrets — that could be done during a trial — but to make sure that the full damage to Americans’ civil liberties is never revealed.

[...]

The president will continue to claim the country is in grave danger over this issue, but it is not. The real danger is for Mr. Bush. A good law — like the House bill — would allow Americans to finally see the breathtaking extent of his lawless behavior.

that's about the size of it...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Joe Courtney (D-CT) on yesterday's House FISA vote

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

McJoan: Why isn't Mark Klein being called to testify before Congress?

from mcjoan at daily kos, a follow-up to my post the other day on babak pasdar... important enough to post the whole thing...

Mark Klein is the former AT&T technician who exposed the infamous secret room at AT&T's facility in San Francisco, the room that was equipped to vacuum up "comprehensive customer usage data ... and transforms it into actionable information.... (It) provides complete visibility for all internet applications." For his efforts in exposing this massive warrantless wiretapping program by AT&T on behalf of the NSA, Klein received the Electronic Frontier's Foudnation Pioneer award.

What he has yet to receive is an invitation from any committee of Congress to testify about AT&T's illegal activity. In fact, the only member of Congress to make an attempt to reach out to him has been Senator Chris Dodd.

In this video, Boing Boing's Xeni Jardin interviews Klein and EFF legal director Cindy Cohn about the case, the Congress, and the Constitution. Klein has some harsh words for Democrats who care to listen.



Maybe it's time for Mark Klein to have his day testifying before Congress. While they're at it, they could invite whistleblower Babak Pasdar who tells a very similar story about one of the nation's major wireless carriers, ironically enough very likely the wireless carrier that sponsored that video you just watched.

It's unbelievable that these stories haven't been heard by Congress, that the Democratic leadership and the chairs of the Intelligence and Judiciary committees haven't given them the opportunity to tell what they know about this highly controversial, and illegal spying on Americans.

Instead, they want to sweep it all under the rug. Tell them not to. Call your Senators and Representative and tell them to demand a hearing for these allegations. No further action on FISA until they, and we, have heard the whole story.

Call leadership and the intelligence committee chairs, and tell them, too.

Harry Reid, Phone: (202) 224-3542, Fax: (202) 224-7327
Nancy Pelosi, Phone: (202) 225-4965, Fax: (202) 225-8259
Jay Rockefeller, Phone: (202) 224-6472, Fax: (202) 224-7665
Silvestre Reyes, Phone: (202) 225-4831, Fax: (202) 225-2016

Update: Adding in Judiciary Chairs, because they could probably find some angle to bring these guys in with, and frankly would be a lot more likely to do it.
Patrick Leahy, Phone: (202) 224-4242, Fax: (202) 224-3479
John Conyers, Phone: (202) 225-5126, Fax: (202) 225-0072

yeah, it may be nothing more than the little dutch boy, sticking his finger in the dike, but we gotta keep fightin' against our police state...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Oferchrissake, NOW the FBI wants telecom immunity

i'd no sooner finished with the previous post than i ran across this totally self-serving piece about fbi director mueller recommending telecom immunity...
At the heart of President Bush's plea to give telecommunications companies legal immunity is the contention that these companies were merely being patriotic corporate citizens when they facilitated the warrantless wiretapping of Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller undercut that argument Wednesday, telling Congress that the 'good faith' argument should have nothing to do with whether or not they are let off the hook in dozens of pending court cases.

"I would focus more on the downsides, substantial downsides, of not providing retroactive immunity as being the principal rational of the legislation, providing immunity," Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

go back and re-read my previous post and then tell me if you don't think the fbi is making a big move to protect its OWN miserable, exposed ass...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wholesale FBI/NSA domestic information "vacuuming" - first Mark Klein, now Babak Pasdar

looks like we have another mark klein...
A U.S. government office in Quantico, Virginia, has direct, high-speed access to a major wireless carrier's systems, exposing customers' voice calls, data packets and physical movements to uncontrolled surveillance, according to a computer security consultant who says he worked for the carrier in late 2003.

"What I thought was alarming is how this carrier ended up essentially allowing a third party outside their organization to have unfettered access to their environment," Babak Pasdar, now CEO of New York-based Bat Blue told Threat Level. "I wanted to put some access controls around it; they vehemently denied it. And when I wanted to put some logging around it, they denied that."

Pasdar won't name the wireless carrier in question, but his claims are nearly identical to unsourced allegations made in a federal lawsuit filed in 2006 against four phone companies and the U.S. government for alleged privacy violations. That suit names Verizon Wireless as the culprit.

Pasdar has executed a seven-page affidavit for the nonprofit Government Accountability Project in Washington, which on Tuesday began circulating the document (.pdf), along with talking points (.doc), to congressional staffers hashing out a Republican proposal to grant retroactive legal immunity to phone companies who cooperated in the warrantless wiretapping of Americans.

According to his affidavit, Pasdar tumbled to the surveillance superhighway in September 2003, when he led a "Rapid Deployment" team hired to revamp security on the carrier's internal network. He noticed that the carrier's officials got squirrelly when he asked about a mysterious "Quantico Circuit" -- a 45 megabit/second DS-3 line linking its most sensitive network to an unnamed third party.


thanks babak... great info...

and, of course, we remember mark klein, don't we...?

What I observed first-hand:

In 2002, when I was working in an AT&T office in San Francisco, the site manager told me to expect a visit from a National Security Agency agent, who was to interview a management-level technician for a special job. The agent came, and by chance I met him and directed him to the appropriate people.

In January 2003, I, along with others, toured the AT&T central office on Folsom Street in San Francisco -- actually three floors of an SBC building. There I saw a new room being built adjacent to the 4ESS switch room where the public's phone calls are routed. I learned that the person whom the NSA interviewed for the secret job was the person working to install equipment in this room. The regular technician work force was not allowed in the room.

In October 2003, the company transferred me to the San Francisco building to oversee the Worldnet Internet room, which included large routers, racks of modems for customers' dial-in services, and other equipment. I was responsible for troubleshooting problems on the fiber optic circuits and installing new circuits.

While doing my job, I learned that fiber optic cables from the secret room were tapping into the Worldnet circuits by splitting off a portion of the light signal. I saw this in a design document available to me, entitled "Study Group 3, LGX/Splitter Wiring, San Francisco" dated Dec. 10, 2002. I also saw design documents dated Jan. 13, 2004 and Jan. 24, 2003, which instructed technicians on connecting some of the already in-service circuits to the "splitter" cabinet, which diverts some of the light signal to the secret room. The circuits listed were the Peering Links, which connect Worldnet with other networks and hence the whole country, as well as the rest of the world.

One of the documents listed the equipment installed in the secret room, and this list included a Narus STA 6400, which is a "Semantic Traffic Analyzer". The Narus STA technology is known to be used particularly by government intelligence agencies because of its ability to sift through large amounts of data looking for preprogrammed targets. The company's advertising boasts that its technology "captures comprehensive customer usage data ... and transforms it into actionable information.... (It) provides complete visibility for all internet applications."

My job required me to connect new circuits to the "splitter" cabinet and get them up and running. While working on a particularly difficult one with a technician back East, I learned that other such "splitter" cabinets were being installed in other cities, including Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego.

What is the significance and why is it important to bring these facts to light?

Based on my understanding of the connections and equipment at issue, it appears the NSA is capable of conducting what amounts to vacuum-cleaner surveillance of all the data crossing the internet -- whether that be peoples' e-mail, web surfing or any other data.


no WONDER the bushies want to shut down those pesky lawsuits by giving the telecoms immunity... the discovery information might just end up confirming what we all already know...

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, March 02, 2008

NO-O-O-O-O-O-OOOOOOO...!

did ANYONE ANYWHERE entertain anything but the most psychotic delusion that this wouldn't happen...?
Lawmakers may consider a compromise bill that would renew the law, which expired last month, and possibly grant some sort of protection to phone companies from lawsuits. But it would differ from a Senate-passed measure backed by the White House that would provide blanket immunity.

"We think we're very close. Probably within the next week, we'll be able to hopefully bring it to a vote," House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes of Texas said of efforts to craft and pass such legislation.

[...]

Reyes said House Democrats were now reviewing confidential U.S. documents they received in recent weeks about the warrantless electronic surveillance program and were talking with phone companies.

Consequently, Reyes said he now had an "open mind" on whether to shield companies from lawsuits.

keee-f'ing-rist... is there even one of the s.o.b.'s that takes their goddam oath of office seriously...? the country they're screwing with belongs to ME TOO...!

Labels: , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

No capitulation and no covering Bush's ass with retroactive immunity for the telecoms

amazingly enough, the wapo is offering a small ray of daylight, albeit on page 7...
[I]n the bitter Washington dispute over whether to give the companies legal immunity, there is one thing on which both sides agree: If the lawsuits go forward, sensitive details about the scope and methods of the Bush administration's surveillance efforts could be divulged for the first time.

Nearly 40 lawsuits, consolidated into five groups, are pending before a San Francisco judge. The various plaintiffs, a mix of nonprofit civil liberties advocates and private attorneys, are seeking to prove that the Bush administration engaged in illegal massive surveillance of Americans' e-mails and phone calls after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and to show that major phone companies illegally aided the surveillance, including the disclosure of customers' call records.

If the cases are allowed to proceed, plaintiffs' attorneys say, the courts could review, in secret if necessary, any government authorizations for the surveillance. The process might also force the disclosure of government memos, contracts and other documents to a judge, outlining the legal reasoning behind the warrantless wiretapping program.

Perhaps most important, disclosures in the lawsuits could clarify the scope of the government's surveillance and establish whether, as the plaintiffs allege, it involved the massive interception of purely domestic communications with the help of the nation's largest providers: AT&T, Cingular Wireless, BellSouth, Sprint and MCI/Verizon. (Verizon Communications bought MCI in 2006.)

yeah, those would be SENSITIVE, all right... DAMN SENSITIVE... so SENSITIVE, in fact, that the collective hind-ends of the bush administration criminals could potentially be locked up for a long, long time...

dday from daily kos...

[T]here's only one constituency for which this legislation is designed. And that's the Bush Administration itself. As Glenn Greenwald noted the other day, it's not like this is even well hidden.

In his Press Conference yesterday, Commander-in-Chief George W. Bush candidly explained why he was so eager to have Congress grant amnesty to telecoms:

"Allowing the lawsuits to proceed could aid our enemies, because the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of information about how we conduct surveillance." [...]

Bush is finally being candid about the real reason the administration is so desperate to have these surveillance lawsuits dismissed. It's because those lawsuits are the absolute last hope for ever learning what the administration did when they spied on Americans for years in violation of the law. Dismissal via amnesty would ensure that their spying behavior stays permanently concealed, buried forever, and as importantly, that no court ever rules on the legality of what they did. Isn't it striking how that implication of telecom amnesty is never discussed, and how little interest it generates among journalists -- whose role, theoretically, is to uncover secret government actions?

That's all this is about. The telecoms don't want the amnesty. The overriding goal is to shut down these lawsuits and, most important, eliminate the discovery phase so that the full extent of Administration lawbreaking is permanently hidden. This is about burying the evidence, as every single action by the White House since the Democratic takeover of Congress has been. Bush may have a soft spot in his heart for his corporate buddies, but he's really not interested in indemnifying them. He's interested in immunity for himself.

As the Democratic leadership in the Congress floats trial balloons about capitulating on this bill, it's important to keep this end goal in mind. Official Washington really doesn't want to reveal a lot of its secrets. Immunity has a certain pull for the Democrats as well, particularly those who were briefed about the program, even in part. They either made no objection or failed to ask the proper questions or in some way became complicit to this lawbreaking that has occurred for almost SEVEN YEARS now, and if the truth ever came out, my guess is that nobody would come out looking so noble.


that last statement is certainly an understatement... criminal prosecution is highly IGNOBLE and it's no surprise that the bushies would like to forestall that event once 20 january 2009 has come and gone...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Calling for a Congressional encore

yep, yep, yep...


(Click on image for larger version - PDF)

Labels: , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Presidential press conference [UPDATE] [UPDATE II] [UPDATE III] [UPDATE IV] [UPDATE V]

honest to god, this will be the first one i've watched... not sure i'm going to be able to take it...

[UPDATE]

"abusive lawsuits"

gag me with a spoon...


[UPDATE II]

fear, fear, terror, terror, iraq, "the surge is working," "democrats just want to retreat," "the same old call for withdrawal"...

[UPDATE III]

"you can't expect telephone companies to participate if they think they're going to be sued..."

they're not going to be sued if they're operating within the law...

btw, i'm not doing very well watching this bastard... i may not last very much longer...


"my judgment happens to be the will of the people..."

oferchrissakes...

[UPDATE IV]


i've got the "And, yes, I DO take it personally" radio show coming up in 15 mins on blog talk radio with co-blogger brother tim... thank god... i'll have to shut george down...

[UPDATE V]


you miserable, rotten, son-of-a-bitch... you refuse to talk with "tyrants" like raúl castro but you feel perfectly comfortable talking about religious freedom with the chinese premier, arguably a tyrant on a much greater scale than the castro brothers...

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Now, the Bush admin is claiming the telcos are refusing to cooperate

lord almighty... the bush administration is never going to stop playing the fear card...
Two top Bush administration officials said Friday that some telecommunications companies are resisting wiretapping orders for terrorists because a surveillance law expired nearly a week ago.

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey made the assertion in a letter to Congress, the latest salvo in a rhetorical war between the White House and Capitol Hill over the law's expiration and the refusal of House Democrats to adopt a Senate-passed bill in its place.

The House has passed its own version of surveillance legislation. Democrats want to work out the differences between the bills rather than accept the Senate's version outright.

The two bills differ in one important way: The Senate bill provides retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that wiretapped American phone and computer lines at the government's request after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but without the permission of a secret court created 30 years ago to oversee such activities. The House does not provide telecom immunity.

President Bush has promised to veto any surveillance bill that does not protect the companies from civil lawsuits that allege violations of privacy and wiretapping laws under the warrantless wiretapping program.

McConnell predicted last week that the government's surveillance of terrorists would be harmed by the expiration of the law. He and Mukasey said that, six days after the law expired, that prediction has come true.

"We have lost intelligence information this past week as a direct result of the uncertainty created by Congress' failure to act," they wrote in a letter to Rep. Sylvestre Reyes, chairman of the House intelligence committee.

They said some private companies have delayed or refused compliance with requests to initiate wiretaps against people covered by orders issued under the expired law. They said most companies are cooperating, but some have suggested they will stop if "the uncertainty persists."

Senior administration officials refused Friday to specify which companies, or how many, were not cooperating. They said the companies believe the law's expiration means no changes can be made in existing orders, which can last for as long as a year. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

so, we've got to go to those telecoms and tell them, "look, we know we 'forced' you to break the law, and we know we told you we'd fix everything up for you, but we didn't expect that breaking the law was going to cause so much fuss, so just hang in there and keep on breaking the law, and we'll keep trying to change the law so that you won't have to break it any more, ok...?"

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Mark Klein rides again [profmarcus: other cities have spy rooms]

[bumped and with note from profmarcus]

Mark Klein appears on Washington Journal:



Cryptome reveals other cities receiving Spy Rooms besides just San Francisco. Hey, this is still about Telcom Immunity. So we haven't even yet begun to discover the gear going into the ISPs.

[note from profmarcus]

this is from the unredacted version of the declaration filed by mark klein, listing the additional cities believed by mr. klein to be the other cities where spy room have been installed, as mettle has noted above...
My job required me to connect new circuits to the "splitter" cabinet and get them up and running. While working on a particularly difficult one with a technician back East, I learned that other such "splitter" cabinets were being installed in other cities, including Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Insider Sabotage

We know telcom immunity conspiracy is not about to go away. We know that these conspirators are going to pile on at that exact moment when they try and ram this through. The trail signs suggest that it might coincide with that distraction which is being run by FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin, with his plan for further media concentration, by Christmas. Plan on every distraction that they engineer into play, to be compelling.

DU points us to this article in The Hill:

'I think it's very important that the courthouse not be closed so there can be a judicial determination to see if there have been any violations of privacy rights', Specter said. 'I think the telephone companies were good citizens, and should not suffer from what they did. And my idea is to have the government substituted as the party.'"

So then why not simply float another corporate welfare bail-out bill, after the fact? Because what Specter proposes is putting up a wall of professional liars, con men, swindlers, cheats and frauds between the People and justice.

Let us not forget what the federal government thinks of a level playing field: They frequently seize all assets of criminal defendants upon arrest in order to assure that defendants cannot pay for lawyers. And that doesn't even begin to describe how government rigs the system in order to assure that they prevail, ad nauseum.

Senator Specter, I respectfully remind you that you traded for your office, as previous chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in exchange to the Executive for promising obeisance to him. Buying and selling of office is repugnant. Betraying the American People to the 5th Estate along the course of events with results that end in the privatization of the Internet, is onerous.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments