Warrants? George Bush needs no stinkin’ warrants
By Vindu Goel
Friday, February 29th, 2008 at 5:18 pm in Business, Columns & Extras, Iraq War, Politics, Public Policy, Technology, Yahoo.
Digg this 
del.icio.us
In my Sunday column, which we’ve already posted online, I discuss President Bush’s controversial crusade to convince Congress to give him essentially unfettered power to snoop on Americans suspected of consorting with terrorists.
Like many civil libertarians, I’m upset that the Bush administration wants to eliminate the already minimal justification that the intelligence agencies must make to a secret court to eavesdrop on Americans. (Under current law, the feds can start wiretapping anyone, but must quickly get permission from a secret court — a court that has almost never said no — to continue.)
And I’m also angry that he wants to give telecom companies immunity against lawsuits for cooperating with illegal wiretap requests in the past and future. AT&T, the worst offender, gave the National Security Agency access to the email of millions of Americans without any legal justification. You bet the company should be sued (and has been). Since when are companies supposed to turn over private information just because some government official wants it? Heck, Congress ripped into Yahoo for giving the Chinese government e-mail information about dissidents there, so why do they want to condone such police tactics in the U.S.?
To me, this is just an extension of Bush’s systematic trampling of civil rights in the name of fighting terrorism. We’ve got the Patriot Act (which the bright-as-a-bullet Bush confused with his new proposal, the “Protect America Act,” during his news conference Thursday). We have the establishment of indefinite detention without charges and military-only trials for aliens held at Guantanamo. And of course, there’s the waterboarding, extraordinary rendition and Abu Ghraib nastiness.
Sadly, Congress, despite all its posturing and pontificating, has gone along with all of it. That just hands victory to the terrorists: fear of them is making us abandon core American values.
[Both comments and pings are currently closed.]
March 1st, 2008 at 12:30 am
Of course, the “illegal wiretap requests” that AT&T and other telecoms complied with weren’t actually illegal.
But why let facts get in the way of a good rant, Vindu?
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
I agree. The Republicans have played the fear card once again, and Congress has folded.
B.C. - I’m glad you have faith that it was legal, but thanks to the White House and congress we’ll never know.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Your dislike of Bush is justifiable and shared by many, but your contempt has clouded your judgment. As a Silicon Valley guy, you should be well aware of the power of information technology. You should want more use not less. Information is vital, it can save lives at it is better than just blowing things up. America needs to win this war and your attempt to hobble it is beyond reproach. To not listen in to terrorists phone calls in the name of protecting your privacy is extremely selfish. Your privacy is fine. Before you ask everyone else to risk their lives, why don’t you just keep your private thoughts out of cyberspace. But your comment about allowing the trial lawyers to get rich at the expense of companies doing what the government asked them to do in a time of war (wow, what a concept) belies your real motives. Greed.
March 7th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
I love ‘experts’ like Vindu who do not have to deal with reality. I wonder what he is afraid of - who is he talking to. The FISA law is old and outdated. The internet was unknown when the FISA law was written. Today with high speed links the luxury of time does not exist. There is still FISA Court oversight. Someone who is a self-proclaimed high tech expert should understand that it is not 1980.
March 8th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Reality? It’s the conservative propganda that’s out of touch with reality.
No one is saying the U.S. government can’t use the latest and greatest technology to spy on the bad guys.
But the administration needs to be accountable to someone for its spying decisions — namely, the FISA court. And the bills allow for emergency authorization by the attorney general, with retroactive review by the court. That’s hardly a burden on legitimate intelligence-gathering.
Of course, if you’re into waterboarding, extraordinary rendition, suspension of habeas corpus, domestic spying and all sorts of other nefarious stuff, as the Bush administration has shown itself to be, then you don’t really want a court looking over your shoulder, do you?
After all, a judge might actually find that what you’re doing is illegal (as the Supreme Court found with the Guantanamo prisoners held without charges).
As for the trial lawyers, they only get paid if they win. So if BC’s claim is right and GWB and the phone companies acted fully within the law, they’re not going to get a dime. Of course, if the law was broken, that’s a different story.
Bottom line: every presidential administration must be accountable to someone, and that’s all I’m asking for in FISA legislation.
March 13th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Consider for a moment that our government DID NOT wish to monitor electronic and internet communications.
What would that mean?
Also, let’s assume that WE have to entrust some entity with maintaining both National Security and the rights currently afforded the individual under our Constitution and it’s Amendments.
Who better than American Agency’s, Military and branches of Law and Government?
If and when abuse does occur.
Why not save the finger pointing till somebody deserves both barrels?