<http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080507Z.shtml>http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080507Z.shtml

[truthout] Editor's Note: A few points not covered in The New York 
Times report below. The White House, and specifically George W. Bush, 
stand accused by critics and members of congress of breaking the law 
by engaging in warrantless wiretapping of Americans. This legislation 
authored by the White House blurs the line between what was clearly 
an illegal action by Bush and other White House officials and what 
now appears to be permissible in Congress' view. As such, it 
diminishes significantly any chance that any White House official 
will ever be held accountable for breaking the law to begin with.

In addition, the White House's insistence that the FISA court's 
authority be significantly diminished is consistent with the 
administration's pattern of attacking any entity in a position to 
question their actions. It appears that there is no impediment to the 
DOJ notifying the FISA court when surveillance is needed, just an 
ongoing refusal on the part of the White House to share information 
with anyone, for any reason, regardless. ma/TO

The roll call vote for the surveillance bill can be found at: 
<http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll836.xml>http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll836.xml
 

     <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/washington/05nsa.html>Go to Original
     House Passes Changes in Eavesdropping Program
     By Carl Hulse and Edmund L. Andrews
     The New York Times
     Sunday 05 August 2007
Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the measure "does violence to the 
Constitution of the United States."
     Washington - Under pressure from President Bush, the House gave 
final approval Saturday to changes in a terrorism surveillance 
program, despite serious objections from many Democrats about the 
scope of the executive branch's new eavesdropping power.
     Racing to complete a final rush of legislation before a 
scheduled monthlong break, the House voted 227 to 183 to endorse a 
measure the Bush administration said was needed to keep pace with 
communications technology in the effort to track terrorists overseas.
     "The intelligence community is hampered in gathering essential 
information about terrorists," said Representative Lamar Smith, 
Republican of Texas.
     The House Democratic leadership had severe reservations about 
the proposal and an overwhelming majority of Democrats opposed it. 
Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the measure "does violence to the 
Constitution of the United States."
     But with the Senate already in recess, Democrats confronted the 
choice of allowing the administration's bill to reach the floor and 
be approved mainly by Republicans or letting it die.
     If it had stalled, that would have left Democratic lawmakers, 
long anxious about appearing weak on national security issues, facing 
an August spent fending off charges from Republicans that they had 
left Americans exposed to threats.
     Despite the political risks, many Democrats argued they should 
stand firm against the initiative, saying it granted the 
administration far too much latitude to initiate surveillance without 
judicial review.
     They said the White House was using the specter of terrorism to 
weaken Americans' privacy rights and give more power to Attorney 
General Alberto R. Gonzales, an official Democrats say has proved 
himself untrustworthy.
     "Legislation should not be passed in response to 
fear-mongering," said Representative Rush D. Holt, Democrat of New Jersey.
     The legislation makes changes to the Foreign Intelligence 
Surveillance Act, known as FISA.
     There was no indication that lawmakers were responding to new 
intelligence warnings. Rather, Democrats were responding to 
administration pleas that a recent secret court ruling had created a 
legal obstacle in monitoring foreign communications relayed over the Internet.
     They also appeared worried about the political repercussions of 
being perceived as interfering with intelligence gathering. But the 
disputes were significant enough that they are likely to resurface 
before the end of the year.
     Democrats have expressed concerns that the administration is 
reaching for powers that go well beyond solving what officials have 
depicted as narrow technical issues in the current law.
     In a statement issued late Saturday, Mr. Bush said he would 
"sign this legislation as soon as it gets to my desk." The Senate 
approved its version of the bill on Friday.
     In seeking changes to the surveillance program, the 
administration said it was being prevented from monitoring 
communications of terrorism suspects overseas in a period of 
apparently heightened activity. Other Republicans called for swift 
House action as well.
     "I can't imagine they would take a monthlong vacation without 
fulfilling their obligation to keep America safe," Senator Mitch 
McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said before the House 
approved the bill.
     Senior House Democratic leaders said they were resigned to the 
measure, which will be in force for six months. But they said they 
would not wait that long before trying to come up with a more 
acceptable, permanent change in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
     "There is no way we are ever going to wait six months," said 
Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House 
Democratic Caucus.
     The surveillance measure came up in the House late Saturday, 
after lawmakers had approved an energy efficiency measure and were 
preparing to pass a major Pentagon spending bill and approve $255 
million for rebuilding the collapsed bridge in Minnesota.
     In the final vote, 41 Democrats joined all but 2 Republicans in 
backing the measure; 181 Democrats opposed it.
     Some Democrats complained they were being bullied into hasty 
action on the intelligence bill by the administration and 
Congressional Republicans. They said the House should stick with a 
proposal defeated Friday that kept more judicial control over the 
program than the administration wanted.
     House Republicans pointed to Senate's approval of the measure, 
which was supported by most Democratic members of the panel that 
oversees intelligence operations.
     "If it is good enough for Senate Intelligence Committee 
Democrats, it should be good enough for House Democrats," said 
Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the second-ranking Republican.
     Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the senior Republican 
on the Intelligence Committee, accused Democrats of dithering for 
months without giving "the intelligence community tools they need 
while we are at heightened risk."
     Administration officials had been quietly pushing Congress to 
pass a "modernization" of the current law, arguing that technological 
changes - especially the expansion of telephone calls over the 
Internet - had made the current rules outdated.
     One major issue, apparently raised in secret by judges 
overseeing the program, is that many calls and e-mail messages 
between people outside the United States are routed over data 
networks that run through the United States.
     In principle, the surveillance law does not restrict 
eavesdropping on foreign-to-foreign communications. But in practice, 
administration officials contend, the path of those calls through 
this country means the government cannot monitor them without a warrant.
     But Democratic lawmakers have been deeply suspicious that the 
Bush administration was seeking a broader and more controversial 
expansion of surveillance authority by making changes that were vague 
on important issues.
     Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas and chairman 
of the House Intelligence Committee, said Friday that the bill the 
administration wanted would allow wiretapping without warrants as 
long as it was "concerning a person abroad." As a result, Mr. Reyes 
said, the law could be construed as allowing any search inside the 
United States as long as the government claimed it "concerned" Al Qaeda.
     Democrats said their suspicions had been fueled in part by the 
White House's repeated reluctance to ask Congress for technical 
changes addressing issues that should have been apparent long ago.
     In a recent letter to a Republican on the committee, 
Representative Heather A. Wilson of New Mexico, Mr. Reyes noted that 
Congress had updated the FISA law eight times since the Sept. 11 attacks.
     "You repeatedly claim that FISA is woefully outdated," Mr. Reyes 
wrote. "Neither you nor the administration raised concerns during 
consideration of those bills that the statutory changes proposed were 
inadequate."
     For years, but especially since the attacks, Democrats on the 
intelligence oversight committees have been loath to do anything that 
might provoke charges of tying up the intelligence agencies in 
"outdated" restrictions.
     But relations have steadily soured since the public disclosure 
of the warrantless surveillance program 18 months ago. White House 
officials have repeatedly argued that the president has broad 
authority to carry out such programs without explicit permission from 
Congress, even if the programs appear to violate long-standing legal 
restrictions.
     The mistrust has gone in both directions. Administration 
officials contend that any effort to have Congress address even 
straightforward issues prompts Democrats to seek all manner of new 
restrictions.
     But Democrats, and some Republicans, say the administration has 
worsened the distrust by refusing to be provide detailed information 
to lawmakers and by offering what appear to have been misleading 
answers to Congressional queries.
     Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on 
the Senate Judiciary Committee, has criticized Mr. Gonzales, the 
attorney general, for insisting that the Justice Department never had 
any internal disputes about the legality of the surveillance program.
     Several top Justice Department officials, including the director 
of the F.B.I., Robert S. Mueller III, have publicly contradicted Mr. 
Gonzales's testimony and told lawmakers that senior officials 
threatened in 2004 to resign over the disputes.



__________ NOD32 2438 (20070805) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com


__________ NOD32 2438 (20070805) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
Icujp-news mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/icujp-news

To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

You will receive a confirmation email. When you reply to that, you 
will be off this list. It just takes a second!

=============================

List-Id: ICUJP Topics Discussion List

To manage your list account (i.e. set to deliver in Digest form, 
temporarily disable subscription, etc.) you need to:

Add your email address to the end of this URL and then visit that 
page in your web browser (such as Internet Explorer or Firefox):

http://lists.meer.net/mailman/options/icujp-news/

=============================

List-Unsubscribe: http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/icujp-news,
         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

List-Archive: http://lists.meer.net/mailman/private/icujp-news

List-Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

List-Subscribe: http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/icujp-news,
         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

__________ NOD32 2438 (20070805) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com



__________ NOD32 2438 (20070805) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com

John Johnson
Change-Links Progressive Newspaper
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://change-links.org
Subscribe to our list server. Email  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(818) 782-1412
Cell (818) 681-7448.

===



  ----------



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.4/936 - Release Date: 8/4/2007 2:42 PM


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to