sure, why not? They both feed the military-industrial complex, making weapons systems manufacturers rich, and the sheeple scared.
Here’s a picture to keep in mind for when McCain announces he’s gonna run for president in 2008.
Democrat wants Bush censured on eavesdropping – Yahoo! News
Mon Mar 13, 2:21 AM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Congress should censure President George W. Bush for ordering domestic eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without a warrant, a Democratic senator said on Sunday.
Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record) of Wisconsin told ABC’s “This Week” that he intends to push for a resolution that would censure the president for what he considers an unlawful wiretapping program authorized by the White House after the September 11 attacks.
“It’s an unusual step,” Feingold said of the measure he plans to introduce in the Senate on Monday. “It’s a big step. But what the president did by consciously and intentionally violating the Constitution and laws of this country with this illegal wiretapping, has to be answered.”
GOP to force Federal Marriage Amendment vote in 2006
Melissa McEwan
Published: January 27, 2006
A Republican effort to ban gay marriage nationwide will be returned to the Senate floor in 2006, RAW STORY has learned.
The Marriage Protection Amendment was originally introduced by Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) in 2003, and leveraged as a wedge issue by the GOP during the 2004 election cycle as a way of mobilizing its base to vote against same-sex marriage.
Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO), a co-sponsor of the 2005 joint resolution, has confirmed that Senate Majority leader Bill Frist (R- TN) will attempt to bring the controversial legislation to the floor this year for a full vote.
Statement by Former Vice President Al Gore
2 hours, 46 minutes ago
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 /U.S. Newswire/ — Following is a statement by former Vice President
Al Gore:
“The Administration’s response to my speech illustrates perfectly the need for a special counsel to review the legality of the NSA wiretapping program. The Attorney General is making a political defense of the President without even addressing the substantive legal questions that have so troubled millions of Americans in both political parties.
“There are two problems with the Attorney General’s effort to focus attention on the past instead of the present Administration’s behavior. First, as others have thoroughly documented, his charges are factually wrong. Both before and after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was amended in 1995, the Clinton/Gore Administration complied fully and completely with the terms of the law.
“Second, the Attorney General’s attempt to cite a previous administration’s activity as precedent for theirs — even though factually wrong — ironically demonstrates another reason why we must be so vigilant about their brazen disregard for the law. If unchecked, their behavior would serve as a precedent to encourage future presidents to claim these same powers, which many legal experts in both parties believe are clearly illegal.
“The issue, simply put, is that for more than four years, the executive branch has been wiretapping many thousands of American citizens without warrants in direct contradiction of American law. It is clearly wrong and disrespectful to the American people to allow a close political associate of the president to be in charge of reviewing serious charges against him.
“The country needs a full and independent investigation into the facts and legality of the present Administration’s program.”
Poll: Americans Want Warrants for Spying
By KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 24 minutes ago
WASHINGTON – A majority of Americans want the Bush administration to get court approval before eavesdropping on people inside the United States, even if those calls might involve suspected terrorists, an AP-Ipsos poll shows.
Over the past three weeks, President Bush and top aides have defended the electronic monitoring program they secretly launched shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, as a vital tool to protect the nation from al-Qaida and its affiliates.
Yet 56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism.
Alito Confirmation Hearings Begin
By William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 9, 2006; 1:12 PM
The Senate Judiciary Committee today opened confirmation hearings on the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court, a choice that senators of both parties said brings into focus major questions on presidential power.
In an opening statement, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the chairman of the committee, said the hearing “comes at a time of great national concern” about balancing the civil rights of Americans and the president’s national security authority. He cautioned against jumping to any conclusions about Alito, a nominee widely seen as likely to shift the court to the right.
Man, the rhetoric has been turned up on this confirmation hearing, from both sides. Should be interesting…
Homeland Security opening private mail
Retired professor confused, angered when letter from abroad is opened
By Brock N. Meeks
Chief Washington correspondent MSNBC
Updated: 5:17 p.m. ET Jan. 6, 2006
Brock N. Meeks
Chief Washington correspondent
WASHINGTON – In the 50 years that Grant Goodman has known and corresponded with a colleague in the Philippines he never had any reason to suspect that their friendship was anything but spectacularly ordinary.
But now he believes that the relationship has somehow sparked the interest of the Homeland Security Department and led the agency to place him under surveillance.
Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official seal of the Department of Homeland Security.
Surveillance Court Is Seeking Answers
Judges Were Unaware of Eavesdropping
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 5, 2006; Page A02
The members of a secret federal court that oversees government surveillance in espionage and terrorism cases are scheduled to receive a classified briefing Monday from top Justice Department and intelligence officials about a controversial warrantless-eavesdropping program, according to sources familiar with the arrangements.
Several judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said they want to hear directly from administration officials why President Bush believed he had the authority to order, without the court’s permission, wiretapping of some phone calls and e-mails after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Of serious concern to several judges is whether any information gleaned from intercepts by the National Security Agency was later used to gain their permission for wiretaps without the source being disclosed.
From the New York Times:
The president last week denounced in strong language the leaking of information about the agency’s program, saying: “My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war. The fact that we’re discussing this program is helping the enemy.”
Privacy advocates on Friday said the leak investigation should be set aside, at least for now, in favor of an investigation of the warrantless eavesdropping itself.
“President Bush broke the law and lied to the American people when he unilaterally authorized secret wiretaps of U.S. citizens,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “But rather than focus on this constitutional crisis, Attorney General Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss. Our nation is strengthened, not weakened, by those whistle-blowers who are courageous enough to speak out on violations of the law.”
Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, said his group believed “the priority at this point for the Department of Justice should be the appointment of an independent prosecutor to determine whether federal wiretap laws were violated” by the security agency program, not the leak inquiry.
The administration has been sensitive about leaks of closely held information, classified or not, and the Justice Department is also investigating the recent disclosure by The Washington Post that the Central Intelligence Agency operated secret prisons for terrorist suspects in Eastern Europe.
It’s the fact that you’re running secret torture prisons, and spying on Americans that’s the problem. If you were so concerned with leaks, why is Karl Rove still employed after the Plame leak?
