| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| FISA Immunity Passes. Obama voted Yes. What now? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 9 2008, 02:37 PM (287 Views) | |
| mynameis | Jul 9 2008, 02:37 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Internet Jujitsu
|
Feingold & Dodd Amendment fails on FISA By: John Amato @ 9:45 AM - PDT Their amendment went down. I believe the final vote was 32-66… Specter’s was rejected too. Here’s some voting information. It’s just coming out now. Please Donate here to help fight back against these actions. Blue America has been leading the way to fight for our rights and to elect new candidates that will uphold UPDATE: (Logan) The only two Senators not to vote on FISA today? One with a brain tumor and McCain. Priorities. http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/09/feingold-dodd-amendment-fails-on-fisa/ |
![]() |
|
| mynameis | Jul 9 2008, 02:51 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Internet Jujitsu
|
What State laws were violated and what lawsuits can be filed in all 50 states?
Edited by mynameis, Jul 9 2008, 02:51 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Reggie_perrin | Jul 9 2008, 03:18 PM Post #3 |
|
read glen greenwalds blog, probably the best reporting on FISA anywhere on the internet, chances are if you have a question he's got the answer- http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/ |
![]() |
|
| riverwatcher | Jul 9 2008, 07:55 PM Post #4 |
|
my letter today to our MN Democratic Senator: Dear Senator: Several months ago, when similar surveillance and communications legislation was pending before the Senate, I wrote to you with my concern that the US was throwing away our safeguards on surveillance and handing the keys to the already-too powerful and unchecked executive branch to do as they wish with whom they wish, with little or no oversight or recourse by their targeted suspects. Your response then was that this was a necessary and temporary measure that would be thoroughly reviewed when its termination date approached, and you assured me that my liberties and rights were of equal concern to you; that you share my concern over balance and limits on a power-hungry White House and intelligence offices. Today I learned that the Senate overwhelmingly caved to Bush and his scare tactics, gleefully tossing him all the authority he requested in our lovely, endless and self-perpetuating "war on terror", in spite of records that the NSA regularly spies on the likes of Quakers, Greenpeace and PETA, and now the courts will have no teeth in enforcing what should be corporate responsibility. AT&T, Verizon et. al. are obviously far more important than any group of citizens who may be illegally wiretapped -until now - and no doubt the benefactors of cozy lobbyist relations with this do-nothing Senate. Not knowing how you voted - although I could take a wild guess at Republican Senator Coleman's - I am left to wonder what else this Congress is willing to mangle or undo that has until now stood the test of time for this nation under numerous and more legitimate wars and threats. Hoping you at least voted against this travesty of a lobotomy on our Constitution, this handcuffing of civil rights that were already eroding under this administration, I am left to fear for what our so-called leaders are up to. FISA was sufficient for all wiretaps and surveillance needed, but Bush & his fear-mongers, true to form, cannot stand to abide any laws and predictably changed them to suit their tyranny and trampling. Your job is to uphold the Constitution and protect the people. This would include protecting the Constitution and the people from those who would ruin both, as has been consistently happening for the last 8 years. I suppose the fear among your peers was, of course there will be another attack, and you will be targeted for not giving the authorities "all the tools they needed". This government is out of control, and I seriously wonder what else is on the verge of vanishing that was once untouchable and precious. Were these gun rights or abortion rights being debated, I wonder if your colleagues would be so quick and timid to bow to the Emperor and his antics. A concerned and appalled Minnesotan, (name and contact info.) |
![]() |
|
| DoYouEverWonder | Jul 9 2008, 08:19 PM Post #5 |
|
Now what? Time for a real third party in this country. One that represents the people, not the corporations. |
![]() |
|
| Flippy | Jul 10 2008, 12:20 PM Post #6 |
|
GOGO Cynthia McKenney? EDIT: Fuck Obama. Edited by Flippy, Jul 10 2008, 12:20 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| mynameis | Jul 10 2008, 05:45 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Internet Jujitsu
|
Here's the list of the FISA VOTE. Not one single Republican nay.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00168 Edited by mynameis, Jul 10 2008, 05:46 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ferric Oxide | Jul 12 2008, 08:37 AM Post #8 |
|
Senator Reed (RI) voted against the FISA amendments. I wrote to him and this is his response: Dear [ferric oxide]: Thank you for contacting me regarding the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). I appreciate learning of your concerns on this important matter. As you may know, on July 9, 2008, the Senate voted 59 to 28 to approve the FISA Amendments Act. I did not support this legislation after amendments to strip or dramatically alter the immunity provisions in the bill failed. For your review, I have enclosed a copy of my statement from the Congressional Record which further details my thoughts on this matter. I believe that we must take every step necessary, consistent with our nation’s laws and Constitution, to thwart terrorist attempts to attack our nation. I also believe that in doing so, we must make every effort to preserve the civil liberties and privacy rights so important to our democracy. Your thoughts on this matter are important to me, and you can be assured that I will keep them in mind should further legislation on this matter come before the Senate in the future. Again, thank you for contacting me, and do not hesitate to write, call, or visit my website, www.reed.senate.gov, for information regarding this or any other matter. Sincerely, Jack Reed United States Senator http://reed.senate.gov Senator Reed's statement Mr. REED. Mr. President, I wish to spend a few minutes discussing why I vote against final passage of H.R. 6304, the House companion to S. 2248, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. I would like to begin by commending Senators ROCKEFELLER and BOND who have negotiated this bill, literally for months, in order to reach the compromise that we voted on today. I believe that many aspects of this bill are an improvement, not only to the Protect America Act which passed last August, but also to S. 2248, the bill we voted on in February. I opposed both of those bills. This compromise bill specifies that FISA and certain other statutes are the exclusive means for conducting surveillance on Americans for foreign intelligence purposes. It requires the inspectors general of the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency, and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct a comprehensive review and issue a report on the President's surveillance program. It requires the intelligence community to create reverse targeting guidelines so that the National Security Agency cannot conduct surveillance of a U.S. citizen without a warrant by targeting a foreigner. Finally, it sunsets this legislation in 4 1/2 half years rather than the 6 years called for in the original bill. All of these measures increase oversight and help protect civil liberties and are helpful changes. However, title II of this bill still grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies for actions they may or may not have taken in response to administration requests that may or may not have been legal. As I have stated before, the administration has had years to provide the written legal justification that they gave the telecommunications companies when they requested their cooperation in the aftermath of September 11. A few of my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee and Intelligence Committee were allowed to read certain documents related to this matter after extensive negotiations with the administration. However, I, and the rest of my Senate colleagues who are not on those committees, were denied access to those documents. In addition, the telecommunications companies who have been named in several lawsuits have been prohibited by the administration from providing any information regarding this issue to the courts, to the plaintiffs, to Members of Congress, or to the public. In good conscience, I could not simply trust with blind faith that the administration and telecommunications companies took proper, lawful actions. I therefore supported three attempts to strip or limit this immunity during today's debate. First, Senator Dodd offered an amendment to strike title II. When that failed, Senator Specter offered an amendment to require a Federal district court to assess the constitutionality of the terrorist surveillance program before granting retroactive immunity to the companies alleged to have assisted the program. This amendment also failed. As a final effort, Senator Bingaman offered an amendment which would have stayed all pending cases against the telecommunication companies related to the Government's warrantless surveillance program and delayed the effective date of the immunity provisions until 90 days after Congress receives the required comprehensive report of the inspectors general regarding the program. If Congress took no action in that time, the telecommunications companies would receive immunity. Unfortunately, that amendment also failed. The Senate had three opportunities to implement sensible measures to ensure that the grant of immunity to the telecommunication companies was appropriate. But these amendments were voted down. I believe the result sets a dangerous precedent. We must take the steps necessary to thwart terrorist attacks against our country, but these steps must also ensure that the civil liberties and privacy rights that are core to our democracy are protected. This bill fails to meet this threshold. For these reasons, I oppose the passage of this bill. Edited by Ferric Oxide, Jul 12 2008, 08:39 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · The Lounge · Next Topic » |








9:22 AM Jul 11