Pulling the Plug on Warrantless Eavesdropping of Americans
In the early morning hours of May 11th, the House of Representatives responded, at last, to the President’s assertion of inherent authority to eavesdrop on Americans without a warrant or any judicial review.
By a vote of 245-178, the House adopted an amendment that I offered with my colleague Jeff Flake (R-AZ) to reiterate that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) provides the exclusive authority to engage in domestic electronic surveillance for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence information.
In December 2005, we learned that the Bush Administration may be using the National Security Agency (NSA) to eavesdrop on Americans on U.S. soil without a warrant or any judicial oversight. Shortly after these activities were disclosed, I introduced the “NSA Oversight Act” with Mr. Flake to address the President’s “Terrorist Surveillance Program” (TSP) and to provide congressional oversight.
We strongly believed that Congress had a duty to respond because of the impact the program would have on the expectation of privacy of all Americans, as well as the very serious constitutional and separation of powers issues that were raised by the President’s actions.
Just last week, we heard reports that even Attorney General Ashcroft may have had such serious reservations with this questionable program that he was prepared to resign over it at one time, along with FBI Director Robert Mueller and other Justice Department officials.
The Founders designed a system of checks and balances, built on three separate and co-equal branches, in order to ensure that no one branch of government would become too powerful or engage in unchecked activities. A common theme that echoed throughout the deliberations at the Constitutional Convention was one of distrust, and particularly distrust of the Executive. This “distrust” is woven in the very fabric of our system of checks and balances today, designed to ensure that fundamental liberties are safeguarded even in times of war or great crisis.
On the House Floor, the chief opponent of our amendment seemed to argue instead that our system of three branches was unworkable in the fight against terrorism – asserting that because FISA needs to be amended, but has not yet been amended, we must allow the President to simply ignore it. That, I submit, is unconstitutional and a threat to the very freedoms that Americans hold dear. It also ignores the fact that FISA has been amended many times, and recently.
After the September 11th attacks, it was clear that fundamental changes to our existing surveillance and anti-terrorism statutes were required, both because of “walls” between federal law enforcement authorities, as well as radical technological changes that had occurred since these statutes were last revised. While FISA had proven to be an important tool pre-9/11, some modifications were necessary, and were in fact made to FISA, to respond to the new threat posed by al Qaeda. In fact, FISA has been amended a great many times to update the law, and still additional changes may be necessary. The federal government has a duty to pursue al Qaeda and other enemies of the United States with all available tools, including the use of electronic surveillance, to thwart future attacks on the U.S. and to destroy the enemy. But while the President possesses the inherent authority to engage in electronic surveillance of the enemy outside the country, Congress possesses the authority to regulate such surveillance within the U.S. And Congress did, in fact, act to occupy that field when it passed FISA and explicitly stated in law that FISA and our existing criminal wiretap statutes, both of which contain warrant requirements, provide the sole authority for electronic surveillance of Americans on U.S. soil.
FISA has proven to serve as an efficient tool for law enforcement. Indeed, the Department of Justice recently reported that in the last year, 2,176 FISA applications were approved, with only one rejected, in part, by the FISA Court. Since 2001, only four requests have been denied. The law also provides flexibility to ensure that imminent attacks can be thwarted by permitting the initiation of electronic surveillance in emergencies where there is not adequate time to first go to the FISA court.
Since the law is crystal clear and has largely proven to be effective, the President has no basis or authority to operate around it. The President, however, has argued that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) provided him with such authority to engage in warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans. It is hard to believe that any of us in Congress contemplated – when we voted to authorize the use of force to root out the terrorists who attacked us on September 11th – that we were also voting to nullify FISA to permit spying on Americans without warrant.
Despite repeated requests for hearings on this issue in the last Congress, we were rebuffed by the House leadership and Congress engaged in no meaningful oversight of the President’s activities and assertion of inherent authority in this area. Nevertheless, I was able to force votes on this issue on the House Floor on three separate occasions with Mr. Flake, coming within 7 votes of shutting down the TSP with the support of almost two dozen Republicans.
On the first day of the 110th Congress, we continued our efforts to address this issue by reintroducing our legislation as H.R. 11. Shortly after, the Attorney General indicated that electronic surveillance occurring as part of the TSP would cease to operate without the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). This was more than a little ironic, since up until that point the Administration claimed that if it brought the TSP within FISA, the program would be unworkable. Now, they asserted there was no logistical impediment to doing so. Moreover, the President has yet to concede that he cannot conduct such electronic surveillance of Americans unilaterally outside FISA with no judicial oversight. And we still do not know whether the FISA court is renewing applications on a case-by-case basis, or merely reviewing the program as a whole. Congress cannot be silent in the face of this assertion of power, and that is why Mr. Flake and I have fought to address this issue over the last year.
The Schiff-Flake amendment makes clear that in the absence of explicit statutory authority for electronic surveillance, FISA continues to be the exclusive authority for the conduct of domestic electronic surveillance of Americans for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence information. The adoption of our amendment on the House Floor was a victory for all Americans. While a number of important questions still remain with regard to the Administration’s new approach as well as the past activities under the TSP, the House is now clearly on record as opposing the President’s assertion of inherent authority in this area and has drawn a clear line in the sand.
What about the Senate? This number isn't veto proof. How can we change that, aside from the obvious - elect more Democrats? What if Bush ignores any changes that finally pass Congress?
Tom
May 22, 2007 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surprising that you accept the assertions of Alberto Gonzales. I would not extend him that consideration, and would press for detailed description of both current practice, and what procedures were in place both before and after the famous hospital visit.
It is time to stop accepting "I don't recall" and to start imposing contempt charges for failure to testify truthfully.
May 22, 2007 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since the law is crystal clear and has largely proven to be effective, the President ...
has that much more incentive to ignore it and, in the long run, to get rid of it entirely.
There, I've fixed it for you. If I've learnt *anything* during the 6 yrs of mis-rule by the mal-administration it's that Bush is congenitally unable to coexist with anything that functions well, at any level of govt.
[...] the House is now clearly on record as opposing the President’s assertion of inherent authority in this area and has drawn a clear line in the sand.
Being on record is good, but you know what happens to lines drawn in the sand -- the first time the wind blows, they disappear.
May 22, 2007 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for posting. I admire your courage. And thank you, and your party, for Watergate. If it wasn't for Nixon and Watergate, FISA would never have been necessary in the first place. The Church Committee investigated illegal domestic spying by your party's administration back in the 70's.
Thank goodness for Republicans. The disease AND the cure!!
May 22, 2007 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you saying....out loud........with witnesses......that your president is breaking the law?
Why not start impeachment proceedings. This IS more egregious than say.......lying about a blow job, wouldn't you say?
May 22, 2007 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whose party are you talking about?
May 22, 2007 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. This is the right way to do things, and, historically, the way it had been done. Even without a terrorism case, the Communications Act of 1934 recognized special circumstances, and delegated to the Attorney General the privilege to declare that a proposed pen register surveillance was legal. Pen registers are obsolete today, but their technological details are the call detail records (CDR), or billing records, that appear to have been the target of at least one NSA operation. Pen register and similar information has been held by the courts as having a lesser expectation of privacy than the content of the call. Think reading the envelope versus reading the letter.
Republicans offered GWB to amend the FISA, but he brushed that aside.
I would hope against hope that when amendments are passed, they stay with the technical legislation like the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). CALEA was enacted for some very legitimate reasons of there being telephone technology that simply didn't fit previous lawful interception warrant models. Technology continues to evolve, but amendments for new technology, such as throwaway cellular phones, were put into the emotionally named PATRIOT Act rather than reasonably as updates of CALEA. Speaking as an engineer that has to deal with compliance, it would be so much nicer if the material were in one place!
--
Howard
*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]
May 22, 2007 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have never quite understood the almost apologetic tone adopted by those purporting to stand up to the illegal acts of the Bush Administration. It goes on still.
My perception is that our democratic republic is on life support -- flat-lining even -- and politicians are standing around claiming that the patient has a low-grade temperature.
In 2001, an unusual email landed in my box addressed not to me, but to an FBI field agent.
I had no connection to either the sender or the addressee. Yet, there it was in my email box. I forwarded the email to the proper addressee from my box. And this "glitch" never happened again. In any other time line, I would have thought of it as a glitch. On that day, I suspected the glitch to be illegal surveillance.
So you see, the damage is already done. We now live in an environment of suspicion. And to further compound this insult, we're probably going to watch helplessly as those who broke the laws walk away without prosecution.
May 22, 2007 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right direction!
Now get busy on repealing the Patriot Acts and that damned blank war check given the liars in the White House.
Oh, please investigate and get to the bottom of who is aiding and abetting in the selling of terrorism and the flea bitten rag tag Arab terrorists as the replacement for the Russian Communist threat so as to keep the MIC in tall clover and to use as a foil for an imperialistic foreign policy in the Middle East.
You guys have a lot of work to do for the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the American taxpayers and voters.
May 22, 2007 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
With all due respect Congressman, getting on the record is not enough.
We've seen Congress spin its wheels trying to negotiate with known criminals.
We've seen absolute proof that they are knowingly violating their oaths of office and destroying our Constitution.
On record may seem to save all of you come election time - but it won't.
America is fed up. We want those thugs out of our White House.
What's it going to take to get you people to stop thinking of documenting your opposition to their crimes - and start doing your duty and really stopping them?
May 22, 2007 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
“On May 22, 2007 - 6:02pm Tom Wright said:
Surprising that you accept the assertions of Alberto Gonzales. I would not extend him that consideration, and would press for detailed description of both current practice, and what procedures were in place both before and after the famous hospital visit.
It is time to stop accepting “I don’t recall” and to start imposing contempt charges for failure to testify truthfully.”
Thank you, Tom Wright. Couldn’t have said it better myself. When, exactly will the majority stop being Stockholm syndrome victims and start asserting the will of the people? I called Mr. Schiff’s office last night in regard to the impeachment of Gonzales. It is so desperately needed and long overdue.
May 22, 2007 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
With all due respect to the opinions expressed so far in these comments (with which I wholeheartedly agree), Adam Schiff is working as hard as he can. His piece strikes a well-reasoned tone, as if he has spent some time working on the matter. Cool heads prevail. He's in this for the long haul.
Additionally, a press release from his office yesterday states, "Today, Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Artur Davis (D-AL) introduced a resolution expressing no confidence in the performance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and urging the President to request his resignation. Reps. Schiff and Davis, both former federal prosecutors, drafted the resolution in response to failures of Attorney General Gonzales to adequately and properly manage the Department of Justice."
As someone who voted Schiff into office, I'll just say "go get 'em!" and hope that more members of congress wise up and get a spine.
I love democracy ... I just hope it outlasts our generation.
Peace
May 22, 2007 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
have you seen the:
NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51
HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20
This is very disturbing! The directive seems to be done under the wire and if any disaster, man made or nature, this directive gives him total rule of law, and congress is irrelevant. Which includes the other appointees to act in conjunction with homeland security and enforce the presidents rule of law.
So, with all the effort congress has put forth in reversing the "evil doers" work, they on the other hand are working around all of congress efforts for accountability and rule of law.
No matter what laws are reversed or loop holes closed, this administration works very hard at "giving US the birdy" and placing directives that give them total power, laws - congress - Courts - and the American people - are a matter of text and become irrelevant!
We need real strong willed - strong minded - in your face - read every text - question everything - work for the American people - up hold the rule of law - have strong ethics - morals that reflect their past, current and past while serving the American people...CONGRESS.
What are you and congress going to do to reverse this?
May 22, 2007 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
You seem to be under the impression that Rep. Schiff is a Republican. Perhaps you're mixing him up with Jeff Flake (who really should have an L next to his name, since the defining characteristic of an R is carrying water for the Bush Administration, but never mind).
If you're just saying that President Bush is "our President" then never mind, but that doesn't seem to be the tone in which you're saying it.
May 22, 2007 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
This should be all over the MSM but they've not mentioned a word about it. I have repub reps so I emailed Conyers com. and Waxman's com. and my senator and the Democratic Caucus. The constitution already had a plan for emergencies and this one makes the president the decider of "constitutional government" with power over all branches of government. Why at this time would he come up with this edict unless he plans on implementing it? There are no checks or balances here just a total dictatorship and I don't believe the congress is even aware of the significance of this directive. It's bad enough that the DoJ has come under the control of the executive branch because it renders the Legislative branch powerless to even enforce its subpoenas but with a national emergency Bush could just dismiss them. He would have 90 days to accept a plan for government or not. This really sucks. To the point that I've been telling my friends to buy extra dry foods and bottled water to stock up for this event. Congress needs to act now before they are no longer able to circumvent this directive. What does it take for this congress to start impeachment? Our entire Democracy may depend on such immediate action for its own survival. Or is it true that the democrats have been bought and sold also.
May 22, 2007 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
~
Ah yes ... You noticed this too, eh?
Za appears to be just another one of those fine denizens who has lurked for 1 year 43 weeks before jumping into the water here at the cafe...
Hmmmm ... Veddy veddy indur-res-ding ...
~OGD~
May 22, 2007 11:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Both houses are working on votes of no confidence. I believe the first announcement of the House version added that it already has 14 co-sponsors.
May 22, 2007 11:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quit apologizing and rid yourself of the delusion that you are dealing with traditional political opponents.
The Bush gang has stolen two presidential elections. The whole business with the US attorneys is part of their intention to use the justice department and all the authority of the federal and state governments to entrench themselves in power by suppressing votes and also suppressing the VOTER RIGHTS LAWS which came out of the Civil Rights movement.
This is so obvious, and needs to be stated plainly. Yet I heard Mr. Schiff today on the radio asserting that Gonzales isn't serving the "President" well. Baloney! Gonzo is serving Bush perfectly---don't you get it?
Imagine how the Republicans would be acting if the roles were reversed. Don't you know that one reason they keep pounding the Democrats for being "weak" and "soft" is because the Democrats so obviously don't have what it takes even to stand up for themselves---much less for the American people.
SHOW SOME LEADERSHIP! Call these criminals out and quit the shadow-boxing and play-acting! You've seen first hand how many Republican Congressmen have been sent to prison or are in trouble---do you think they exist in a vacuum? They're the small fry, compared to the bigger criminals.
Do you think it impossible for the US government to have been subverted by criminals masquerading as a political party? It has happened!
For God's sake, for America's sake, start the impeachment process against Gonzales!
I don't care how many of you used to be prosecutors---it doesn't show. You're being played for chumps! The public won't support you UNLESS AND UNTIL you show some FIGHT!
May 23, 2007 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
er, that would be the Republican party. You know, the one Adam belongs to?
May 23, 2007 5:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like some of the drugs you people are on. Hadn't you noticed Adam's party affiliation? I mean, it's perfectly Josh to have Adam come here and say his piece, but that doesn't mean I have to be pleasant to him.
After all, the reason we even HAVE FISA and FISC, is because Nixon was doing the exact thing Bush is now doing. It's the Republican party that's the problem here. They want to inch us ever closer to fascism.
The fact that two Representatives in this Congress feel differently, will change NOTHING.
May 23, 2007 5:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Enemy? Of course we are fighting and occupying, but are we at war? With who? It's a dumb question my congressman Tom Allen cannot answer: are we at war? "Sure feels like it", he says.
The President breaks the FISA law, admits it, even revels in it and Congress's response is to pass a law saying the law is a law? When the President keeps telling them over and over and over he is above the law. Doh.
I'm insulted. And I'll be working to defeat my dear Democratic war-monger. No AEGIS left behind. No oil left behind. No big corporation left behind.
Now watch Congress let Verizon off the hook on the wiretapping violations. Not the Telco's fault they will whine - that ought to be good for some campaign contributions. [Oh, shall we talk about that campaign reform promise?]
Why did Americans elect Democrats last fall? Suckers.
May 23, 2007 6:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
"This should be all over the MSM but they've not mentioned a word about it." My goodness, yes. It takes a second to realize that I'm actually learning about an important piece of legislation that went to a vote, and a winning vote, for the first time here. (My huge thanks to the congressman for both the bill and today's reading material here.)
Whethere one thinks that impeachment is viable or not, I can't believe it would have got far in the Nixon administration without the Washington Post. Now we can't even read about it, much less expect a crusading press.
John
http://www.haberarts.com/May 23, 2007 6:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know which Adam you're referring to, but Rep. Adam Schiff of California is in fact a member of the Democratic Party. Believe me, as an appalled conservative I wish there were Repubs standing up to the President, but so far that's been a pipe dream. Now that the survival instinct is kicking in, you'll see more GOP Reps trying to join the bandwagon.
May 23, 2007 9:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Representative Schiff,
Thank you for you service and your attention to this subject. As one who once lived in your District and still works there, I appreciate your efforts. Additionally, I appreciate you taking the time out oh your busy schedule to communicate with us in this public forum.
Protecting human rights including privacy is of paramount importance. Reaffirming FISA was a good start.
Unfortunately, two other pieces of legislation inflict even more egregious harms upon these rights. The PATRIOTS Act and the Military Commissions Act have yet to be addressed by the 110th Congress. Until last year, more destructive legislation had not existed since John Adams’ Administration and the Federalist controlled Congress enacted the Aliens and Seditions Act of 1798 and they lacked the concentration of corporate power and media control that presently exist.
It is time to restore our democracy by limiting the forces of fascist plutocracy. I enjoin you to focus the future efforts of Congress on dismantling the harms caused by repealing these Acts.
It is time for the FIRST branch of the government to reassert its primacy. I and 330 million other folk look forward to the fruit of your efforts.
May 23, 2007 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have posted at my TPM blog the comments made at the Amendment's introduction by Representives Schiff and Flake, published in the Congressional Daily Record.
There is a date discrepancy between Thomas.loc.gov and the GPOs Congressional Records. The Thomas records show May 11, but the GPO records show May 10. I am presently using the GPO date, because it is the data cited, and the data I am more familiar with using. I queried the Library of Congress though...
May 23, 2007 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
As "an appalled conservative", I am curious how you feel being defined as "librul" and "Bush Hating Lefty" by the vacuous horde of Contemporary Conservatism's Ad Hominem Repeat-a-Cons? (joke, ok? - i have been called a lefty for citing Goldwater on some political boards).
May 23, 2007 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
~
I hope this helps, but I doubt it.Drugs? If so, maybe you SHOULD try some too ...
Toodle loo ...
~OGD~
May 23, 2007 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
What happens if Pres. 28% vetos the intelligence funding bill because of the reaffirmation of FISA? I wonder if this tactic would allow the President to, in effect, retro actively veto FISA. If he vetos the bill... what then? The Congress will never override his veto, and the President would be able to point to his successful veto of the question at hand to justify continuing the practice... as I interpret this anyway.
What is the purpose of affirming a law which was passed, and never repealed? The constitutional remedy for this behavior is impeachment. I wonder if ever before in this nations history we have seen an example of a President defiantly breaking a law, and then having Congress respond by sending the law back for the Presidents signature?
I think the sentiment is right, but I hesitate to be all gung ho for a solution which our founding fathers would have scoffed at. The notion that the Congress would reaffirm a valid law in the face of Presidential defiance of that law seems to be too deferential to the Presidents lawlessness. It may blow up in our faces. Either take the constitutional remedy and impeach him for breaking the law, or roll over and let him steam roll you. But don't make it worse by trying to get all cutesy with the issue.
If I'm wrong in my reading of this, I'll take it all back. I want to be wrong! Prove to me that I am, and I'll hop on the reaffirmation of FISA in the intelligence bill bandwagon forthwith... Until I see that proof though, I will wonder at the consequences of a Presidential veto of a law which is already a law, but brought back for his consideration by a well meaning congress.
May 23, 2007 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did I miss something? I haven't seen a link to either directive nor have I come across them elsewhere. Can someone please supply either a link or their text.
Thanks,
Not so brief Al
May 23, 2007 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Al, here is the link to NSPD 51/HSPD-20.
Everyone should read this latest horror story coming from the WH (dated May 9, 2007). It gives lip service to the other two branches of government, but merely as a matter of 'comity'.
(Comity: A state or atmosphere of harmony or mutual civility and respect)
On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron. H.L. Mencken
May 23, 2007 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believe it or not, OGD, his wife's name is Eve!
On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron. H.L. Mencken
May 23, 2007 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are ugly derivative implications which should naturally flow from the content of Mr. Bush's rationalising confessions of Executive Overreach, and Serial Rapine of The Constitution. The public's acquiescence to Mr. Bush's unlawful eavesdropping is an indication that rampant intelligence failure has not been contained to just Government Politicians and Bureaucrats, and now affects the general population at epidemic levels. The oft-stated foundational rationale justifying the eavesdropping makes Bush look be either a slothful liar, who knows there are enough Party-Firsters and Blind-Feith Believers in the GOP, any half-baked mendacity will be propagated as Mr. Bush's God's honest truth, or is simply; Too Stupid To Be President, and for that reason, relieved of his office for mental incapacitation.
Here are three examples of that main excuse:
GW Bush, February 23, 2006
GW Bush - September 7, 2006
GW Bush - October 4, 2006
Hey, Dubya! If you know it's al Qaeda calling America, why aren't you aggressively working to take down the originator of the call?
May 23, 2007 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Representative Schiff is a Human I count as a Friend of Liberty.
He is someone who understands the reason why Americans are supposed to traverse the high ground, even though it comes at a higher cost. That reason being a simple one: Because We're Americans. Even if this means we sometimes must fight with one hand tied behind our backs, Real Americans understand, know that we play by a different ruleset that most of the world, and cannot allow ourselves to be drawn into the Foul and Fetid Pit of Moral Relativism. For America to win; at the War's End, we must emerge more than just triumphant in battle: we must also return in possession of our humanity and honour. There has always been an extra price for Freedom, but even after this has been totaled into the bill, the cost is transparently, a real value.
Have present day Americans forgotten our birthright's true worth, and are now willing to barter it for nothing more than a pot of beans, seasoned blandly with the faint aroma of faux-security? Even if some have, what could that possibly mean to me? My liberty remains intact and secure in my personal possession, and is not upon any bargaining table, especially not for sale to an Administration looking to purchase shortcuts of equivocations; the very same Administration tasked with America's defense on September 11, 2001. The government was never given the authority to take our Natural Liberty, and only an obscene tyrannical shade of an American government could possibly manifest itself in this fashion. Thank-you Representative Schiff, and know that you are not just one of a handful resisting this surging horde of authoritarians and monarchists, that many others are well-positioned and entrenched upon the high ground, awaiting the proper time to provide for the Charlatans, Pimps and Thieves, who conspire to steal our liberty, enlightenment from experiencing the painful enfilade of their moral awakening.
Rep. Schiff spoke out against the Military Conventions Act of 2006 in Congress on September 27, 2006, articulating why habeas corpus matters:
Rep. Schiff also rebuffed as a sham, the GOP's claim that the Military Commissions Act clearly differentiated between Americans and non-Americans:
This was a reply to distortions from GOP Congresspersons, one who became a personal target of opportunity upon first reading of the dishonest partisan putrescence he spewed out defending his obfuscation of torturous acts marked with the imprimatur of America's political leadership, when he sat as chairman of the House Armed Service Committee, and refused to pursue proper investigations into the mistreatment of American held detainees, trivialising Abu Ghraib as being nothing more than 'seven bad apples', when it was reported by the San Diego Union/Tribune on May 20, 2004:
As Usual, Wrong Again Mr. Hunter. This country and world would have been a far better place had you not in an act of perverse partisan based heresy, renounced the Dreamtime America.
- A people who believe the source of their rights flow from the acts of a benevolent state have never known liberty.
- A legal system which posits different sets of laws' applicability, based solely upon citizenry, and the arbitrary will of politicians cannot be just.
- An American future in which the people did not restrain and muzzle our leviathan, which in the throes of our understandable vengeful passion just after 911, was loosed from its chains, set free to prey upon the world as rabid wolf amongst the sheep, will never again experience peace.
We are Americans. Even the devil deserves his day in a fair and open courtroom. Accused terrorists certainly deserve the same, and if the state successfully secures conviction under due process of law, then they may hang. These are the rules in America; justice can only rightfully be served blindly and equally to all humans who sit accused. Tyranny cannot be bounded by citizenry. It will reach to everyone of us if left unchecked.Thank-you Congressman Schiff, for rising in resistance in defense of the people's liberty.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We seek not your counsel, nor your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget
that ye were our countrymen.
--Samuel Adams
May 24, 2007 5:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great post PseudoCyAnts...
I am all for protecting the safety of Americans from all enemies foreign and domestic...but NEVER at the cost of our liberty and freedom!!!!
May 24, 2007 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink