Stop the New FISA
July 11, 2008
‘Allowing the new surveillance law to stand would seriously cripple our free press,’ writes Chris Hedges.
If the sweeping surveillance law signed by President Bush on Thursday — giving the U.S. government nearly unchecked authority to eavesdrop on the phone calls and e-mails of innocent Americans — is allowed to stand, we will have eroded one of the most important bulwarks to a free press and an open society.
The new FISA Amendments Act nearly eviscerates oversight of government surveillance. It allows the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to review only general procedures for spying rather than individual warrants. The court will not be told specifics about who will be wiretapped, which means the law provides woefully inadequate safeguards to protect innocent people whose communications are caught up in the government’s dragnet surveillance program.
The law, passed under the guise of national security, ostensibly targets people outside the country. There is no question, however, that it will ensnare many communications between Americans and those overseas. Those communications can be stored indefinitely and disseminated, not just to the U.S. government but to other governments.
This law will cripple the work of those of us who as reporters communicate regularly with people overseas, especially those in the Middle East. It will intimidate dissidents, human rights activists and courageous officials who seek to expose the lies of our government or governments allied with ours. It will hang like the sword of Damocles over all who dare to defy the official versions of events. It leaves open the possibility of retribution and invites the potential for abuse by those whose concern is not with national security but with the consolidation of their own power.
I have joined an ACLU lawsuit challenging the new law along with other journalists, human rights organizations and defense attorneys who also rely on confidentiality to do their work. I have joined not only because this law takes aim at my work but because I believe it signals a serious erosion of safeguards that make possible our democratic state. Laws and their just application are the only protection we have as citizens. Once the law is changed to permit the impermissible, we have no recourse with which to fight back.
I spent nearly 20 years as a foreign correspondent for the New York Times, as well as other news organizations. I covered the conflict in the Middle East for seven years. I have friends and colleagues in Jerusalem, Gaza, Cairo, Damascus, Tehran, Baghdad and Beirut. I could easily be one of those innocent Americans who are spied on under the government’s new surveillance authority.
The reach of such surveillance has already hampered my work. I was once told about a showdown between a U.S. warship and the Iranian navy that had the potential to escalate into a military conflict. I contacted someone who was on the ship at the time of the alleged incident and who reportedly had photos. His first question was whether my phone and e-mails were being monitored.
What could I say? How could I know? I offered to travel to see him but, frightened of retribution, he refused. I do not know if the man’s story is true. I only know that the fear of surveillance made it impossible for me to determine its veracity. Under this law, all those who hold information that could embarrass and expose the lies of those in power will have similar fears. Confidentiality, and the understanding that as a reporter I will honor this confidentiality, permits a free press to function. Take it away and a free press withers and dies.
I know the cost of terrorism and the consequences of war. I have investigated Al Qaeda’s operation in Europe and have covered numerous conflicts. The monitoring of suspected terrorists, with proper oversight, is a crucial part of our national security. But this law is not about keeping us safe, which can — and should — be done in a constitutional manner and with judicial oversight. It is about using terrorism as a pretext to permit wholesale spying and to silence voices that will allow us to maintain an open society.
Chris Hedges was part of the team of New York Times reporters who won a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for reporting on global terrorism. He is the author of many books, including “War Is the Force that Gives Us Meaning.”
See article at:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/07/08/18514466.phpTuesday Jul 8th, 2008 5:32 AM
East Bay | North Bay / Marin | South Bay | U.S. |
“Compare Provisions in “Hitler’s Laws” with FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008″
Today The FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 May be Passed by the U.S. Senate.
Compare provisions in “Hitler’s Laws” with U.S. FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008: Note similar manner the Act, HR 6304 suspends the U.S. Constitution’s 4th Amendment Protections and Telecommunication Privacy for American Citizens.
THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008, H.R. 6304 EH may be found at:
http://thomas.loc.gov/
Below: Are Hitler’s signed Discriminatory Laws of February 28, 1933.
ROBL. I 83
DECREE OF THE REICH PRESIDENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF
THE PEOPLE AND STATE
In virtue of Section 48 (2) of the German Constitution, the following is decreed as a defensive measure against Communist acts of Violence, endangering the state:
Section 1
Sections 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, and 153 of the Constitution of the German Reich are suspended until further notice. Thus, restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press, on the right of assembly and the right of association, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic, and telephonic communications, and warrants for house-searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.
Section 2
If in a state the measures necessary for the restoration of public security and order are not taken, the Reich Government may temporarily take over the powers of the highest state authority.
Section 4
Whoever provokes, or appeals for or incites to the disobedience of the orders given out by the supreme state authorities or the authorities subject to then for the execution of this decree, or the orders given by the Reich Government according to Section 2, is punishable—insofar as the deed, is not covered by the decree with more severe punishment and with imprisonment of not less that one month, or with a fine from 150 up to 15,000 Reichsmarks.
Who ever endangers human life by violating Section 1, is to be punished by sentence to a penitentiary, under mitigating circumstances with imprisonment of not less than six months and, when violation causes the death of a person, with death, under mitigating circumstances with a penitentiary sentence of not less that two years. In addition the sentence my include confiscation of property.
Whoever provokes an inciter to or act contrary to public welfare is to be punished with a penitentiary sentence, under mitigating circumstances, with imprisonment of not less than three months.
Section 5
The crimes which under the Criminal Code are punishable with penitentiary for life are to be punished with death: i.e., in Sections 81 (high treason), 229 (poisoning), 306 (arson), 311 (explosion), 312 (floods), 315, paragraph 2 (damage to railroad properties, 324 (general poisoning).
Insofar as a more severe punishment has not been previously provided for, the following are punishable with death or with life imprisonment or with imprisonment not to exceed 15 years:
1. Anyone who undertakes to kill the Reich President or a member or a commissioner of the Reich Government or of a state government, or provokes to such a killing, or agrees to commit it, or accepts such an offer, or conspires with another for such a murder;
2. Anyone who under Section 115 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious rioting) or of Section 125 (2) of the Criminal Code (serious disturbance of the peace) commits the act with arms or cooperates consciously and intentionally with an armed person;
3. Anyone who commits a kidnapping under Section 239 of the Criminal with the intention of making use of the kidnapped person as a hostage in the political struggle.
Section 6
This decree enters in force on the day of its promulgation.
Reich President
Reich Chancellor
Reich Minister of the Interior
Reich Minister of Justice
End
Following see HR 6304 “(2) Probable Cause” section under (C)(Order):
It is necessary to read entire FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to ascertain its low standards of “Probable Cause” to wiretap and spy on persons in the U.S.
Example: Following is HR 6304 “(2) Probable Cause” section under (C)(Order):
Note how the weak word “May” in this “Probable Cause” paragraph of HR 6304 misleads readers to believe this provision shall protect U.S. Citizens and other persons in the U.S. from Government agents violating their Constitutional rights. That HR 6304 paragraph is shown below: see how the Act’s Probable Cause wording “may” undermines protection for persons in the U.S. exercising 1st Amendment rights.
This is from HR 6304 “(2) Probable Cause” section under (C)(Order):
“No United States person may be considered a foreign power, agent of a foreign power, or officer or employee of a foreign power solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”
The House inserted the weak word “may” and failed to insert, e.g., “SHALL NOT” which legally would have been more binding on Government and police not to violate the 1st and 4th Amendment rights of U.S. Citizens. Consequently it will be harder for persons in the U.S. to defend against U.S. Government wiretap evidence.
This vague language of THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 should concern U.S. Activists that network with other activists, especially with groups overseas. For example, the Stop the War Campaign and labor groups’ transcend countries. Some of those country’s governments strongly oppose U.S. policies.
After the Senate passes HR 6304, U.S. Activists who network, especially with international activists, run the risk they “MAY BE CONSIDERED” by U.S. Government, agents of a foreign power if they support causes opposed by the Government. Historically it has not been beyond this U.S. Government to make such charges.
The FISA AMENDMENTS ACTS OF 2008 will permit massive U.S. Government surveillance of electronic communications going out of and coming into the United States, with minimum court oversight. U.S. Government may also use several broad provisions of the Patriot Act to further its domestic surveillance.