Weirdness Abounds

That the Democratic-led 110th Congress passed the new-and-improved FISA law which not only gave the President more power to spy on Americans but also gave him cover for the past violations of that law was disturbing enough. Today, however, an editorial in the NY Times added to my unease, primarily because of the unstated yet underlying assumptions made about that bill.

The new measure eviscerates the protections of FISA, allowing the attorney general to decide when to eavesdrop — without a warrant — on any telephone call or e-mail message, so long as one of the people communicating is “reasonably believed” to be outside the country. The courts have no real power over such operations.

The only encouraging notes were that the new law has a six-month expiration date, and that leaders of both houses of Congress said they would start revising it immediately. But there’s a big catch: most lawmakers have no idea what eavesdropping is already going on or what Mr. Bush’s justification was in the first place for ignoring the law and ordering warrantless spying after 9/11. ...

If Mr. Bush wants Americans to give him and his successors the power to spy on them at will, Americans should be allowed to know why it’s supposedly so necessary and how much their freedoms are being abridged. If Congress once again allows itself to be cowed by Mr. Bush’s fear-mongering, it must accept responsibility for undermining the democratic values that separate this nation from the terrorists that Mr. Bush claims to be fighting. [Emphasis added]

I was with the editorialist right up until the last paragraph cited above. The implication of the highlighted section is that Congress and the President can abridge freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution if only they can come up with a good enough reason.

I expect the answer is going to be "But, we're at war and during war time it is necessary to suspend certain freedoms to protect the nation."

To which I respond,"Bullshit!"

The "war" is an undeclared and unsanctioned one. The Global War On Terror is not a war in the traditional sense. It is nothing more than this administration's euphemism for an excuse to keep us all cowering under our beds so that our rights and our treasure can be siphoned off by the imperial guard.

The editorial suggests a state in which, like drowsy lobsters, we have barely noticed the increasing heat in the kettle we find ourselves. The incremental stripping away of our freedoms so that 'Daddy' can protect us is hardly the kind of security this nation needs or should want.

There is NO excuse, NONE, to justify the abridgement of our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. If this Congress doesn't understand that, then we need a new Congress.