Civil liberty groups sue Bush!

www.chicagotribune.com...

Its about time someone starts resisting this crap.

Good luck there. How come if they are so up in arms in the house and the senate they havent moved on this. Because they know that whats going on is perfectly legal under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They may not like it, but face it, they got no case and they know it. Waste of money, not to mention a much more important thing, their dignity. In this report of the FISA act, check out Executive 12333 on pg. 10. Youll have to read it a few times unless youre familiar with legal jargon(annoying). You will see that the actions taken by the Bush Administration and the NSA are legal as approved by the Attourney General. The House and Senate Committies on Intelligence knew about it, where was the uproar then?

www.fas.org... -link from bottom of wiki link
en.wikipedia.org...







[edit on 1/18/2006 by ludaChris]

The Current Republican Government sure did have it's way with America, it reminds me of 1984. That novel was supposed to be fiction

here's another link for the above story

Originally posted by baaronhaile
The Current Republican Government sure did have it's way with America, it reminds me of 1984. That novel was supposed to be fiction

here's another link for the above story

Sorry I was late in getting my links in, but take a look at those. Those explain the clear fact that these groups are about to make a mistake in even trying to make a case

"President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it," said Anthony D. Romero

He can authorize it without Congressional approval for one year with the consent of the Attourney General. The NSA program was only screening calls coming into the United States, making it legal for them to do. If you read the executive order 12333 you will see what I mean. You do know the President have legal advisors to tell him what would be illegal if it were implemented, if he could get in trouble for it, it wouldnt be implemented.

Of course he can do that, he has given himself executive powers since 9/11. He is assuming dictatorial powers. This is EXACTLY how Nazi Germany got rolling, EXACTLY! But you people out there still conditioned, believe that Bush can somehow do this legally. Can he really?

It says in the US Constitution that all executive powers go into the hands of congress, and congress alone. Bush has chose to ignore that law. He is not following, and he is gutting, the constitution he took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend.

He has passed the Patriot Act which abolishes the 4th ammendment of the constitution, and strains many others.

He wants to pass the Victory Act, or Domestic Security Enhancement Act which will abolish the constitution all together. Go read it for yourself.

www.eff.org...

irregulartimes.com...

rense.com...

It also says in the Declaration of Independance that anyone who tries to gut, or overthrow the constitution is a traitor, is a criminal, and should be delt with. It says very clearly that it is our duty to overthrow those who would overthrow the constitution. BUSH IS TRYING TO OVERTHROW THE CONSTITUTION. With what? With these phony ''anti-terrorism'' laws.

Many people out there know what i am talking about and are fighting against it. Unfortunalty, you have a few people here and there who are just too ignorant to see the truth. They will eventually.

Tyranny will come to your door in a uniform.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by LetKnowledgeDrop]

Originally posted by LetKnowledgeDrop
It also says in the Declaration of Independance that anyone who tries to gut, or overthrow the constitution is a traitor, is a criminal, and should be delt with. It says very clearly that it is our duty to overthrow those who would overthrow the constitution. BUSH IS TRYING TO OVERTHROW THE CONSTITUTION. With what? With these phony ''anti-terrorism'' laws.
[edit on 18-1-2006 by LetKnowledgeDrop]

You have voted LetKnowledgeDrop for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

I'm not even American, but I really wish more Americans could see, and understand that simple concept.. Anyone that tries to gut, or overthrow the constitution is a criminal.

I can think of a few lawsuits against Bush (or other senior Republican Members or Intelligence Agencies), but you tend to not hear much of them after that. I certainly hope this is not the case here.


[edit on 19-1-2006 by ekul08]

LettheKnowledgeDrop, were having it out tonight haha. But did you read the link in my first post here and go down to page 10 to read Executive Order 12333? Its all there, all the legal information you need directly as congress sees it. Granted its from 2004 and I dont know if any changes in the FISA act have taken place, but its there for you to read if interested. If you dont believe it as it is in the original document there, then I dont think I can convince you. But please, read it and get back to me, its not that long.(Just EO 12333, the whole thing is 90 pages.)

The president does have the power to do this without congressional authority for one year. That is absolutely correct. One problem, however, is that this has been going on longer than 12 months, and he has stated bluntly that it will continue, despite clear disapproval on the part of congress.

Another problem is this:

Collection within the United States of foreign intelligence not
otherwise obtainable shall be undertaken by the FBI or, when significant foreign
intelligence is sought, by other authorized agencies of the Intelligence
Community, provided that no foreign intelligence collection by such agencies
may be undertaken for the purpose of acquiring information concerning the
domestic activities of United States persons

The argument for the legality of what the NSA has been doing is that the calls which have been intercepted came from outside the United States, and are therefore subject to the rules governing the gathering of foreign intelligence. The above quote ( E.O. 12333 2.3(b) ) clearly states that this is acceptable, as long as it is not for the purpose of gathering intelligence on the domestic activities of United States persons. If this is being adhered to, then this is totally legal.

The problem here is that there has been a concerted, repeated effort to establish data mining systems by the current administration, despite all congressional obstacles or outcries, which do indeed involve the domestic activities of United States citizens. TIPS and any form of National ID card were prohibited by congress. Then came TIA, and congress dismantled it as well. Then came the MATRIX program, which also tanked. Establishment of this sort of system has been a stated and well documented goal of several administration officials, and the record shows a habitual drive to recast, re-imagine, and recreate one every time congress or anything else gets in the way. Even the National ID card (at least, essentially) hurdle was cleared, with the Real ID Act. Bearing that in mind, it raises the specter of these NSA wiretaps and interceptions being used similarly. I'm not saying they will, or that I even expect they will. I'm just saying it causes concern for many people.

It cannot be proved, and I'm not a judgmental person. I will not condemn anyone, and I concur that they have no case. One cannot be convicted or held civilly liable for unproved activities that are merely inferred, let alone inferred by actions that could very well be legal.

I'm just saying it concerns me very deeply that there is no oversight in this matter. I think that's what many are feeling, and I think it's justified, whether what's taking place is legal or not. I hope those with different views can understand that, even if they cannot agree with it. The experiences and perceptions that lead those who disagree to their stance on this issue, are just as valid as mine or anyone else's, so again, I would never condemn, flame, or get bent out of shape over anyone or their beliefs.

I'm just expressing my gut reaction to this, which is that the very possibility that these concerns might be well founded is cause for alarm in my mind.

The above quote ( E.O. 12333 2.3(b) ) clearly states that this is acceptable, as long as it is not for the purpose of gathering intelligence on the domestic activities of United States persons. If this is being adhered to, then this is totally legal.

Just wanted to let you know that “US persons” means citizens, or permanent residents of the US, anything else does not fall under it.

Interesting, did a search for 12333 and it looks as if that executive order was passed 1981. So, Bush IS NOT the one that gave himself the power to do this.

first line under the heading.

www.cia.gov...

Doesnt matter, once an Executive Order is signed into what is basically what I would call defacto law, it applies to all Presidents. And gives them the power to do what they feel they must do to protect this country. How can you argue with that, when its plain as day. Executive Orders can be modified or altered by a successing Presidents EO. Here is a complete list of EO's organized by Presidential signatories. You can see which EO's ammend which and the such. As for it being going on for over a year, it has yes, but on and off every 3 months or so. I dont think its specific as to how it is supposed to be done in terms of consecutive months, or collective months, which would be a loophole and therefore not illegal. If they want soemthing done, congress can change it, they have the power to do it. Thats the brick wall for any case against Bush on this issue in my opinion based on what I have read so far, I gotta finish it though, see if I'm missing anything.

Executive Orders

[edit on 1/19/2006 by ludaChris]

Originally posted by WestPoint23

The above quote ( E.O. 12333 2.3(b) ) clearly states that this is acceptable, as long as it is not for the purpose of gathering intelligence on the domestic activities of United States persons. If this is being adhered to, then this is totally legal.

Just wanted to let you know that “US persons” means citizens, or permanent residents of the US, anything else does not fall under it.

Exactly. And if that's being adhered to, then it is legal. We have no way of knowing whether U.S. citizens have had their communications intercepted, though. That's why position my is that I won't jump to any conclusions, but remain extremely concerned by all of this.