|
I sent this e-mail to my Congressman today:
I read today that Representative Nancy Pelosi and Congress are reaching a despicable "compromise" on the FISA bill. I further read that Representative Pelosi is defending 1) the Congress' abandonment of the human rights of millions of Americans to privacy in personal electronic communications and 2) approval of retroactive immunity for the telecom companies -- by shifting the focus from the paramount crimes that have been committed to the idea that the really important task is to pass a law insuring "exclusivity," i.e., a provision purporting to prohibit the government from surveillance outside the new FISA bill. NONSENSE.
The reason that telecom immunity is requested, the reason that amendment of the FISA bill is requested is THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS NO RESPECT FOR THE LAW AND DID NOT OBEY THE EXISTING BILL. Let's remember, at the time that the illegal acts at issue took place, Republicans were in the majority in Congress. The Bush administration could have easily obtained any change in the FISA bill that it wanted. Instead, President Bush and the telecom companies chose to violate what they knew full well was the law.
And that law as set forth in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is clear: the president must obtain a warrant based on probable cause to search and seize our private papers and property. There can be no question that a warrant is required. Our current president decided that the Constitution was an inconvenience and violated it. And now he is pressuring Congress for its retroactive complicity in his violation.
The issue here is not whether Congress passes a law limiting the power of the president with regard to future electronic surveillance. The issue here is that the Bush administration has no respect for the law, and bribed, intimidated or through other means persuaded the telecom companies to disobey the very clearly written existing laws. If Representative Pelosi and others in Congress think that Americans will be fooled for one instant by her ridiculous subterfuge, her pitiful "compromise," they are sadly mistaken.
The cost for giving in on the fundamental issue -- respect for the law is loss of the rule of law. It is that loss that poses the greatest threat to our nation at this time.
Our country is in peril. The Constitution, the rule of law are under attack -- not so much by terrorists who can only destroy our buildings and our lives but not our spirits and our rights but from an executive gone mad with power. And Congress stands helplessly by. Where is the Patrick Henry, where is Samuel Adams, where is the Thomas Paine, where is Thomas Jefferson, where is the James Madison, where is the Alexander Hamilton, where is the Benjamin Franklin of our day? Who will find the courage to speak out about the serious violations of Americans' rights? And if no one dares to speak out, how will this or a future administration violate our rights?
In 1776, our freedom was jeopardized by England. Today, it appears that the greatest threat to our freedom is not a foreign power that seeks to dominate us through force but rogue multinational companies that, like the Barbary pirates that our founding fathers had to contend with in the early years of our nation, do not have the responsibilities of sovereign states and therefore act outside the law.
What is more, it appears that these rogue multinationals have bought our Congress and the men and women who should be the faithful protectors of our rights. If not, where is the sense of outrage in our leadership? Where is the sense of national purpose and pride? What kind of nation are we that passes laws, obtains irrefutable evidence, even confessions of violations of those laws by its own leadership and by rogue multinational, extra-national companies and cannot bring those companies to answer for their admitted and serious wrongs?
For shame, Nancy Pelosi and all who vote to compromise the precious rights of the American people. The Bush administration must be reminded that the rule of law, not the rule of the president is supreme.
|