ACLU Welcomes Senate Inquiry Into Warrantless NSA Spying Program With Full Page Propaganda
Posted on February 6, 2006
The ACLU are running this full page ad in conjunction with today’s Senate hearings over the NSA.
As the Senate Judiciary Committee met today to conduct the first official Congressional oversight hearing on the warrantless National Security Agency wiretapping program, the American Civil Liberties Union urged Senators to ask tough questions of the sole witness, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and reject the administration’s claim that the operation is both legal and necessary.
“President Bush, like all presidents, is bound by the rule of law,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. “The Senate Judiciary Committee must vigorously fulfill its responsibility to America by asking tough questions of the attorney general. While Mr. Gonzales gave the go-ahead on the illegal spying program when he worked for the president in the White House, he now has a different role as the country’s highest law enforcement official tasked with upholding the nation’s laws. If he can’t exercise an independent review of the executive, he should step aside and appoint a special counsel who can do an independent review. The administration should stop trying to justify this illegal program. No one in America is above the law.”
To heck with any evidence! Mr. Romero says that Bush is already guilty, and to say anything otherwise is trying to justify what is illegal!
What is more disturbing than the ACLU’s guilty charge is the words of the very chairmen of the counsel that will be doing the hearings today, Arlen Specter’s announcement on National television last night.
The Republican who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee said today that he believed the Bush administration had violated the law with its warrantless surveillance program and that its legal justifications for the program were “strained and unrealistic.”
The program “is in flat violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” said the chairman, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who will open committee hearings on Monday.
Great! We all feel more comfortable that these hearings will be fair and unbiased now Arlen! The real question is whether or not FISA is unconstitutional, by giving the Senate power that the Constitution does not grant it, over a power it does grant the President.
In a full-page advertisement in today’s USA Today, the ACLU urged Congress to act on the warrantless NSA spying program authorized by President Bush, noting that Democrats and Republicans alike have raised serious concerns. The ACLU has called for a full, open and independent investigation into the illegal program, and has also filed a lawsuit on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, nonprofits, terrorism experts and community advocates challenging the constitutionality of the warrantless surveillance operation on First and Fourth Amendment grounds.
Today’s first official congressional oversight hearing follows an aggressive public relations campaign by the administration to try to justify the program without revealing any verifiable facts about its reach. The ACLU noted that none of the administration’s rationalizations justified the president’s assertions of limitless, unchecked authority to violate the Constitution and federal laws. Legal experts have agreed that the illegal NSA spying program violates the letter and spirit of the law, and the non-partisan Congressional Research Service concluded the president has overstepped his authority and that he failed to properly brief Congress, as required by law.
The ACLU urged lawmakers to ask tough questions of the attorney general to determine: What laws the White House is referring to when the president has said the program is “legally right”; does the attorney general believe that the president, and not the Supreme Court, has the job of interpreting the law; how many Americans have had their conversations or e-mails monitored by the warrantless program; how much money has been wasted on inquiries into the private lives of innocent Americans; and if there are any limits to the broad powers that the president has claimed.ACLU Press Release
The Financial Times reports how Gonzales will react today.
The Bush administration will tell the Senate today that the National Security Agency’s programme for terrorist surveillance has been badly distorted by media reports, and that the scheme is a strictly limited one aimed at al-Qaeda members and affiliated groups.
In the first Senate hearing on the controversial programme, which was set up secretly in 2002 and revealed publicly in December, Alberto Gonzales, the attorney-general, will say that the press accounts “are in almost every case, in one way or another, misinformed, confused or wrong,” according to Time magazine, which has obtained documents outlining the planned testimony.
“Contrary to the speculation reflected in some media reporting, the terrorist surveillance programme is not a dragnet that sucks in all conversation and uses computer searches to pick out calls of interest,” Mr Gonzales will say in response to questions raised by Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate judiciary committee. “No communications are intercepted unless first it is determined that one end of the call is outside of the country, and professional intelligence experts have probable cause [that is, 'reasonable grounds to believe'] that a part to the communication is a member or agent of al-Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist organisation.”
It should get interesting today as one side accuses the administration of spying on innocent Americans without any evidence to back them up, and the other side defends what was supposed to be a secret program designed to defend us from the enemy. Why anyone should have to defend trying to spy on the enemy is just ridiculous to me.
Am I a Bush apologist? No, I haven’t heard any viable reason why he hasn’t secured our borders, and there are several other issues I have qualms with Bush about. However, listening in on the conversations of those talking to the people who want to kill us is not one of those issues. Constantly spinning this to compare it to what Nixon did is completely dishonest and has no evidence to back it up. These people are spies on our own soil, and in many cases admitted terrorists. I have seen no evidence that any innocent citizen has been harmed by this program, but I have seen evidence that it has captured admitted terrorists.
On the other hand, I am suspicious of the ACLU wanting FOIA on a program that was intended to be classified. They are constantly defending our enemies, and now that this program has been leaked, an admitted terrorist is trying to get off the hook due to the evidence against him being gathered via the NSA program.
Iyman Faris’ challenge is among the first to seek evidence of warrantless electronic eavesdropping by the National Security Agency, a practice that began after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Government officials have reportedly credited the practice with uncovering Faris’ terrorist plot and several others.
The ACLU are eager for his case to go forward.
In many ways, Faris is not an ideal plaintiff for attorneys who hope to focus their case on whether the president abused his authority by spying on innocent Americans. Faris’ guilt is widely acknowledged, despite his recent claims of innocence. Among the evidence against him, prosecutors alleged that he sent a message to al-Qaida leadership in 2003 claiming that “the weather is too hot,” a signal that he could not follow through with his Brooklyn Bridge plan.
But if civil libertarians wait for the perfect case, they may have to forgo a legal challenge altogether. The targets of the secret NSA program are classified, and barring additional leaks, it is unclear how innocent American citizens would discover that they have been monitored. “The reality is that the people in Fourth Amendment cases are rarely the people you would invite over to dinner,” said Chris Hoofnagle, senior counsel to the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
The ACLU’s Steinhardt said he welcomed a phone call from Smith. “A likely route to this challenge is in the context of a criminal case,” he said.
Take a look at a piece Alberto Gonzales wrote today in the Opinion Journal.
In the days following Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush charted a course of action to respond to the worst attack on our homeland in history. He promised to use every tool available to defeat al Qaeda and pledged to take the fight to the enemy abroad as he worked to prevent another attack. As he said in the State of the Union address, “Our country must remain on the offensive against terrorism here at home.” The president has the constitutional responsibility–and authority–to lead this response.
After Sept. 11, Congress immediately confirmed the president’s constitutional authority to “use all necessary and appropriate force” against those “those nations, organizations, or persons he determines” responsible for the attacks. The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) gave the president the latitude to use a full complement of tools and tactics against our enemy. A majority of Supreme Court justices have concluded that the AUMF authorizes the president to use “fundamental and accepted” incidents of military force in our armed conflict with al Qaeda. The use of signals intelligence–intercepting enemy communications–is a fundamental incident of waging war.Read More
Stop the ACLU will be an intervening party against the ACLU in their lawsuit. If you would like to get involved with us, there is no hassle to it. All the information can be found here.
Others: Blogs For Bush
Rightwing Nuthouse
Decision 08
Washington Post
» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
17 Responses to “ACLU Welcomes Senate Inquiry Into Warrantless NSA Spying Program With Full Page Propaganda”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Sen. Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said Sunday that while President Bush’s terrorist surveillance program is a “flat out violation” of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
“it may be entirely legal because of powers granted the president by the Constitution.
“There is an involved question here . . . As to whether the president’s powers under Article 2, his inherent powers, supersede a statute.” Specter told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The Pennsylvania Republican said that if the FISA statute “is inconsistent with the Constitution, the Constitution governs and the constitutional powers predominate.”
http://email.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/5/142841.shtml?s=ic
DePaul scholar at center of free speech fight…
In another, somewhat related action, a Federal Appeals court in Chicago stated “… “We note at the outset that the realm of national security belongs to the executive branch, and we owe considerable deference to that branch’s assessment in matters of national security.”
Arlen Specter has no beliefs, except to appease the Democrats. These Senate investigations and hearings are nothing more than a sham excuse to waste more tax payers money to justify the existence of their staffs and to get their mugs on television.
Open and honest
Sure just like Gonzales wasn’t sworn in, so I am sure he is being honest
…considerable deference to executive branch…
Here is an idea, following the damn laws that are already on the books instead of creating your own.
Waste of tax payers dollars
I see how debating the rights of American citizens is a waste of tax payers dollars…I would rather spend more time on steroids in baseball. You are right on there….
More on why the economy is much stronger than people think :
http://futurist.typepad.com
I see one of the crude variety of Trolls posted earlier. The are an interesting study. I have never seen one that is very knowledgeable. This one obviously does not realize that the only time the ACLU is concerned with the right to speech is when it pertains to their anarchistic agenda.
The Constitution makes President Bush the commander and chief of the military and NSA should be considered a military organization as it maintains national security and not internal security. President should keep Congressional members informed of what is being done so that their is some oversight but he is the one running the war.
The intellectual tenor of this debate is so stimulating!
Bush admitted violating the law on tv during a press conference. He believes he is above the law.
There’s no point in a warrantless wire tap on American citizens when the warrant can be acquired retroactively. Unless the point has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. King George wants to keep an eye on anybody who disagrees with him.
Oh, and FOff:
The ACLU has successfully defended your right to wear religious jewelry and pray in school, so go for it, if that’s what floats your boat.
This blog really frustrates some people huh? Well, Sonja…You’ve convinced me. I’m officially shutting down this blog because of your intelligent, convincing comments. Congrats!
While it’s always good to be successful in debate, I’d rather you keep the forum up. I think you are doing a great public service to provide a venue for all points of view!
I, for one, am misty-eyed in my gratitude.
President Bush never said that he broke the law, that is a fabrication. Also, no one has shown or proven where he did break the law. The NSA always has been a military organization, one reason why its almost impossible to do field work without prior military experience. The wiretaps are eavesdropping on terrorists from the outside calling into the U.S. Leftists need to stop twisting the debate to make it sound like Bush is just tapping U.S. citizen phones at random.
“Here is an idea, following the damn laws that are already on the books instead of creating your own.”
If the left can create laws to kill babies, we can create laws to protect our country. The point is moot anyway, since the NSA is a military organization and Bush is the Commander In Chief.
apostle:
“the wiretaps are eavesdropping on terrorists from the outside calling into the U.S. Leftists need to stop twisting the debate to make it sound like Bush is just tapping U.S. citizen phones at random.”
We have no way of knowing that, do we? Without oversight he could be wiretapping people at random and we would never know. A lot of people showing up on the “no fly” lists are ordinary Americans who were critical of the administration. We have absolutly no reason to believe for an instant that the warrantless wiretaps have anything to do with terrorism. If they are simply listening in on terrorists, what’s wrong with getting a retroactive warrant?
And there are a lot of right wing Republicans who are mighty pissed about this. It’s far from moot and far from over.
What angers me is that they allowed Clinton to stay in office after he committed a FELONY by perjuring himself, but now they want to crucify Bush for trying to
PROTECT OUR RIGHTS. Democrats are morons.
To James:
We have a RIGHT TO BE WIRETAPPED WITHOUT A WARRANT? I don’t remember seeing that. Which amendment was that? Did they pass it while I wasn’t looking?
Looks like we have another know nothing Liberal posting. It would be very helpful and refreshing if idiots like you Sonja actually did some research and knew what they were talking about rather than coming in and posting blindly and making an [edited] of yourself and irritaing the rest of us with working brains. Maybe you just have a serious reading comprehension problem or are hard of hearing. Then again, it could be your just a hard headed stubborn Liberal [edited]. Pick one. Anyway, as is usual, your wrong. Fact number 1, we do know for sure what type of wire taping is going on. If you bothered to read and do research, you would know that even though an actual warrant was not obtained due to the urgent nature of the situtaion that required immediate action, that detailed and thorough records are kept of each action taken. These records are your beloved [edited] oversight. Fact #2, the president, may God protect him, never said he broke the law, he has always maintained he wored within the law. That little twist was another Liberal lie. Nothing new actually. Fact #3, the president, may God bless and protect him, is completely, and legally using his powers to protect national security, and the citizens of this country. He is given that permission in the Constitution, and I must point out that its the real Constitution, not the Liberal “Living Document” version, and he also had a mandate from Congress to take the actions he has and had kept all of them informed of what he was doing. So your [edited] laws are already on the books and he is following them, not creating some immaginary laws you have in your empty Liberal head. Fact #4, the ACLU is a criminal organization filled with communists and anti-American zealots hellbent on destroying this country from within. This is proven,, and if you again bothered to read and comprehend what is said and done out in the world by these commie criminals in the ACLU, you will know that you or I nor anyone else can NOT pray in a public space or wear a religious symbol in a public place, particularly if its a (gasp) public school. They have seen fit to guarantee that my right to do so under the regular and generally accepted version of the Constitution have been thoroughtly and completely violated. Fact #5, again, you have no facts or comprehension. No one has a right to be wire tapped under the Constitution unless under normal circumstances there is a warrant issued. However, in fact, this president at this time has the right and the authority to wire tap with or without a warrant as he see’s fit to protect this country and its citizens if that person is in fact thought to be aiding and abeting terrorists. It really quite simple and quite clear if you have a working brain, a half decent set of comprehension skills, and of course nothing to hide. So you obviously don’t know jack [edited] about what your talking about. I pity you and all Liberals, your so pathetic and lost its almost uncomprehensable, but all so sad. Please seek professional help and spare us all further burden and violations to our common sense and our rights.
NO PROFANITY! This is your last warning.
We appreciate your support but rules are rules
Lobo
MrWonderful:
“. . . making an ass of yourself and irritaing the rest of us with working brains”
I’m sorry my working brains irritate you.
“These records are your beloved [edited] oversight.”
These records are the bald, unsupported word of the wiretappers. If the need is urgent the warrant can be acquired retroactrively. I’m supposed to accept the word of people who have already broken the law?
“not the Liberal “Living Document” version”
you are not alone in thinking the constitution is a dead document. Most other rightwingers think so too. The LAW states that wiretaps on US citizens must be conducted with a warrant. Bush has broken that law.
“ACLU is a criminal organization. . .”
Translation: I don’t like them, nyah! The ACLU protects your civil liberties and that of others. If you don’t like that, tough.
You most certainly CAN wear religious symbols and pray in “public spaces” and public schools. The ACLU defends cases like that all the time and will continue to do so.
“this president at this time has the right and the authority to wire tap with or without a warrant as he see’s fit”
he does not. You see, back in civics (do they still teach that? I doubt it!) I learned that the US government has 3 branches–Congressional, Executive & Judicial. You and King George obviously didn’t get that memo. Congress passed a law stating explicitly that warrants were required and made them super-easy to get. Yet that’s not enough. Not even retroactive warrants is enough. We don’t know *who* they are wiretapping because there is zero oversight–in violation of the law and the executive is never above the law. Never.
I can’t wait for 2009 when all you wing-nuts will do a 180 and start bleating and screaming about the Democratic President having too much power. Let’s see a show of hands of how many of you would trust Hillary if she said she wasn’t spying on ordinary citizens. That’s what I thought.
So really, think about the unchecked powers you are advocating for, because you’ll be handing it down to the next pres very soon.
Why would you want to stop an organization that protects citizens rights from discrimination from the goverment? At least 90% of all ACLU cases are fought for ordinary middle-class Americans constitutional rights against the goverment, Federal, state or local, it’s only the fringe cases that get all the publicity. Stop the ACLU has a better plan of action to help us? What is that plan? Where is your superior organization that will protect us against goverment? Why has almost 100K Republicans joined the ACLU in the last year? Gotta love some conspiracy theories from the bootlickers…this site is a hoot.