The Protect Who Act?

[babylonsister]

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2660/81/

The Protect Who Act?
Saturday, 20 October 2007
by Jayne Lyn Stahl


Congress appears to be on the verge of reaching agreement on some aspects of the so-called Protect America Act, or the "spying bill," which grants immunity to telecommunication companies accused of turning over private customer records to the National Security Agency. (WaPo)

The legislation which aims to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act such that warrants are now optional with the vehicle will make an appearance before the Senate next week where it is expected to pass. And, this bill is as much about protecting America as the Iraq war is about bringing democracy to the Middle East. The only ones being protected here are those who continue to break the law under the guise of national security. From the presidential veto, it's obvious that this administration isn't interested in granting immunity from prosecution to parents who are unable to pay their children's medical bills.

What's more, when was the last time you've heard of a White House giving an order to any company, let alone a communications company, which has tens of millions of customers, not to testify in court under a state secrets law that has yet to be written. But, what the hell, if one can grant retroactive immunity, why not enforce a law that isn't on the books? Oh, and why not cook the books, too, while we're at it as the Downing Street Memo clearly proves.

If nothing else, the past six years proves that not only does crime pay, but it pays handsomely — for the upper one percentile of the population of this country, that is. There are more carcinogens trying to pose as laws, coming out of Congress, these days, than on any freeway in America.

Let your Senators, whose salaries you and I pay, hear now whether you're willing to have your personal phone calls, and e-mails, intercepted as those of tens of millions of Americans already have, and whether it's okay with you for those telecommunication behemoths like A T & T, and Verizon, to be granted immunity from prosecution for breaking the law that protects your privacy.

Look at it this way, would you grant immunity unless you thought that a crime was committed? The Constitution isn't the only casualty of the "war on terror;" common sense is, too.

[baldguy]

1. "America" consists of the Republican party and the corporations that support it.

NOT YOURS!

[robinlynne]

2. This is serious, deadly serious. immunity for literally thousands of felonies

committed against us.
and a guarantee of right-wing power for a long time to come.
elimination of impeachable evidence against Bush.

legalized spying on all the democrats, and all of us.
This is almost as bad as it can get.

There is NO justification for any Democrat to vote yes on this bill.

We should be loud and vocal

(our local group intends to be.)

things you can do:
sign Chris Dodd's petition at chrisdodd.com It is halfway down the page, after the "support the constitution which is a fundraiser for dodd.
sign the ACLU's petition. google ACLU and find it.
CALL HARRY REID's office. Dodd put a hold on this vote, with the support of Feingold and Wyden, who are both on the committee, and strongly against the bill. They have seen the documents.
in an unprecedented move, harry Reid has threatened to go forward and ignore the hold placed by his own party.

Rockefeller, created "the deal" with the republicans, If you are in his district, you might want to call him to.

In any other democracy, this would create an uprising of tremendous proportions!

[intheozone]

3. If the telecoms violated our constitutional rights,

does Congress have the authority to give them immunity? Seriously, couldn't such a law be unconstitutional in that basically it would give them authority to violate the constitution and our rights under the constitution! If immunity is granted by Congress (I am going to be so fucking pissed off!), I hope some group immediately files a lawsuit alleging the law is unconstitutional. Let's at least tie this up in courts until Bush is out of office and we get a larger majority in Congress.

[robinlynne]

4. It is happening right now.

[AdHocSolver]

5. Why are Democrats even considering this bill?

The only logical explanation is that Bushco has used this spying capability to dig up some "dirt" on key Democrats and Republicans. In the legal world it is called blackmail. Can anyone now deny that this country is being transformed into a fascist state?

[babylonsister]

6. Money:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2094787