Real Meaning Of FISA

By John Darkow - Columbia Daily Tribune, Missouri

House Democrats Show Some Backbone

On Friday, the House of Representatives passed a new version of the Federal Intelligence Surviellance Act, but it wasn't the version that Bush and the Republicans wanted. They wanted retroactive immunity for the telecom companies, but this time the Democrats stood up to them and refused to do it. The vote was 213-197 to deny the immunity.

After 9/11, Bush talked some of the telecommunications companies into breaking the law by helping the government snoop on American citizens without a search warrant as constitutionally required. Now, in an effort to determine the full scope of the unconstitutional surviellance, about 40 different lawsuits have been filed against the telecoms. They are currently pending in a California court.

Bush and the Republicans have been saying the retroactive immunity was neccessary to protect America in the future, because the telecoms would not cooperate. Texas Rep. Lamar Smith mouths the party line when he says, "We cannot conduct foreign surveillance without them. But if we continue to subject them to billion-dollar lawsuits, we risk losing their cooperation in the future."

But that's a BIG FAT LIE! All they have to do is get a search warrant (which they can do secretly) and the telecoms cannot refuse to help. What they'll lose is the ability to talk the telecoms into breaking the law and violating the constitution in the future.

They'll also lose the ability to hide the scope of their illegal activities in the past. A retroactive immunity would have allowed the Bush administration to hide their past crimes and keep Americans from finding out just how pervasive the past illegal surveillance had been.

That's what all of this has been about. It has nothing to do with protecting America from terrorists. That can be done with court-ordered search warrants. It is all about the Bush administration trying to hide its past crimes.

Finally, the congressional Democrats have stood up to Bush. They not only denied the retroactive immunity, but also created a bipartisan panel to examine the administration's warrantless wiretapping. Good -- it's about time this mess was exposed to the light of day.

I am proud of the House Democrats. They have finally stood up for the Constitution, and voted to protect the rights of American citizens. They have also given Bush a workable bill. I hope they don't let the Senate or Bush pressure them into changing it.

Is Privacy An Outdated Concept ?

Is the concept of a citizen's privacy outdated? If the Bush administration gets what it wants, it certainly will be.

Bush appointee to be Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Donald Kerr (pictured above), believes we must re-define privacy. He says anonymity is a thing of the past, and privacy should now mean the government can collect as much information about you as they want as long as they don't "misuse" the information they gather.

Kerr made the remarks in testimony to Congress regarding the re-approval of FISA (Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act). Congress has already given the government permission to eavesdrop on any electronic transmission as long as at least one end of the conversation was outside the United States. Bush would like to extend that to all conversations, even those without a connection outside the country. He also wants the telecommunications companies to be immune from any lawsuits that might expose the extent of the eavesdropping.

The reason Bush wants this written into law is to prevent exposure of WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY DOING! Retired ATT technician Mark Klein says a device was installed on ATT lines in 2003, which diverted and copied ALL calls,e-mails and internet accesses to a government supercomputer. Undoubtedly, the same has been done at other telecommunications companies.

In other words, the government has been breaking the law since 2003. Most of these diverted transmissions would violate even the newest FISA laws, not to mention the Constitution. But if the telecommunications companies are protected from lawsuits, then the public could never find out what the government is doing.

We must hold Congress' feet to the fire, especially the Democrats. They should not extend FISA, and they should not shield the telecommunications companies from lawsuits. It is time that they took steps to uphold the Constitution.

The government should not have access to the communications of an American citizen unless they have first obtained a warrant from a court. Further, these warrants must be issued on an individual basis, and not for all of the communications routed through a particular company. Anything less would truly trash the concept of privacy.

I don't want to give up my right to privacy, and I have no wish to re-define the concept of privacy. Do you?