Mass'Debator
Posts: 4,282 
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
February 13th, 2008, 10:34 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7243201.stm
I don't really like the plan at all in either Bush's approach or Congress's, but the bickering back and forth as to how crappy it'll be in the end is just as bad.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7243201.stm
Quote:
Wait.. what? Who? Bush said that?? US President George W Bush has told Congress he will not accept another temporary bill allowing warrantless wiretapping of foreign terror suspects.
Quote:
oh ok, that makes sense then.
....Mr Bush said he wanted Congress to approve legislation which was permanent and provide retroactive immunity to telephone companies that co-operated.
Quote:
What's the rush? Saturday? That's three days away, I'm sure there should be plenty of time to look into the matter in detail to make sure all the T's are crossed and the I's are dotted.
...."The time for debate is over," Mr Bush told reporters in Washington. "I will not accept any temporary extension."
The current legislation, last extended in August, will expire on Saturday.
The Protect America Act, which amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, allows the US authorities to tap into phone calls and e-mails to or from the United States, as long as the target is abroad.
Previously, they had to seek approval from a special court in advance.
The act did not, however, grant immunity to the telecommunication companies who have been co-operating with the government since it was passed.
Several lawsuits have since been filed against them by campaigners for collaborating with the US authorities and violating privacy laws.
'Flow of intelligence'
On Tuesday, the Senate approved full legislation which would authorise the surveillance of foreign terror suspects for another six years and included the provision of immunity for telecommunication companies.
However, the legislation still needs to be backed by the House of Representatives, where leading Democrats have reportedly proposed extending the temporary legislation for another three weeks.
But speaking at a news conference in the Oval Office, President Bush said he would not accept another extension, insisting Congress should pass permanent legislation before the current law expires at midnight on Saturday.
"It's time for Congress to ensure the flow of vital intelligence is not disrupted," Mr Bush said alongside the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell.
"It is time for Congress to pass a law that provides a long-term foundation to protect our country and they must do so immediately."
The current legislation, last extended in August, will expire on Saturday.
The Protect America Act, which amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, allows the US authorities to tap into phone calls and e-mails to or from the United States, as long as the target is abroad.
Previously, they had to seek approval from a special court in advance.
The act did not, however, grant immunity to the telecommunication companies who have been co-operating with the government since it was passed.
Several lawsuits have since been filed against them by campaigners for collaborating with the US authorities and violating privacy laws.
'Flow of intelligence'
On Tuesday, the Senate approved full legislation which would authorise the surveillance of foreign terror suspects for another six years and included the provision of immunity for telecommunication companies.
However, the legislation still needs to be backed by the House of Representatives, where leading Democrats have reportedly proposed extending the temporary legislation for another three weeks.
But speaking at a news conference in the Oval Office, President Bush said he would not accept another extension, insisting Congress should pass permanent legislation before the current law expires at midnight on Saturday.
"It's time for Congress to ensure the flow of vital intelligence is not disrupted," Mr Bush said alongside the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell.
"It is time for Congress to pass a law that provides a long-term foundation to protect our country and they must do so immediately."
Quote:
A little something I like to call "Corporate Ratitation"
Mr Bush also stressed the importance of giving companies retroactive immunity from prosecution for co-operating with the government without court approval.
Quote:
Why is it that one side of the government always wants one extreme, and the other side wants another extreme and neither can ever seem to work on a compromise?
"We need the co-operation of telecommunications companies," he said. "If these companies are subjected to lawsuits costing billions of dollars, they won't participate, they won't help us."
The chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, has however said he still opposes giving such companies immunity.
"There is no basis for the broad telecommunications company amnesty provisions advocated by the administration," he wrote in an letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding.
The chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, has however said he still opposes giving such companies immunity.
"There is no basis for the broad telecommunications company amnesty provisions advocated by the administration," he wrote in an letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding.
I don't really like the plan at all in either Bush's approach or Congress's, but the bickering back and forth as to how crappy it'll be in the end is just as bad.
Electoral Member
Posts: 360
Location: California
Location: California
March 8th, 2008, 10:19 AM
I see in the media that the FBI now admits it gathered and did some surveillance using what is now described as "illegal methods" and it involves monitoring of both cell phone and emails captured using methods that may violate some Constitutional guarantees. Boy, isn't that reassuring? Now, no one will act about it either. How about the material used to convict someone that is illegally gathered? Where are the Courts when they are needed?
I see in the media that the FBI now admits it gathered and did some surveillance using what is now described as "illegal methods" and it involves monitoring of both cell phone and emails captured using methods that may violate some Constitutional guarantees. Boy, isn't that reassuring? Now, no one will act about it either. How about the material used to convict someone that is illegally gathered? Where are the Courts when they are needed?
Senate Member
Posts: 5,586
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
March 8th, 2008, 11:00 AM
Obama is an unknown factor.
Bush is WAY out of line on this one.
Quoting Avro
I think you will find Mr. McCain pays somewhat more attention to the US Bill of Rights than either Bush.......or the Clintons.
Yep, one must also think that the Yanks are cowards if this crap keeps working.
(no sarcasm alert)
(no sarcasm alert)
Obama is an unknown factor.
Bush is WAY out of line on this one.
No party affiliation
Posts: 2,003
Location: Oshawa
Location: Oshawa
March 8th, 2008, 11:46 AM
For once, you are right.
Bush is always way out of line.
Quoting Colpy
I think you will find Mr. McCain pays somewhat more attention to the US Bill of Rights than either Bush.......or the Clintons.
Obama is an unknown factor.
Bush is WAY out of line on this one.
Obama is an unknown factor.
Bush is WAY out of line on this one.
For once, you are right.
Bush is always way out of line.
