Bush warns Congress on wiretaps

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7243201.stm

US President George W Bush has told Congress he will not accept another temporary bill allowing warrantless wiretapping of foreign terror suspects.

Wait.. what? Who? Bush said that??


....Mr Bush said he wanted Congress to approve legislation which was permanent and provide retroactive immunity to telephone companies that co-operated.

oh ok, that makes sense then.

...."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."

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.

Mr Bush also stressed the importance of giving companies retroactive immunity from prosecution for co-operating with the government without court approval.

A little something I like to call "Corporate Ratitation"

"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.

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?

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.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
Here comes the politics of fear for election '08. Bush is buttering the bread for McCain.
 

normbc9

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2006
483
14
18
California
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?
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Yep, one must also think that the Yanks are cowards if this crap keeps working.

(no sarcasm alert)

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.
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
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.


For once, you are right.

Bush is always way out of line.