This Shall Not Stand

When you and I read a book like 1984 or Brave New World, or some other fiction dealing with a future dystopia ruled by nefarious overlords, where personal rights are quashed, we see it a cautionary tale, something to be avoided. When people like the current administration’s leaders read those things (well, those of them that read books) they see those types of novels as a wish list, a guide-map, a working manual. Because what they seek is a country, indeed a world, in which the central government, in hand with the corporatocracy, knows all and controls all.

If and when the full truth comes out about the NSA eavesdropping program called "The Program," it will be understood that it went miles beyond anything to do with potential terrorists. Thousands upon thousands of citizens were, and are, having their phone calls and e-mails "vacuumed" by the government, including those who have participated in anti-Iraq-War protests or organizations, or the environmental movement. It’s the Vietnam era wrongdoing (COINTELPRO, etc.) all over again, only with better technology.

Perhaps they think they can pull the warrantless spying off because their polling has shown that only 5% or so of Americans know what the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution says (see below) and with their control of the major media they can keep the furor quelled, but I sense that things are going to blow up in their faces, There’s just too damn much overreaching, corruption, incompence and now outright lawbreaking for it not to hit the fan.

The warrantless eavesdropping alone is an impeachable offense but I fear that the only way to get Bush out of there is to get a woman to give him a hummer in the Oval Office and have him lie about that. But seriously, the partial solution is to get the Dems back in control of Congress in 2006 and have them impeach Georgie Boy. I say partial because that would make Cheney the president and nothing much would change, so they better arrange to get him gone as well.

What the administration is apparently basing this surreptitious lawbreaking on is the power given to the president after 9/11 which empowered him to "use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

The right interpretation of this would focus on the modifier "appropriate," another way of saying within the bounds of the Constitution (which the president took an oath to uphold) and previously established law, e.g., 1978's Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which specifically prohibits what the administration has been doing. Also, the force being authorized is targeted at those whom he "determines" to be guilty of terrorism, not a broad dragnet of individuals who are three or four degrees of separation from suspected terrorists.

What they start with in this program is a list of the phone numbers and e-mail addresses found on captured al Qaida suspects, then gather the numbers and adresses that all those people have contacted, then etcetra and etcetra until they have 6,000 or more "suspects." So if you ever called a man you work with and he once called his ex-professor about something and his ex-professor had received an e-mail from Al-Arian (the Florida prof who was found innocent of charges brought by the feds of terrorist ties), who had phone calls to and from Palestinian charities who received donations from al-Qaeda, then you're on the list. You're what the president and attorney general have characterized as "al-Qaeda connected." In other words, a distinct lack of probable cause, and no warrant issued to peruse your phone conversations and private e-mails. Wake up folks, before it's too late to stop this great land of freedom from slipping away. Perhaps it's time to re-read Orwell and Huxley, less as fiction and more as political science.

{I'm adding this today, 2-8-06. It just occurred to me why the administration didn't want to go through the FISA court. That would leave a paper trail and since less than 1% of the illegally surveilled people were found to be in any way worthy of future eavesdropping (this figure being from an FBI source who had firsthand knowledge) that would open them up to massive lawsuits if the list were revealed.}

The Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."