NSA Defenders In The Senate Flip Out Over Amash Amendment To Stop Dragnet Surveillance

Another great articl on techdirt.com. Really starting to like this site...

Seems that some in congress are getting the message that the American people are upset with the revelations that they are being spied on and are taking action to stop it. Also seems like others, like Fienstien, who received over a half million dollars from defense/psuedo corporations like BAE Systems, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, SAIC and Raytheon since the inception of the PRISM program, want to put a halt to any threats to limit surveillance on americans.

From the article:

Not surprisingly, the NSA's emergency lobbying to try to stop Rep. Justin Amash's amendment that will stop the NSA from its bulk data collection program under Section 215 of the Patriot Act (while allowing lots of other surveillance efforts to continue) has drawn support from the Senate's two biggest supporters of stomping out your privacy: Senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss. Together, they've put out a ridiculous statement defending the trampling of your Constitutional rights to support the efforts of the NSA and giant government contractors to spy on everything you do.

Read the article HERE

Elouina made a great thread last night about this amendment being put in the bill.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I was wondering how the NSA would act. No pass, no funding.

reply to post by Isittruee


Seems the NSA is scurrying to stop it:

NSA's Keith Alexander Calls Emergency Private Briefing To Lobby Against Amash Amendment

reply to post by Isittruee


Even Obama is freaking out:

Obama Opposes Amash Amendment Because It's A 'Blunt Approach' And Not A Product Of 'Open' Process

Cant make this stuff up...

reply to post by Mike.Ockizard


My big thing is even if it does pass will they care? Who's to say they will care. Not like that agrency has the transparency needed to see what they are up to.

Is NSA General Keith Alexander Violating UCMJ by Lobbying Congress Against Amash Bill?

It is my understanding that soldiers may not participate in political activity while in uniform, creating the impression that the activity is endorsed as the official position of the military. General Alexander is just one man, who happens to be in charge of the NSA. Yet he is using his uniform to lobby in an official capacity on an issue to be decided by the civilian leadership, the duly elected Congress of the United States..

www.dailypaul.com...

reply to post by Maluhia


It would be epic to see him called out on this before he gets a chance to try and quash the amendment.

reply to post by Isittruee


From what I gather, there are a few devoted souls in congress that will be beating the drum to make sure no violations occur. I'm hearing more and more senators/congressmen that are speaking up on our behalf. Hopefully this is a trend.

Originally posted by Mike.Ockizard
reply to post by Maluhia

 

It would be epic to see him called out on this before he gets a chance to try and quash the amendment.

Found out that the emergency meeting has already been held.

Good to see that the White House and members of congress are willing to stop at nothing to continue with their treasonous, rogue efforts.

I doubt the NSA cares about the amendment or any other law for that matter. They do what they want and have always done so. They have been listening to us for years now with digital tv and cell phones its much easier. Were a tracked society. Get used to it. Everything will be tracked in the future.

reply to post by Maluhia


In this case the head of the NSA is a military officer. I think the UCMJ portion is to prevent military officers from participating in politics in an official manner since our government is civilian led. I think the intent was to prevent the military from becoming their own power base on the civilian side of politics.

With that being said if people in government are flipping out, then maybe the amendment is the right thing to do.

This whole argument over assassinations', FISA courts, etc. reminds me of a line from a former TV show called The West Wing. At the end of the third season they deal with terrorism, a terrorist plot and the means they go to to remove the threat.

They discussed executive orders that prevented political assassinations, posse comitatus and how the military is forbidden from arresting the guy.. In the end they opt to assassinate the person because of the laws in place on the civil side of the law (Federal / Domestic).

While discussing the actions in the first part of the 4th season, a lawyer asks the question -

"How can justice that has to be served in secret be justice?"

When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass the 4th amendment....
When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass Due Process....
When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass Innocent until proven guilty...
When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass an accused person has a right to confront the evidence and their accusers...
When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass the judicial branch....
When the Federal government uses the guise of national security as a means to bypass separation of powers...

The Federal Government is going down the road of turning every single US citizen into a target, simply by virtue of those citizens being concerned about government actions and questioning them...

Which is exactly what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they chose a Representative Republic form of Government.

Originally posted by Mike.Ockizard

has drawn support from the Senate's two biggest supporters of stomping out your privacy: Senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss. Together, they've put out a ridiculous statement defending the [ trampling of your Constitutional rights ] to support the efforts of the NSA and giant government contractors to spy on everything you do.

Read the article HERE

But but but.. according to the Obama administration none of this is illegal or against the US Constitution in any way -

www.abovetopsecret.com... Obama administration says NSA phone snooping is Not Unconstitutional & House to vote on NSA

I want to see an ATS thread made with Constitutional lawyers who can give us the truth of the matter. I think Obama is lying through his teeth and hoping he won't be challenged.

If these things are not really illegal, then tons of representatives and congressmen are woefully ignorant of the law - thats what the Dictator Obama is saying. I can't believe that for a minute. This needs to go to the Supreme Court. if this crap is upheld by the Supreme Court ( and we know judges are being bought off - www.abovetopsecret.com... NSA has been blackmailing Supreme Court judges ) then we will truly know this is the beginning of the End of America.

Laws are for sheep, but not exactly for the shepherd.

The shepherd warns the sheep to beware of wolfs in sheep's clothing.

But has any sheep ever wondered if the wolf is in shepherd's clothing?

Horror indeed.

reply to post by CAPT PROTON
indeed, for I hear all the time ,"then lets charge them all HOUSE and SENATE, along with the WHITE HOUSE with Treason" not so fast it is easier said then done and is a two edge sword for they can and would say the same to the one bring fourth the charges legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... .

High Crimes and Misdemeanors legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... could be used to remove all of them that have forced TSA, DHS, NDDA, NSA, down the peoples throats . It could be done. but then would there be enough to stand behind it?

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by CAPT PROTON

 

indeed, for I hear all the time ,"then lets charge them all HOUSE and SENATE, along with the WHITE HOUSE with Treason" not so fast it is easier said then done and is a two edge sword for they can and would say the same to the one bring fourth the charges legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... .

High Crimes and Misdemeanors legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... could be used to remove all of them that have forced TSA, DHS, NDDA, NSA, down the peoples throats . It could be done. but then would there be enough to stand behind it?

I too had the feeling that all of our representatives were losers until I heard Ron Wydens speech yesterday. I also have been following Alan Grayson. These guys mean business and say what you like but to me they are tenacious with the issue and continue to work within the system for issues I see eye-to-eye with them on.

As for the others? Yes, try and convict them. They are mostly corrupt if not incompetent.

the NSA is here to stay...geez, everybody on this site knows how much our privacy is being lost. and, with that, everybody here knows that since 9/11, every American is now, or in the future, a possible threat to national security. they wouldn't be doing this kind of wholesale data gathering if they thought different. the government can't even keep student loan rates from doubling, why in the hell would you expect them to stop NSA surveillance?

Well it looks to me that the White House and the Democrats are all in favor of the spying on American Citizens.

Their undies are showing.

They are scrambling because they are afraid more info will be let out to the public.

Don't forget either that the original FISA law was introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy(D) in the late 1970's.

God only knows what secret deals are made within that outfit !!

I know this is very confusing for Democrats and Liberals (Gulp).

Now they don't know what to think

Anyone heard whether the vote happened yet?

reply to post by Mike.Ockizard


Hasn't come to a vote yet. Monitoring progress HERE