constitution?

we don't need no stinkin' constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rawstory.com/news/2008/FISA_court_rejects_ACLU_request_for_0829.html">FISA court rejects ACLU request for transparency

A court created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act denied an ACLU motion Thursday that would have increased public scrutiny of how the Bush administration's new spying law is reviewed, according to a statement released Friday.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the motion 10 hours after President Bush signed the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) into law July 10, requesting that any further proceedings that might question the law's constitutionality be revealed to the public, according to an ACLU press release.

The organization also asked to participate in the hearings and submit briefs to court, which was denied as well.

"It's disappointing that the intelligence court intends to adjudicate these important legal issues in complete secrecy," said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. "The new surveillance law affects all of us because it allows the executive branch virtually unfettered access to the international telephone and email communications of U.S. citizens and residents."....

dana milbank's column

in today's wapo, could NOT possibly have a better title.
Hitting the Mute Button on the Freedom Agenda
By Dana Milbank
Just last Thursday, President Bush spoke of his Freedom Agenda spreading democracy across the globe: "We are standing with those who yearn for liberty."
Yesterday, the Bush administration unveiled a pragmatic new foreign policy: The Stand by Your Man Agenda. In the intervening period, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, a U.S. ally, had suspended his country's constitution, arrested Supreme Court judges, closed media outlets, and beat or imprisoned demonstrators by the hundreds -- using some of his billions of dollars in American military aid to impose martial law. .......

help

chris dodd bring our constitution back!

stop on by

the life and times of a carolina parrothead and read a powerful posting on our constitution (through one man's eyes)

i'm ALL for it!

spying on terrorists or even suspected terrorists. one has to do what one has to do. IF those suspected terrorists are american citizens, one MUST get a warrant. there is a special process for that and from what i understand only two or three cases in the past 20 (give or take) years have been rejected. GET A WARRANT. this is AMERICA. we are AMERICAN CITIZENS.

i expect our agencies charged with 'certain duties' to protect us. i'm not an idiot. i know all sorts of underground activities go on. YET i do not want our constitution to be ripped apart when it comes to the citizenry of the united states of america. there is NO need

oh and to the democrats - stop it. take your vaginas out of your mama's handbag RIGHT NOW

How the Fight for Vast New Spying Powers Was Won


By Joby Warrick and Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writers
For three days, Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, had haggled with congressional leaders over amendments to a federal surveillance law, but now he was putting his foot down. "This is the issue," said the plain-spoken retired vice admiral and Vietnam veteran, "that makes my blood pressure rise."
McConnell viscerally objected to a Democratic proposal to limit warrantless surveillance of foreigners' communications with Americans to instances in which one party was a terrorism suspect. McConnell wanted no such limits. "All foreign intelligence" targets in touch with Americans on any topic of interest should be fair game for U.S. spying, he said, according to two participants in the Aug. 2 conversation.
McConnell won the fight, extracting a key concession despite the misgivings of Democratic negotiators. Shortly after that exchange, the Bush administration leveraged Democratic acquiescence into a broader victory: congressional approval of a Republican bill that would expand surveillance powers far beyond what Democratic leaders had initially been willing to accept..........

what a GREAT ambassador

for truth, JUSTICE and the american way!!!

N O T

a judge who also (in addition to king george and his court) spits on our constitution

i too think we have to defend ourselves against terrorists (many of which WE are responsible for creating. NO not all of them, but many). BUT this is america not north korea, or cuba, or iran. WE have to do it within the boundries of our OWN laws

Secret trials for terrorists, says US judge

David Nason, Chicago

A TOP-RANKING US judge has stunned a conference of Australian judges and barristers in Chicago by advocating secret trials for terrorists, more surveillance of Muslim populations across North America and an end to counter-terrorism efforts being "hog-tied" by the US constitution.
Judge Richard Posner, a supposedly liberal-leaning jurist regarded by many as a future US Supreme Court candidate, said traditional concepts of criminal justice were inadequate to deal with the terrorist threat and the US had "over-invested" in them.
His proposed "big brother" solutions flabbergasted delegates at the Australian Bar Association's biennial conference, where David Hicks's lawyer, Major Michael Mori, is to be awarded honorary life membership.
"We have to fight terrorism with our strengths, and our strengths evolve around technology, including the technology of surveillance," said Justice Posner, a prolific legal scholar who sits on the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. .........

a tiny bit of good news now

they are NOT going to allow king george to absolutely spit on the constitution of the united states of america (after all, HE thinks it's JUST a piece of paper)

please don't think for one moment i don't want terrorists punished. i sure as shite DO. i want it done legally though. i want us to follow the rules and laws in place. you know, the ones that protect US all. THOSE ones. the ones that say we're entitled to a trial (speedy). the ones that say we have to be charged with a crime in order to be kept locked up. the ones that say we can have an attorney. THOSE ones

we start effing with THOSE and we are ALL in deep deep shite
Judges Rule Against U.S. On Detained 'Combatant'


By Carol D. Leonnig Washington Post Staff Writer

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that President Bush cannot indefinitely imprison a U.S. resident on suspicion alone, ordering the government either to charge Qatari national Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri with his alleged terrorist crimes in a civilian court or release him.
The opinion is a blow to the Bush administration's assertion that the president has exceptionally broad powers to combat terrorism, including the authority to detain without charges foreign citizens living legally in the United States............