Article One of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article One of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Bush administration is asking Congress to pass legislation that would grant telephone companies immunity from all prosecution related to their assistance of the intelligence community.
The intent is to protect those companies that have assisted the government with its illegal wire-tapping activities.
As Congress is controlled by Democrats and it is in their interests to highlight the illegality of certain actions by the Bush administration, preventing legal action for constitutional violations allows the Bush adminstration to avoid exposure.
It may be a deal that Bush made with the major phone carriers - but bugging phone lines is a restriction on freedom (of speech) in the same way that censorship is.
The worst Bushism of all is the "if you are not with us, you are our enemy" alongside the idea "if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear".
Taken together, it means, if you are not a God fearin' Republican - you definitely would have something to fear.
Making the illegal orders of a Government retroactively acceptable is nothing but a white wash.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence. What has happened since is overreaching by the state - effectively criminalising anyone.
The problem with freedom of speech is that you may not realise that you do have something to hide when the Government goes and changes the rules. If you are not with them 100%, then you have already been declared an enemy. So do Americans really want to allow Bush to legalise retroactive "speech liability" for all citizens?
The Bush administration is asking Congress to pass legislation that would grant telephone companies immunity from all prosecution related to their assistance of the intelligence community.
The intent is to protect those companies that have assisted the government with its illegal wire-tapping activities.
As Congress is controlled by Democrats and it is in their interests to highlight the illegality of certain actions by the Bush administration, preventing legal action for constitutional violations allows the Bush adminstration to avoid exposure.
It may be a deal that Bush made with the major phone carriers - but bugging phone lines is a restriction on freedom (of speech) in the same way that censorship is.
The worst Bushism of all is the "if you are not with us, you are our enemy" alongside the idea "if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear".
Taken together, it means, if you are not a God fearin' Republican - you definitely would have something to fear.
Making the illegal orders of a Government retroactively acceptable is nothing but a white wash.
9/11 was a failure of intelligence. What has happened since is overreaching by the state - effectively criminalising anyone.
The problem with freedom of speech is that you may not realise that you do have something to hide when the Government goes and changes the rules. If you are not with them 100%, then you have already been declared an enemy. So do Americans really want to allow Bush to legalise retroactive "speech liability" for all citizens?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
Home