FrankRep
02-22-2008, 03:00 AM
Help House Defy Bush on Secret Surveillance Law!
The John Birch Society (http://www.JBS.org/)
Feb. 21, 2008
Democrats in the House of Representatives chose to let a temporary surveillance law expire on February 16, rather than make it permanent.
At issue was whether the permanent version should include retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that were sued for invasion of privacy after helping U.S. intelligence agencies conduct warrantless surveillance.
Surveillance efforts will still continue against targets that have already been approved. But eavesdropping on new targets would have to meet the standards in place before last August. Those standards require that probable cause be established that a target was connected to a terrorist group.
Republican proponents of warrantless wiretapping claim that lawsuits could put telecom companies out of business. But one Democratic senator correctly noted, "It's nothing more than a scare tactic designed to avoid legal and political accountability and keep Americans in the dark about the administration's massive lawbreaking."
It's time to see the House stand up for the rule of law.
Thank you,
The John Birch Society
Click here to take action:
http://capwiz.com/jbs/utr/1/LRVGICYPVC/CSSAICZQKL/1757851081
Send this letter to your Representative.
I'm writing to ask you to vote against any Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.
Speaker Pelosi wisely refused to schedule a vote on the House version of S. 2248, which would have granted such immunity to telecom companies that voluntarily chose to help the Executive Branch violate the Fourth Amendment, protecting Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requiring that any searches be conducted only upon issuance of a warrant under conditions of probable cause.
The White House claims that the immunity is necessary, in order to encourage telecom companies to help the Bush administration protect us from terrorists.
But the real reason is a desire to prevent lawsuits from investigating whether President Bush himself broke the law, when he requested those companies to do what they did.
I am counting on you to abide by your congressional oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” and to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”
The John Birch Society (http://www.JBS.org/)
Feb. 21, 2008
Democrats in the House of Representatives chose to let a temporary surveillance law expire on February 16, rather than make it permanent.
At issue was whether the permanent version should include retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that were sued for invasion of privacy after helping U.S. intelligence agencies conduct warrantless surveillance.
Surveillance efforts will still continue against targets that have already been approved. But eavesdropping on new targets would have to meet the standards in place before last August. Those standards require that probable cause be established that a target was connected to a terrorist group.
Republican proponents of warrantless wiretapping claim that lawsuits could put telecom companies out of business. But one Democratic senator correctly noted, "It's nothing more than a scare tactic designed to avoid legal and political accountability and keep Americans in the dark about the administration's massive lawbreaking."
It's time to see the House stand up for the rule of law.
Thank you,
The John Birch Society
Click here to take action:
http://capwiz.com/jbs/utr/1/LRVGICYPVC/CSSAICZQKL/1757851081
Send this letter to your Representative.
I'm writing to ask you to vote against any Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.
Speaker Pelosi wisely refused to schedule a vote on the House version of S. 2248, which would have granted such immunity to telecom companies that voluntarily chose to help the Executive Branch violate the Fourth Amendment, protecting Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requiring that any searches be conducted only upon issuance of a warrant under conditions of probable cause.
The White House claims that the immunity is necessary, in order to encourage telecom companies to help the Bush administration protect us from terrorists.
But the real reason is a desire to prevent lawsuits from investigating whether President Bush himself broke the law, when he requested those companies to do what they did.
I am counting on you to abide by your congressional oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States” and to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”