Bush Spy Bill Stance Called Fear-Mongering

President: U.S. Could Face Attacks That Would Make 9/11 "Pale By Comparison"

(CBS/AP)  President Bush, in remarks meant to spur House Democrats into accepting a controversial new bill that would expand the government's ability to spy on Americans, warned that the country faced terror strikes that would make September 11 "pale by comparison."

In response, critics of the new bill accused Mr. Bush of "fear mongering," and of trying to deflect attention from the bill itself. Its most controversial provision would prevent Americans from suing phone companies that helped the administration spy on them since the White House surveillance program was instituted in 2001.

Mr. Bush has made immunity from civil prosecution for the telecoms a must-have element for revamping the nation’s surveillance laws, repeatedly saying he would veto any bill that does not exempt telecoms from lawsuits.

The battle lines are being dug in more deeply as House and Senate members prepare to meet in conference to match competing versions of the legislation, an update of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (or FISA).

The House-passed version does not include telecom immunity. This past week, the Senate approved a similar version which includes a provision that protects telecoms from civil lawsuits.

There are approximately 40 lawsuits now brought by citizens and consumer groups against companies that enabled the government to illegally eavesdrop on Americans' phone and Internet communications.

Opponents of the administration's program, which engaged wiretaps against any and all Americans without obtaining court-ordered warrants, say the telecoms' participation was illegal. They say that, given the Bush administration's penchant for secrecy, lawsuits against the telecoms are the only way to obtain disclosure about the facts from the government.

Information being sought includes details about the origins of the program. The administration admitted that the sweeping domestic surveillance originated in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks. However, declassified documents obtained by the National Security Archive and testimony that is part of these lawsuits suggest the National Security Agency program was put into place shortly after Mr. Bush was inaugurated, long before 9/11.

Mr. Bush claims that unless the telecoms received assurance that they will not be sued for breaking the law (and therefore be liable for damages), those companies will not agree to enact future wiretaps, therefore undercutting the government's intelligence capabilities:

"If these companies are subjected to lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars, they won't participate; they won't help us; they won't help protect America."

With the clock ticking down to Saturday midnight, when the Protect America Act expires, President Bush said on Thursday that he would delay his five-nation trip to Africa if it would help the House of Representatives pass his preferred version of the FISA bill.

On Wednesday, after the Senate approved a bill granting immunity, the president for the first time admitted that the telecoms participated in the wiretaps which were not authorized by court-issued warrants.

Mr. Bush also raised the specter of what would happen if telecom immunity is not accepted by the House, by recalling the crime scene on 9/11:

"At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. Their goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison."

Mr. Bush said, "There is really no excuse for letting this critical legislation expire," despite his refusal to sign an extension to the current law while negotiations continue.

House Republicans managed to defeat a House proposal to grant a 21-day extension of the current law.

Critics jumped on the president's refusal to extend FISA.

"The president and House Republicans refused to support the extension and therefore will bear the responsibility should any adverse national security consequences result," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Expiration of the current Protect America Act would not mean an immediate end to wiretapping. Existing surveillance could continue under the law for a year from when it began - at least until August. Any new surveillance the government wants to institute could be implemented under underlying FISA rules, which may require warrants from the secret court.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused the president and Senate Republicans of being more interested in politicizing intelligence than resolving the debate.

Reid said the issue would not even be before Congress if Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, "in their unyielding efforts to expand presidential powers," had not created a system to conduct wiretapping, including on U.S. citizens, outside the bounds of federal law.

"The president could have taken the simple step of requesting new authority from Congress ... but whether out of convenience, incompetence, or outright disdain for the rule of law, the administration chose to ignore Congress and ignore the Constitution," Reid said.

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's legislative office in Washington, lambasted the president for scare tactics and urged the House not to pass the Senate bill.

"The House should stand up to the bullying from the president and reject the administration’s lies and fear mongering," she said. "This administration has abused its power over and over again and it is time for the House to reject any attempts to consider the unconstitutional Senate Intelligence Committee FISA bill.

She also demanded that Americans not be denied their day in court in their suits against phone and Internet companies. "Let the American system of justice decide this case," Frederickson said. "Do not give the phone companies a 'get out of jail free' card. If the companies really 'did the right thing’ as the president said, then they have nothing to fear from going to court.

"Terrorism is a threat. But ignoring the Constitution is also a threat."

The 68-29 Senate vote Tuesday to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act belied the nearly two months of stops and starts and bitter political wrangling that preceded it. The two sides had battled to balance civil liberties with the need to conduct surveillance on potential adversaries.

While giving the White House what it wanted on immunity for the phone companies, the Senate also expanded the power of the court to oversee government eavesdropping on Americans. An amendment would give the FISA court the authority to monitor whether the government is complying with procedures designed to protect the privacy of innocent Americans whose telephone or computer communications are captured during surveillance of a foreign target.

The Senate bill would also require FISA court orders to eavesdrop on Americans who are overseas. Under current law, the government can wiretap or search the possessions of anyone outside the United States - even a soldier serving overseas - without court permission if it believes the person may be a foreign agent.

CBSNews.com producer David Morgan contributed to this report.

[neoconrcrazy]

"If these companies are subjected to lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars, they won''t participate; they won''t help us; they won''t help protect America." bushit

he must of made some hefty promises to his telcom ceo buddies at the golf course.....

this facist is telling us we need telcom companies to protect us? a joke no doubt.

sieg heil bush!

[josephjsalas]

I think Pelosi and Reid should "waterboard"
''lil Bush into jetisening pri-sector booster shots!

[j-whitman]

Our Statue of Liberty is Rolling on the Floor Laughing Out Loud at the thought of another republican President

[efutoo]

******* IT YOU PEOPLE - LOOOOK!!!!:

"At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. Their goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison." Bush

THAT STATEMENT IS - I REPEAT - IS TERRORISM, the definition of terrorism is the fear of violence for political aims.

What if those "terrorists are the western powers such as Bush and the Neo-cons that are working to bring in a New World Order that Bush senior spoke so much about? What if Cheney and Bush are actually assisting the British Empire, could you be so sure they are patriots?, I mean they were the ones who brought you the ''patriot act'' which is the most UN-patriotic thing in US history.

Why don''t you all get more angry?, this guy is a bully and a liar, they ALWAYS want to become dictators, and this guy is looking like he will achieve it.

[efutoo]

******* IT YOU PEOPLE - LOOOOK!!!!:

"At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. Their goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison." Bush

THAT STATEMENT IS - I REPEAT - IS TERRORISM, the definition of terrorism is the fear of violence for political aims.

What if those "terrorists are the western powers such as Bush and the Neo-cons that are working to bring in a New World Order that Bush senior spoke so much about? What if Cheney and Bush are actually assisting the British Empire, could you be so sure they are patriots?, I mean they were the ones who brought you the ''patriot act'' which is the most UN-patriotic thing in US history.

Why don''t you all get more angry?, this guy is a bully and a liar, they ALWAYS want to become dictators, and this guy is looking like he will achieve it.

[michellem99-2009]

Amen. Everybody.

[cinefile]

I would like to thank the Generations before mine that have let this happen! Thanks for nothing, now get out of the way so we can fix it!

[cinefile]

I would like to thank the Generations before mine that have let this happen! Thanks for nothing, now get out of the way so we can fix it!

[the74blaster]

"At this moment, somewhere in the world, terrorists are planning new attacks on our country. Their goal is to bring destruction to our shores that will make September the 11th pale by comparison."

How stupid does he think we are? Given his slight credibility issue, I have trouble believing any of his statements since most have not stood the test of time.

[cantshutup]

gee...i wonder what bush and cheney have planned for us....WHAT CATASTROPHIE WILL YOU PUT ON US YOU CRIMINALS???

[michtom-2009]

"Opponents of the administration''s program, which engaged wiretaps against any and all Americans without obtaining court-ordered warrants, say the telecoms'' participation was illegal."
It is disturbing that your article doesn''t state the unequivocal truth: that the wiretapping without warrents, and the cooperation by telecom companies were BOTH illegal.
This is not an "on the one hand, on the other hand" issue. CBS has no need to refer to "opponents" and SHOULD NOT, because this not a matter of opinion, but one of referring to statues including FISA and the Telecommunications Act of 1934.
Why would the Bush regime so desperately insist on telecom amnesty if the telecoms had not committed illegal acts?

[lillian2]

I think we should listen to what Ron Paul is saying.

"Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies."

The Government is taking over our lives. Does not sit right with me.
Susan

[prinzowhales]

While this monster calls for us to give up our rights to privacy, the border remains wide open!

I hope everyone will go to this site...scroll down to the direct link to the short film of the US soldier bragging and joking about the murder and torture of Iraqis and the gang rape of a 15 year old Iraqi girl who later hanged herself. The link is about 7 links below the ''''Ron Paul for President banner" the page.

http://www.thepowerhour.com/new
s.htm

These people are still on the loose. Call your Congress and lets see them put behind bars for a long long time.

[finewoven]

"If these companies are subjected to lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars, they won''''t participate; they won''''t help us; they won''''t help protect America." bushit
Posted by neoconRcrazy at 07:34 AM : Feb 15, 2008

That should be the new drinking game. People at bars around the country, repeating a lie given by the Bush administration -- and then everyone yells BuSHit!! and does a shooter. Or maybe everyone should yell BullSh*t.

After a little while, everyone will be intoxicated by the lies (or maybe the alcohol).

[cerberus0000]

i don''t blame just the corrupt dictator we have as much as i blame congress. congress makes the laws of this nation not the president. people act like its the president thats making these laws, well its not its your own congress that has sold you out. although the congress would love for you to belive that this is all the president doing so they can continue to chip away at our freedom and constitution while diverting our attention away from the real people passing this unconstitutional legislation. every person in congress with the exception of ron paul and MAYBE a couple of other congressmen should be recalled from their position of power and replaced with people who truly represent our views.

[cerberus0000]

i don''t blame just the corrupt dictator we have as much as i blame congress. congress makes the laws of this nation not the president. people act like its the president thats making these laws, well its not its your own congress that has sold you out. although the congress would love for you to belive that this is all the president doing so they can continue to chip away at our freedom and constitution while diverting our attention away from the real people passing this unconstitutional legislation. every person in congress with the exception of ron paul and MAYBE a couple of other congressmen should be recalled from their position of power and replaced with people who truly represent our views.

[skyk-2009]

Get this Pelosi Bush-ho out!

How much are the neocons paying her to keep impeachment off the table?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by jerr11 at 10:12 AM : Feb 15, 2008
+ report abuse

Exactly HOW do you think Impeachment is possible? We can''t even get people to testify before congress!! You have to give a party the POWER to compell people to testify and this certainly isn''t the days of Nixon when Democrats had a Clear Majority. When you take into account that Liberman would vote with the Republican''s Democrats do NOT even have a simple majority in the senate, which would have to try the case. Time to have a bit of a reality check here.

[lorinkundert]

Start encrypting your emails and use encrypted voip service.

[irishbitch12]

The only one fearmongering here george is you.

[lorinkundert]

We haven''t needed it for more than 200 years and we don''t need it now. Bush has not prevented terrorists attacks with his programs, attacks on US mainland don''t occur less than 8 years apart, we are not even there yet.