[PAA-Discuss] Judge orders halt to Bush wiretapping plan

[Sarah Gonzales]

more detailed article - we're starting to see some reason through the  
trees - finally....

Judge orders halt to Bush wiretapping plan
By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington Financial Times
Updated: 3:12 p.m. CT Aug 17, 2006

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14395577/

The White House on Thursday suffered another major blow in its  
strategy for the "war against terror" when a federal court ruled that  
its controversial warrantless eavesdropping programme was  
unconstitutional.

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ordered the Bush administration to  
immediately stop the so-called "Terrorist Surveillance Programme",  
which she said violated the rights to free speech and privacy. She  
added that the programme also contravened the 1978 Foreign  
Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires the government to  
obtain a warrant from a special intelligence court before it can  
intercept communications of Americans.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the decision was "a landmark  
victory against the abuse of power that has become the hallmark of  
the Bush administration".

"Government spying on innocent Americans without any kind of warrant  
and without Congressional approval runs counter to the very  
foundations of our democracy," said Anthony Romero, executive  
director of the ACLU, which brought the lawsuit against the government.

President George W. Bush authorised the eavesdropping programme after  
the September 11 attacks on the US. The highly classified programme  
allowed the NSA to intercept the international phone calls and emails  
of Americans with links to suspected terrorists.

The White House argued that Mr Bush had the authority to authorise  
the programme, saying it was a crucial tool in the "war on terror".  
But Arlen Specter, the Republican chairman of the Senate judiciary  
committee, and many Democrats criticised Mr Bush for not seeking  
Congressional approval.

Judge Taylor rebuked Mr Bush in her ruling, writing: "It was never  
the intent of the Framers [of the Constitution] to give the president  
such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly  
disregarded the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created  
by the Constitution".

The court ruling is the second recent major indictment of the Bush  
administration's counter-terrorism tactics. In June, the Supreme  
Court ruled that the military commissions created to try prisoners at  
Guantanamo Bay violated US law and the Geneva conventions on the  
treatment of prisoners. The administration was forced, in response,  
to reverse policy to give e that prisoners captured in the war  
against al-Qaeda were entitled to some Geneva protections.

Coming a week after the UK and US foiled an alleged plot to blow up  
airlines over the Atlantic, the court ruling is likely to spark  
renewed debate about the administration's national security policies  
ahead of November's Congressional elections. Republicans have stepped  
up attacks that Democrat are weak on national security in the wake of  
the defeat of Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut Democrat senator, by Ned  
Lamont, an anti-war Democrat, in the primary contest for the Senate  
seat.
Copyright The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14395577/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20060817/c04a967f/attachment.htm>