Comments on: Our blatantly corrupt, secretive government

By: Why We Worry » Blog Archive » Obama should act like McCain will win | Welcome to the black hole of news & opinion

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:40:24 +0000

[...] At the center of the flap between Greenwald and Olbermann was Obama’s reversal of his hardline stance on FISA/Telecom immunity. [...]

By: Why We Worry » Blog Archive » Democrats still just the lesser evil | ‘I’d say your tone is more of a neutered grandfather’ - Ian

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:02:02 +0000

[...] that the Democrats will finally cave on granting immunity to telecoms that aided Bush in his illegal domestic spying program: Democrats are about to institutionalize a proposition that has been rejected since the Nuremberg [...]

By: Why We Worry » Blog Archive » Preserving equal treatment under the law | New articles published Monday-Friday

Sat, 21 Jun 2008 14:10:44 +0000

[...] (AT&T, Verizon, etc.) who aided the Bush administration in illegally spying on us. (Read my explanation of the telecom immunity issue here and/or check out this scathing NY Times [...]

By: Why We Worry » Blog Archive » Telecom amnesty passes in the Senate

Why We Worry » Blog Archive » Telecom amnesty passes in the Senate — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:24:42 +0000

[...] during the Nixon era, but I don’t think it’s hyperbole to make that case. As I said in my last post on this issue “Congressional proponents of retroactive immunity, like Democrat Jay Rockefeller, are [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:41:19 +0000

Yeah, but at least there was outrage. Think of what took down Nixon. That stuff is child’s play compared to what is going on these days.

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:02:54 +0000

OK, in recent memory: The Scooter Libby pardon, the illegal wiretaps, Alberto Gonzalez, Bill Clinton, etc etc. I mean, just look at the kind of prisons CEO’s get sent to and the kind that average Americans get sent to. The divide in the justice system and the notion that money and power can make it work for you has been around a lot longer than just recently.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:56:11 +0000

In the sense that this is a point of no-return, I think what I said is true.

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:21:46 +0000

“If Americans allow this to happen, we will have destroyed the idea that there is one system of justice for all.”

That statement comes off as incredibly naive. You think that this one event will have destroyed the idea? Not the hundreds before it? The idea still exists?

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:03:45 +0000

Cameron,
That argument has been brought up in defense of the telecoms as well. I’m receptive to the idea that corporations could act patriotically, and perhaps there should be some protection for those corporations in times of crisis. Also, I know the legality of these programs hasn’t been determined, so I can’t really say they are guilty of anything, even if I do think all the signs point to yes.

However, granting immunity takes away the possibility that they might be guilty. And granting immunity because they acted patriotically, ignored a few important facts:

a) QWEST refused to comply with the goverment’s program
b) The telecoms are making large amounts of money from these programs
c) The program wasn’t started in response to 9/11 nor did it last just a few days/weeks or months in response to a crisis. It’s gone on for years.

By: Cameron

Cameron — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:24:38 +0000

Couldn’t it also be that these companies were put into a no-win situation? Imagine you’re the CEO of one and you get a call from the NSA saying they need you, yes you, to serve your country. Considering what happens to individuals who anger the federal government, of course you’d agree to it.

I’m not saying that’s necessarily how it went down, but just the fact that they helped out with it doesn’t mean they’re guilty as sin.