Mmmmkay... </sarcasm>
I notice that you did not deny being a terrorist sympathizer.
This is a ch__ch. What's missing?
Posted on 01/18/2006 8:10:29 AM PST by Perlstein
Leading Conservatives Call for Extensive Hearings on NSA Surveillance; Checks on Invasive Federal Powers Essential
1/17/2006 6:36:00 PM
To: National Desk
Contact: Laura Brinker, 202-715-1540, for Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, laura.brinker@dittus.com
WASHINGTON, Jan. 17 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances (PRCB) today called upon Congress to hold open, substantive oversight hearings examining the President's authorization of the National Security Agency (NSA) to violate domestic surveillance requirements outlined in the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr, chairman of PRCB, was joined by fellow conservatives Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR); David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union; Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation and Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, in urging lawmakers to use NSA hearings to establish a solid foundation for restoring much needed constitutional checks and balances to intelligence law.
"When the Patriot Act was passed shortly after 9-11, the federal government was granted expanded access to Americans' private information," said Barr. "However, federal law still clearly states that intelligence agents must have a court order to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans on these shores. Yet the federal government overstepped the protections of the Constitution and the plain language of FISA to eavesdrop on Americans' private communication without any judicial checks and without proof that they are involved in terrorism."
The following can be attributed to PRCB members:
"I believe that our executive branch cannot continue to operate without the checks of the other branches. However, I stand behind the President in encouraging Congress to operate cautiously during the hearings so that sensitive government intelligence is not given to our enemies." -- Paul Weyrich, chairman and CEO, Free Congress Foundation
"Public hearings on this issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by alarming revelations of NSA electronic eavesdropping." -- Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform
"The need to reform surveillance laws and practices adopted since 9/11 is more apparent now than ever. No one would deny the government the power it needs to protect us all, but when that power poses a threat to the basic rights that make our nation unique, its exercise must be carefully monitored by Congress and the courts. This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Americans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in ways that pose constitutional concerns." -- David Keene, chairman, American Conservative Union
"If the law is not reformed, ordinary Americans' personal information could be swept into all-encompassing federal databases encroaching upon every aspect of their private lives. This is of particular concern to gun owners, whose rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment are currently being infringed upon under the Patriot Act's controversial record search provisions." -- Alan Gottlieb, founder, Second Amendment Foundation
Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances is an organization dedicated to protecting Americans' fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment and ensuring that all provisions of the Patriot Act are in line with the Constitution. For more information, visit the Web site at http://www.checksbalances.org.
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
Barr has more conservative credentials than 90% of the Couch-Rambos around here. I don't want ANY president to be able to tap phones without somebody outside his office involved. It wasn't right when Clinton did it and it's not right now. Hearing the way the jackals are jumping all over Bob Barr and Grover Norquist's backs makes me question either the wisdom, sincerity or belief in American principals of these people who think they have some grasp on the history of freedom. If it wasn't for Grover Norquist, there's a good chance we wouldn't have a Republican majority and White House today.
I'm not willing to give credit to this wiretapping for the lack of terrorist attacks any more than I'm willing to give Pat Robertson credit for there not being any major earthquakes in the US.
Maybe it's just in the nature of a second-term president to try to grab too much power, or to think a little too highly of his position in the system of checks and balances. Let's hope somebody has a talk with President Bush before he hurts himself. I've been hearing an awful lot of Nixon-speak coming from the Whitehouse lately. And maybe it's heresy around here to say it, but Nixon was a crook, crazy and hurt the Conservative agenda.
First you name one "real" terrorist that was caught using a warrantless search. And a bunch of wackos trying to take down the Brooklyn Bridge with Bic lighters doesn't count.
Churchillbuff:
Bless you for making me feel like I'm not the only conservative who still thinks the constitution is worth preserving. Unchecked power is unchecked power. There are going to be lots of "crises" in the future, and if we let every president who says "I'm doing it for "national security" have his way, then we might as well not have a constitution.
I'll tell you what, I've been in the gun law wars long enough to know when to recognize a slippery slope, and this one is the slipperiest of all.
I believe that the remark on NRO said that they objected from a libertarian point of view, a weak one at that, all except Grover Norquist, who never really justified his statements, at all.
Here's some information on Grover Norquist:
Grover Norquist: Conservative Exposed as Terrorist Sympathizer/Enabler
There's an incredible story brewing in Washington that is too hot for the networks to touch.
Grover Norquist, whom most conservatives know as Executive Director of the College Republicans, boardmember of the NRA, and head of Americans for Tax Reform, has been exposed as helping Muslim groups and individuals who finance and support Islamic terrorism gain access to the Bush White House.
Norquist has also been exposed as the founder of the Islamic Insitute, a group believed to be funded by foreign governments, Wahhab Islam elements in Saudi Arabia, and U.S. Muslim groups recently raided by a special Treasury Department task force for funding Al Qaeda and Palestinian terrorists. The Islamic Institute's website lists the following goals:
1. Cultivate and expand Muslim activists and mobilize the community at the state and federal levels on issues affecting the American Muslim community.
2. Provide a platform to promote an Islamic perspective on domestic issues (social and fiscal) to help enhance the Muslim community's input in the decision-making process.
3. Run aggressive campaigns at the state and federal levels on issues affecting the American Muslim community.
Wahhabi Islam funding from Saudi Arabia appears to have been instrumental is creating and and sustaining a large number of organizations involved in such troubling activities as:
1. Recruiting felons into Islam in U.S. prisons
2. Recruiting U.S. military personnel
3. Proselytizing on more than 500 college campuses across the United States
4. Covertly raising funds for terrorist groups through U.S.-based Muslim charities
5. Providing financial support - and gaining control - of 70-80 percent of U.S. mosques, and
6. Setting up private Muslim K-12 schools to indoctrinate U.S. Muslims into fundamentalist Islam (We ran an expose on one of these located just a few miles from our HQ which you can find at http://www.citizensoldier.org/madrassa.html.)
Norquist's relationship with Muslim groups that support terrorism became public after Norquist launched an unexpected and inexplicably vitriolic attack against Frank Gaffney, the President of the Center for Security Policy.
During a routine Conservative Political Action Conference meeting in early February, Gaffney participated in a panel discussion about the balance to be struck in time of war between preserving civil liberties and safeguarding American's lives and safety. Gafney expressed concern about one of the most insidious of the Wahhabis' activities, a concerted attempt to penetrate and influence the Executive and Legislative branch of our government.
Gafney noted that groups like the American Muslim Council (AMC) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have been able to gain access to the White House thanks to the White House's Associate Director of Cabinet Affairs Ali Tulbah, a Muslim, and his predecessor, Suhail Kahn. At the same time, Tulbah and Kahn have excluded moderate American Muslim groups from White House access. Both Tulbah and Kahn have family ties to extremist Wahhabi religious groups. AMC and CAIR have expressed support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda and are actively campaigning to waterdown immigration controls, law enforcement, and intelligence gathering.
Gaffney's concerns are legitimate, because granting access to Muslim extremists gives them a chance to exercise undue influence over policy - undermining the war on terrorism - and confers a legitimacy that allows them to dominate the U.S. Islamic community.
Norquist responded to Gaffney's comments by calling Gaffney a racist and religious bigot in an appearance on Fox News Channel and in letters sent to the Washington Post and Washington Times and barring Gaffney from attending the most important meeting in Washington, the regular Wednesday meetings of conservative Capitol Hill aides and interest-group representatives held in Norquist's offices.
It is unclear whether the Muslims who have been acting as White House gatekeepers - Ali Tulbah and Suhail Kahn - were actually placed in that position by Grover Norquist's Islamic Institute. Norquist is credited with delivering the Muslim vote for Bush in the 2000 election and has the ear of the most influential man in Washington, Karl Rove, President Bush's political advisor. Rove has been a featured speaker at Norquist's Wednesday meetings.
Although it is not noted on either group's website, Norquist's Islamic Institute actually shares office space and staff with Americans for Tax Reform.
According to news reports, while Norquist served as founding Chairman of the Islamic Institute the group received seed money from Abdurahman Alamoudi, then a member of the left-wing American Muslim Council. MSNBC and Fox News have aired videotapes of Alamoudi standing in front of the White House, declaring his support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Hamas is currently one of the leading groups responsible for Palestinian suicide bombers. Hezbollah, sponsored by the Iranian government, was responsible for the death of 240 Marines in Beirut in the 1980s and is believed to be responsible for the attack on Khobar Towers, a barracks in Saudi Arabia.
Key members of the Islamic Institute have come from Alamoudi's organization. One has acknowledged making contributions to the Holy Land Foundation even after it's U.S. offices were shut down by the U.S. government for funding terrorists.
The AMC and CAIR have been able to get access to senior officials in the Bush Administration nine times since 9/11 despite the fact that CAIR has sued Attorney General Ashcroft and in June 2002 CAIR's executive director Nihad Awad declared that he supported the Hamas movement. Both groups have incessantly attacked President Bush's policies on Iraq, the monitoring of aliens from nations that sponsor terrorism, and the prosecution of suspected terror operatives. After the most recent meeting on January 16th, AMC's leader accused Bush of "calling on God to kill innocent Iraqi children."
Norquist also has ties to Sami Al-Arian, president of the National Committee to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF). Al-Arian is under investigation by the FBI for being the leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and was recently exposed by Fox's Bill O'Reilly who aired video tapes of Al-Arian raising money for terrorists. Norquist accepted an award from the NCPPF shortly before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack. During the 2000 elections, Norquist introduced Al-Arian to then candidate Bush.
Since 9/11, Norquist has led opposition to domestic anti-terrorism laws and has been quoted in frontpage NY times articles allelging a wholesale loss of faith by conservatives in Attorney General Josh Ashcroft. Norquist has also attacked Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, and others who have attempted to alert Americans to the dangers of Islam.
WHAT WE CAN DO:
As Citizen Soldier members, most of you have read Koran and Hadith for yourselves. You know:
1. The god of Islam is not the God of the Bible,
2. That the moral rules of Koran differ significantly from Judeo-Christian moral rules, and since rights flow from the prohibitions of moral rules, Islam is not compatible with the equality, individual liberty, or limited government we enjoy in the U.S.
3. That the cause of Islamic terrorism are the ideas taught in Koran, that Muslim extremist groups like AMC and CAIR consistently try to deny these teachings and exploit the ignorance of moderate Muslims who do not know what Koran actually teaches and Westerners who are equally uninformed.
I would ask you to do these things:
1. Please tell others about this story - we'll leave it on our homepage over the weekend. I believe the reason the networks have not jumped on this story is that understanding what is going on would likely lead to a discussion of what Koran actually teaches, something the networks cannot do since they depend on access to moderate and extremist Muslim countries to produce their news.
2. Please call and send email to the White House, Frank Gaffney, and Grover Norquist, letting them know that you understand the dangers of Islam and are concerned about Norquist's involvement with groups that back terrorists.
The White House: (202) 456-1111 email: president@whitehouse.gov (and also vice.president@whitehouse.gov)
Frank Gaffney: (202) 835-9077 email: info@centerforsecuritypolicy.org
Grover Norquist (202) 785-0266 (the receptionist who answers will also be the Islamic Institute's receptionist) email: friends@atr.org
3. Please contact your congressman and senators about this situation as well, since the Congress is another target for Muslims seeking to weaken U.S. policy. They're number is (202) 224-3121.
4. Please consider writing letters to the editor or contacting your local media outlets to encourage them to spill some ink on this story. The more people who know the truth the better.
5. Last, please add this to your long list of prayer concerns, that is our most effective tool.
Conservatives who have not read Koran are vulnerable to unholy alliances with Muslims because Koran and the Bible do share many moral rules, particularly relating to abortion, homosexuality, gambling, paganism and the occult, and prostitution, all issues that liberals and libertarians are pushing the envelope on today.
All pre-FISA decisions, meaning they don't address the question at hand.
Congress has authorized the use of force in the Joint Resolution of Congress passed in the aftermath of 9/11. That resolution charged the president to "use all necessary and appropriate force" to "prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States." These wiretaps follow logically from this resolution.
So then why did Congress, at the President's request, amend FISA 5 weeks after the AUMF? And why did Bush go to court to defend the FISA changes? What's the point in changing and defending a law that had already been rendered irrelevant by the AUMF?
There is no evidence that these wiretaps violate the law.
Depends on the meaning of "violate the law". Bush admits to violating FISA. His claim is that violating FISA is not a violation of the law.
Your accusation against me shows you do not possess intelligence for a proper response.
See post #76 - click, read and talk to the Attorney General.
Presumably the whackoes with the box knives don't count either.
I like debate, you just don't have a clue how to.
I don't think you can even explain what you meant in your vaunted post. I don't think anyone else could either.
Now, just why do you think this is soooooooo bad, and our congress has gone over the edge with its unconstitutional ceding of the war to the executive, and that we are doomed because of the NSA intercepts again?
Frankly, you're just being a silly paranoid.
Mmmmkay... </sarcasm>
I notice that you did not deny being a terrorist sympathizer.
This is a ch__ch. What's missing?
I'm not either, conserv13. And I think that some of our leaders are worried that they too were caught in the net somehow. There are rumors that the surveillance wasn't just against terrorist suspects, and that some people on our side were eavesdropped on too.
If they go forward with those oversight hearings in congress, this will be all over the MSM everyday too. Question is, do they have something to hide? That's what I can't figure out. If not, then investigate away. But I'm worried that when the list of names of people who were eavesdropped on comes out, that more conservs. will be calling for blood. I just wish we knew what they were really doing with the NSA sweeps.
I was a faithful reader of Daniel Pipes until about a year ago. I no longer trust him. When he was independent, the things he wrote were top notch. Since he got involved with Washington, we don't get the same quality from him and he appears to be compromised.
Yes, that's the thing - I don't want any President with that kind of power. When Clinton did it, that FISA court didn't exist yet. Now it does, and it's basically a rubber stamp type of court. In all of 2004, no request was rejected. The warrant was issued by FISA every single time they asked. So why didn't Bush go to the FISA court? This has me very confused. He could have easily stayed well within the boundaries and avoided all this trouble just by going to FISA. And he could have even gone to them *after the fact* if it was an emergency! Somethings rotten with this one. It does not bode well for us.
I've seen that thread. In fact, I even posted evidence on that thread, directly contradicting the administration's claims ("lowest ebb" vs. "authority is at its maximum", plus the weaseling regarding "exclusive means").
Because my question flows directly from the AG's letter, I can't talk to you? If the AUMF "clearly and unmistakably" renders FISA irrelevant, why was FISA subsequently amended? Just for kicks? If you can't answer, no problem. I can't answer it either.
LOL! What do you guys smoke?
bob barr is an employee of the ACLU.
Is that your way of complaining that I'm not joining you on your wild tangents?
Answer the question at #145. Or stand exposed as having a junk hand. Your choice.
I have no idea who these "Citizen Soldier" people are, but if what they're saying about Norquist is true, then that would have to mean that Rove and Bush are tainted by his activities as well.
I notice you did not deny you lack intelligence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.