Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Obama Administration Defends Warrantless Wiretaps

The Bush administration took much heat for their secret plans with At&t to install massive facilities in San Fransisco and St. Louis that the NSA has and is using to conduct warrantless wiretaps on citizens of the United States. Their systems scan phone calls, emails, and who knows what else for the purported purpose of uncovering terrorist plots to attack America.

Using evidence from a whistle blower within At&t, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a lawsuit against At&t for liability in the unconstitutional and illegal spying program. Barack Obama, US Senator at the time, was one of the most outspoken Democrat critics on the issue. While campaigning for the office of the President in August 2007, he had this to say:
"I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.

That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists."

But in summer of 2008, with moment on his side, Obama realized he was destined for the White House and his opinion on warrantless wiretaps and their constitutionality reversed. He, along with the Democrat majority in the Senate and House, voted in favor of and passed a bill that not only legally authorized warrantless wiretaps, but gave At&t immunity for its collusion with the US government to violate Americans' constitutional rights.

This law brought the EFF's lawsuit to an abrupt halt. Democrats defended this by saying that the real culprit is the US government and the correct defendant should be the government and not At&t.

The Obama Administration, now in power, has not only fully embraced the practice of warrantless wiretaps, but they've moved to assert that not only does the government have the right to commit warrantless wiretapping, but the people have no right to sue the government for violating their constitutional rights.

This decision should come as no surprise to those following the Berg v Obama and other lawsuits that are attempting to sue to force Barack Obama to produce his original, vault birth certificate. Time and again the judges in these cases have ruled that citizens have no standing to enforce provisions of the constitution that require natural born citizenship status of the president.

Whether you buy into the conspiracy theories surrounding Obama's citizenship status or not, it's clear the precedents set by these judicial decisions have emboldened the Obama administration. When any administration, Democrat or Republican, asserts they are above the limitations of the constitution of the United States, all freedom loving Americans should be concerned.

No comments: