Warrentless Wiretapping
The Fourth Amendment has stood as a shield around the American people, protecting them from unwarranted search & seizure for over 200 years. This foundation stone of our government protects the populace, while simultaneously providing an avenue for law enforcement to investigate and gather evidence as needed. It requires only probable cause to garner a warrant. For over 200 years this has stood - but no more.
Essentially, the Bush Administration relies upon two forms of "data harvesting", both reflecting secret rule changes.
The first is known as 'pattern matching'. In this, the 'content' and the 'metadata' (email headers, call times, destination, origin and duration) is fed into a computer model created by Administration analysts to create hypothoses of terrorist behavior. This model is widely considered scientifically unrelieable.
The other primary method is to use a variety of techniques such as behavioral psychology and linguistics on intercepted messages to "profile" terrorists.
These two methods yield results which are little better than random chance, and neither rises to the level of "probable cause". In fact, the probability of catching a terrorist with these methods rises to just over one percent - hardly a justification for trampling the 4th Amendment.
In one fell swoop, the Bush Administration violated the rights of each and every one of us by conducting illegal wiretapping of American citizens without a warrant. Incidentally, from the inception of FISA in 1979 to 2004, there have been 18,259 requests made, of which four - just four - have been denied. All of them were within 2003. The Bush Administration has decided the laws of this country do not apply to them. Having done away with Habeus Corpus and the Geneva Convention, they moved on to strike the 4th Amendment.
Why? Why with a track record of near total compliance from the Court would the Bush Administration go around the law, and wiretap illegally? The answer is simple: the administration knew that even in the current climate of fear and anxiety which they have created, they could not meet the lesser standards of a "reasonable articulable suspicion," much less "probable cause." So they went ahead without a warrant, violating the Constitution which they are sworn to uphold.
When news of this illegal activity first broke in December of '05, there was a great hue and cry from the American public. Responding, Senator Snowe rightly expressed outrage and indignation over the Government's actions. On December 21, 2005, She said: "Revelations that the U.S. government has conducted domestic electronic surveillance without express legal authority indeed warrants Congressional examination. I believe the Congress - as a coequal branch of government - must immediately and expeditiously review the use of this practice."
However, in February of 2006 - just two months after Senator Snowe's call for a Congressional Investigation - she reversed herself. Sen. Jay Rockefeller brought before the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committee a proposal to initiate an investigation into the Administrations Warrantless wiretapping. First, Senator Snowe, voted along straight party lines to adjourn the Committee before the motion could be heard, and then in March - when the issue was brought before her Committee again - she voted to quash the Democrats' demands for an investigation. Currently, everyone is operating under an agreement: to seek a warrant from the court whenever possible. This measure, handed down from Bush and supported by Snowe, lacks teeth. Should the administration elect not to seek a warrant, the Attorney General has only to assert to the subcommittee that the surveillance is necessary to protect the country, and the warrantless wiretapping may proceed.
This is a grave threat to each and every one of us. This administration has demonstrated a ready and eager willingness to trespass upon our guaranteed Civil Liberties -and shows no sign of stopping. The fact that they claim to be targeting 'terrorists' and that we are law abiding citizens, is irrelevant. The line between questioning authority and "treason" has become too thin to be measured. When we allow any in our society to be stripped of protection, we expose ourselves. Remember the words attributed to Martin Niemoeller, a Protestant Minister who survived being thrown into a concentration camp by the Nazis:
First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Sen. Snowe was right, it is Congress' responsibility to serve as a check on Presidential Power, and to curb this Administrations enthusiasm for spying on the citizens of this nation. Unfortunately she has failed to meet her responsibility.