Why Did Obama Support FISA and Telecom Immunity?

[Moorbey]

Why Did Obama Support FISA and Telecom Immunity?

Last year, in the midst of widespread outrage over the Bush regime's efforts to grant immunity from lawsuits to telecommunications companies that cooperated with illegal government spying on millions and millions of people in the U.S., the website Talking Points Memo released what they said was an email from Barack Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton saying: "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

But when the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 came up in the Senate last week, legalizing warrantless wiretapping of millions and millions of communications by people in the U.S. and granting immunity to telecom companies from lawsuits in order to cover up the extent of illegal government spying, not only did Obama not filibuster the law, or support a filibuster (which could have prevented it from being adopted), he voted for the bill!

And in the face of very credible evidence that millions and millions of communications from people in this country were intercepted by these illegal warrantless government wiretaps (see accompanying article), Obama justified his vote by essentially echoing the arguments of the Bush regime, saying, "In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people."

As our accompanying article on the passage of the FISA bill notes, much of the public outrage at revelations of massive, warrantless, government spying got channeled into supporting Democrats in the 2006 election—including on the basis of promises that they would oppose Bush's illegal wiretapping. And many people who are supporting Obama see directing their energy into his campaign as a way to oppose the shredding of supposed constitutional protections against things like unwarranted searches. But look at what actually happened: In 2006, when the Republicans controlled Congress, in the face of widespread opposition and tension within the ruling class, Bush wasn't able to pass a bill like this. Now, with the Democrats in control of Congress, and many seeing the Obama campaign as re-legitimizing the system, Bush got the whole package–including immunity for the communication companies.

It's important to understand what is really going on here. This vote was not a move by Obama to curry favor with "the voters," or to pick up "mainstream, middle of the road" votes. He took an unpopular position that angered many of his supporters, and is not going to get a lot of "independent voters" to support him. In fact, the Democratic Party leadership in the Senate set things up so that some (but with votes counted carefully to make sure not enough) of them voted against the bill—in order to maintain credibility as opponents of Bush.

So why did Obama support this unpopular law? Because right now, the ruling class in this country perceives the need, and potential, to rely on complex and advanced technology to spy on people secretly, and very widely, and to have this legitimated in law and political discourse. (For one analysis of why the U.S. ruling class sees a need to spy on the public very broadly, see the Revolution interview with attorney Shayana Kadidal of Center for Constitutional Rights, "Wiretapping Bill and the Unprecedented Expansion of Presidential Powers," 3/23/08, available at revcom.us.) And Obama, as one of the two candidates running for president, is approaching the issue of widespread, warrantless spying on people's communication from the perspective of someone campaigning to be, and preparing to be, the chief executive of the US ruling class.

In an open letter to angry supporters who are complaining about his FISA vote, Obama wrote: "[S]ome of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.… Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change."

In other words, Obama is saying: What-are-ya-gonna-do? Vote for McCain?

Such is the logic of the system's election setup. Brilliant for them. Deadly for the people. The "choose the lesser evil" logic takes you deeper and deeper into supporting a whole package that has nothing to do with, and is actually opposed to, your interests and what you believe in.

Send us your comments.


--
Steve Yip
P.O. Box 941, Knickerbocker Station
New York, New York 10002-0900
866-841-9139 x2670, yipzzz@gmail.com

It's time to throw off the chains of oppression,
and get with the emancipators of humanity!

[SoularFlarez]

not suprised.....

even though it violates our Right to Privacy.... alot of people will probly shrug it off like...

if you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide

OR

they are protecting us from the terrorists

[manifestdestiny]

It always amazes me how our government moves about concerning its affairs. Now, to the uninvolved general masses this may seem like it is something dark and threatening to the very idea of what it means to be free. As if it should have all of us negroes gasping, "I'm shocked, someone call Jesse". The fact is that this nation has little regard for independant thought, which is one of the reasons why we have public education to this day. Ever since the formation of America this country has violated just about every so-called core amendment within the constitution and revised the rules of the game to justify it. To be terse, we are not free, therefore, we have no freedoms except the freedom to be disillusioned. I said this several yes ago and I will say it now, America is founded on the principles of mass manipulation. It is not reflective of the people running for office but the people supporting them. Politicians have no identity, nor position, only an objective. Do I believe that Obama's objective that same as and will treat our community as did bush or will McCain, NO. This is why I am supporting him, damn the trivial issues we have to put ourselves in better conditions so that we are not always dependant on a great white hope to bail us out.

[MShakur]

Obama's Mentor & Foriegn Policy Advisor Is Zbigniew Brzezinski, A Rockefeller Protege And Co-founder Of The Trilateral Commission.
Read Brzezinski's Book, "between 2 Ages" And The "technotronic Era"
And You'll Understand.

[Im The Truth]

Obama will support any and everything that is traditionally ameriKKKan. You saw how he said he'll "protect the right of israel to defend itself" which really means ameriKKKa will continue its arming of isreal of weapons of mass destruction and its close eyes policy to the daily massacre israel does against Palestine.

[SoularFlarez]

Originally Posted by MShakur

Obama's Mentor & Foriegn Policy Advisor Is Zbigniew Brzezinski, A Rockefeller Protege And Co-founder Of The Trilateral Commission.
Read Brzezinski's Book, "between 2 Ages" And The "technotronic Era"
And You'll Understand.

^i thought of this kat right here.... Zbigniew Brezinski

As the twentieth century draws to a close, the United States has emerged as the world’s only superpower: no other nation possesses comparable military and economic power or has interests that bestride the globe. Yet the critical question facing America remains unanswered: What should be the nation’s global strategy for maintaining its exceptional position in the world? Zbigniew Brzezinski tackles this question head-on in this incisive and pathbreaking book.The Grand Chessboard presents Brzezinski’s bold and provocative geostrategic vision for American preeminence in the twenty-first century. Central to his analysis is the exercise of power on the Eurasian landmass, which is home to the greatest part of the globe’s population, natural resources, and economic activity. Stretching from Portugal to the Bering Strait, from Lapland to Malaysia, Eurasia is the ”grand chessboard” on which America’s supremacy will be ratified and challenged in the years to come. The task facing the United States, he argues, is to manage the conflicts and relationships in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East so that no rival superpower arises to threaten our interests or our well-being.The heart of The Grand Chessboard is Brzezinski’s analysis of the four critical regions of Eurasia and of the stakes for America in each arena—Europe, Russia, Central Asia, and East Asia. The crucial fault lines may seem familiar, but the implosion of the Soviet Union has created new rivalries and new relationships, and Brzezinski maps out the strategic ramifications of the new geopolitical realities. He explains, for example: Why France and Germany will play pivotal geostrategic roles, whereas Britain and Japan will not. Why NATO expansion offers Russia the chance to undo the mistakes of the past, and why Russia cannot afford to toss this opportunity aside. Why the fate of Ukraine and Azerbaijan are so important to America. Why viewing China as a menace is likely to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why America is not only the first truly global superpower but also the last—and what the implications are for America’s legacy. Brzezinski’s surprising and original conclusions often turn conventional wisdom on its head as he lays the groundwork for a new and compelling vision of America’s vital interests. Once, again, Zbigniew Brzezinski provides our nation with a philosophical and practical guide for maintaining and managing our hard-won global power.

[MShakur]

LOL! YEAH THAT ABOUT SAYS IT PRETTY ACCURATE. LOL!

YouTube - Obama: I've learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski