Surely can't be legal? "It's now illegal for anyone with a skintone darker than my own to live in this country after 2001 on pain of death. On grounds of terrorism and child-protection. Fire at will, gentlemen."

So the lawsuits should still be able to go ahead- if found guilty the telcos could still be granted a presidential pardon if he's really chummy with them.

...I thought that the *Democrats* won the congressional elections of 2006. Seems I was mistaken.

I'm no expert, but I seem to recall that retroactive lawmaking is explicitly outlawed by a certain "damned piece of paper."

If you can grant immunity retroactively then surely you can remove it retroactively as well ? Could the next US present (hint: the younger one) remove it and press charges ?

Once immunity is granted, it is a legal contract with regards to the justice system. In other words, once it's done, it's done forever.

If the bill actually passes, it also green-lights future trespasses on the behalf of the telcos. Resignations like Nixon's will never happen again, because the government will ALWAYS be able to wiretap in an emergency...no matter what the president defines "emergency" to be that week. I used to be a political scientist, so I know the loopholes. If congress didn't define emergency in the bill, then both parties will be able to take advantage of it and make the 4th amendment null and void at-will.

They talk on the news about Michelle Obama's phrase about being proud of our country. If this bill passes, I will not only be unproud of our country, I will be afraid of our country. VERY afraid.

On a personal note, this isn't the country I grew up in. I don't recognize it anymore (and all that in only 8 years). God help us all.

So Congress created yet another law outlawing what the President and NSA have done? If the then-existing laws didn't stop them, what makes Congress think this new law will? I would also love to know how granting retroactive immunity for illegal activities can possibly be construed as "a victory for the rule of law".

>> "The very fact that you can sit on your arse and complain without being physically harmed [...] is a testament to show you are all completely filled with the solid droppings of the well-fed male ox."

But what some are saying is that the very right to dissent is being infringed or annulled already; at times with some grave consequences. Secret arrests, extraordinary renditions, military tribunals, indefinite detention without charges; the Third Reich and Soviet Russia would indeed be proud.

-dZ.

Wow. It sounded like you actually believed that tripe you spouted. The fact that I am allowed to post a comment on an internet forum without physical harm does not mean:

1) that my rights to religion, speech, press, and assembly have not been violated (just try saying the "wrong" thing and see how fast you end up in Guantanamo Bay, or try peacefully assembling to legally protest and see how fast the police start arresting people)

2) that my right against unreasonable search and seizure has not been violated (warrant? we don't need no stinkin' warrant)

3) that my right to due process has not been violated (what was that about detaining suspects indefinitely without allowing them access to a lawyer?)

4) that my right to confront my accuser has not been violated (sorry, your honor, but it's a state secret, a matter of national security; you'll just have to trust us)

5) my right against cruel and unusual punishment (hello, waterboarding!)

7) my rights in choosing the President (or did you forget how Florida and Ohio admitted to throwing out votes, plus the artificial barriers in Florida to prevent people in certain districts from voting, plus overlooking inconsistencies in the electronic voting machine tallies?)

And those are just the rights granted by the Constitution amendments. But I guess since I can post this without being waterboarded, I must be imagining the loss of those rights. You are correct, however, that I can legally leave this country. Of course, if I'm one of the hundreds of thousands of people on the no-fly list, I won't be able to leave via airplane. And if a border patrol agent thinks I don't quite look right, I may be detained permanently and not allowed to leave. But if they want to let me leave, then I can leave. It's like the old saying goes -- you can do anything you want, as long as it's what I want you to do.

On a final note, I do still believe that the US is one of the best countries in the world in certain ways. But that's really not saying a lot. It certainly isn't something to brag about when you take a look at the country and how far it's fallen in so short a time span. It reminds me of the people that say the US has a better human rights record than China. It may be true, but it doesn't say a lot for the good old "Land of the Free".

It is easily forgotten that both Stalin and Hitler achieved their totalitarian states with the support (often tacit, but also often active) of a large section of the population. This was achieved in both cases by persuading the population that social chaos can only be avoided by treating certain social, political, ethnic or religious groups as a dangerous threat the average 'hard working, right-minded' member of what is now called the 'silent majority'.

In the UK we are seeing exactly the same propaganda at work. Recent examples of this propaganda include treating Muslims as being prone to 'radicalisation', treating young, black people as all potentially part of an unstoppable 'gang culture', branding young white boys from poor backgrounds as drunken 'yobs', and now by claiming that porn addicts are sexual deviants only one step away from becoming paedophiles or rapists. Using 'protection of society' fear-mongering, the government gains the approval of the fearful and selfish majority of the population, and are therefore given free reign to start oppressing minorities right under the eyes of the very voters whose democratic instincts are supposed to prevent this happening.

Once we have reached this point there is not much to be achieved by any one person sticking their head above the parapet. Macarthyism showed that taking individual direct action against a fear-mongering propaganda machine gets you branded a traitor and ruins your life. Instead, it is necessary to form a social counter-movement that exploits the weaknesses of the authoritarian state - namely, that authoritarian leaders are usually irrational, anti-intellectual, and paranoid of showing any sign of weakness.

If we are to prevent a further slide towards NeoConservative socialism/fascism, then it’s up to intelligent and objective people to ignore the Statist fanboys and pick apart every single stupid rule New Labour introduces. This is happening widely now, and Brown's continued idiocy is currently pointed out on a daily basis (eg, discovering that many of Brown's soon to be closed 'failing' schools actually get good or even excellent ratings from school inspectors, or that Brown wants to lock people up for 42 days to protect us, yet lets his staff break basic rules of information security).

There is now a below-the-radar battle taking place in Britain; Brown has a large segment of 'the masses' on his side when it comes to many policy areas, but the liberals have a growing number of intellectuals (even former New Labour cronies like Lord Goldsmith) on their side. At the moment, the rational people are desperately waiting for Brown to get kicked out at the next election. If he doesn't, the shit is seriously going to hit the fan, and I think we'll start to see the kind of social chaos that Brown thinks he's helping avoid. It won't happen at the level of the typical 'protect society at all costs' electorate, but at the level of the social elite - that is, the civil service, the military elite, the Judiciary, the Eurocrats, academics and scientists, and Company directors. A PM needs their support just as much as he needs that of the voters... unless he truly is the next Hitler, in which case he will simply use a combination of 'loyalist' security forces and malevolent mob rule to overcome anyone who questions his authority.

Fortunately, the state of the economy is really scaring people, and that’s probably enough to over-ride the propaganda machine. Self-interest of the most basic kind (ie, food prices, housing shortage, fuel costs etc) will usually over-ride self-interest on a more abstract level. The next election will be the first true test of democracy this country has seen in a long time - if Brown loses, democracy wins.

We shouldn't be thinking of putting someone in jail who works for, or manages, a telephone company because he followed the direction of someone from the FBI or the NSA in letting them connect to their network to help find terrorists and prevent another September 11, 2001.

Instead, it's the people from the government, with the power, not private citizens, involved in this who should potentially face legal penalties if what they did was genuinely improper. Although it may be found, shocking as it might be to some, that a jury might well agree that preventing thousands of innocent people from dying is more important than observing all legal formalities

You risk anything being made public as soon as you tell someone. Whether it be your best friend, spouse, family member etc. I bet you aren't as hard on them when they tell someone else one of your "secrets".

As soon as the government puts you in jail for a conversation of yours which isn't criminal, related to terrorism etc, then you have a gripe. Until then, get real and look at yourself.

The only terrorists I am afraid of is the government of the United States of America. As a "foreign national" I don't have to worry about little things like due process. G Dubya has "declared into place" laws which say they he can, abduct me from my country, hold me for as long as he wants without charges, even torture me for information I most likely don't have, or want to have. The American government doesn't have to tell my family or my government where I am, or why I was taken. If I cross their border, they have the right to arbitrarily search and seize my personal property. Even flying from one of the cities in my country to another city in my country takes me over American airspace, so everything about me has to be sent to and stored by the American government.

Despite having signed numerous agreements about “free trade” with the Americans, my country is constantly threatened with massive economic (and not-so-subtle military, depending on the issue) threats whenever we choose to sell less of a “critical resource” to America, and instead sell to another country, which would pay more for that same resource, or, shock and dismay, sell those goods to our own people, instead of America.

I am sick unto death of my country being forced into selling all our lumber, food, electrical generating capacity, oil, and even more to the Americans, when we ourselves oftentimes can’t find these items, or have to pay prices far in excess of what they are sold to America for. China would pay us far more, and we could keep some of it for our own use for once. Don’t you dare try to say this is the fault of our government either, because when we did elect a government willing to make changes to benefit our people instead of the Americans, there were military threats about “ensuring the stability of supply for resources vital to national security.” (Read: OIL and ELECTRICITY.)

How does the American wiretapping affect me? Why, because I would cheerfully like the ability to take part in the planning and execution of a resistance movement if the Americans ever invade my country too. Hard to do that with them listening in.

Or in other words: yes, I too have things to hide. Who I slept with, and when, when the stripper arrives for my buddy’s bachelor party, oh, and yes, where the weapons are buried. Until the Americans invade, I’m just a nutcase survivalist. When they do invade, I instantly become a terrorist. Interesting how that’s the American term for someone defending their own home.

Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons.