Thoughts on new law?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by EqtTrdr, Dec 30, 2006.


    Bush signing statement claims he can search our mail without a warrant
    December 20th, 2006

    Jeffrey Henderson

    Today President Bush signed the H.R. 6407, the "Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. In doing so he added a few signing statements. One of them is particularly alarming.

    The executive branch shall construe subsection 404(c) of title 39, as enacted by subsection 1010(e) of the Act, which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection.

    Page 65, the second last of the PDF document, addresses the requirement to have a search warrant to open mail. The signing statement declares in effect that if justified by national security the President can forget about this provision. And, re: 404, the signing statement asserts the executive is immune from being taken to court over any possible violation of the law, which opening the mail without a warrant would be.(Here I am not totally certain whether 404 applies to a specific topic or to all provisions of the act.)

    This says the Bush can now search our mail without a warrant. There is no arguing that this is exactly what it says. A signing statement does not outweigh our Constitution.

    I would consider this a violation of our laws, and yet another attack on our freedom.
  2. You guys are the best, the President signs a bill, already passed by both houses of Congress, and suddenly it is another Bush Conspiracy. All it does is personally protect the President from lawsuits.

    Look the NSA can already listen to your phone calls, read your e-mails, monitor your net usage, and track you through your cell phone. They are looking for terrorists not you. Who cares, quit being so paranoid.
  3. How do you know they are looking for terrorists, only? This, or the next administration could try to isolate other 'elements' that are trying to disclose something smelly. Who's gonna stop them?

  4. They already can and have, just ask the hundreds of Republican officials, who had their personal information perused by an offish ex-bouncer working for the Clinton Administration. If the President wants to dig up dirt on opponents, it is going to happen. This law clearly states National Security, or public safety must be at risk, before a search warrant exemption is granted. If anything it clarifies the status-quo.
  5. Do you think law enforcement requires a warrant to open a letter suspected of anthrax contamination or needs a judges permission to open a parcel containing a bomb? Does this law strike you as something new?

    You crack me up, EqtTrdr. Apparently you have little problem with tangible assaults on liberty such as mandatory checkpoints/roadblocks where one must self incriminate by submitting a breathalyzer but the notion of eavesdropping spooks you. Too funny.

  6. Maybe they're trying to starve out Mike Moore by confiscating his airbourne frozen pizzas.
  7. ursa, if you are going to get all up in arms, you need to research echelon etc. and realize this is NOTHING new and was going on extensively during the clinton years too
  8. achilles28


    Its always alarming how many shills come out of the woodwork to defend (not condemn) another attack on our dwindling freedoms.

    #1 Congress never wrote or passed legislation enabling Bush to search our mail without a warrant. Bush did. That’s what his 'signing statement' means. DUH!

    #2 CORRECT! Thanks to Echelon, the NSA has been monitoring our collective email, surfing habits, cell phone and in some cases landline calls. All without a warrant.

    And this wholesale skull fucking of our 4th Amendment right is good, how???

    You think the Fourth Amendment is a joke? Do you even know why its there???


    The whole spirit of the Constitution was written to protect men from men with power.

    The Spirit of man has not changed in 200 years - let alone 2000.

    When the next one goes off, you 'enlightened' pundits are going to get raped by the very machinations you foolishly supported.
  9. it really beggars belief.

    another disgusting display from da neocons cocksuckers.
  10. achilles28


    Since Clinton fucked our rights, its ok if Bush does too?


    Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans regard their precarious freedoms with the same backwards logic as you.

    Try this:

    Both the Left and Right will invariably grow Government and take away liberty.

    That’s all they've ever done for the past 100 years.

    And you so-called 'patriots' and self proclaimed enlightened pundits shrug it off and laude our leaders for exchanging your freedoms for security.

    You know what Benjamin Franklin echoes to the fools who trade liberty for security?

    You deserve neither and will lose both.
    #10     Dec 30, 2006