百家争鸣
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[USA Constitution is in grave danger]
郭国汀律师专栏
·保障人权律师的基本人权刻不容缓
·不敢或不愿为法轮功作无罪辩护的律师,不是真正的人权律师!
·人权律师辩护律师必读之公正审判指南(英文)
·我为什么推崇中国人权律师浦志强?
·巴黎律师公会采访中国人权律师郭国汀
·
·人权律师的职责与使命----驳李建强关于严正学力虹案件的声明
·驳斥刘路有关六四屠城的荒唐谬论
·李建强律师与郭国汀律师的公开论战
·李建强与郭国汀律师的论战之二
·英雄多多益善!郭国汀
·英雄辈出的时代刘路千万别走错路 郭国汀
·答康平伙计关于郭律师与李建强之争
·揭穿刘荻的画皮----南郭与[三刘]之争不属刘家私事而是中国民主运动的公事
·刘荻的灵魂竟是如此[美丽] !
·废除或修改煽动颠覆国家政权罪思想监狱中国律师集体第一议案的诞生
·团结起来共同对敌 答刘路先生的公开信
·敦促刘路公开辩污的公开函
·敦促刘路公开辩污的最后通牒
·我为法轮功抗辩——答刘路质询函
***自由人权宪政共和民主之路争论
·中国人缺少宽容精神么?
·郭国汀评价刘晓波诺奖
·关于刘晓波是否合格人选答阮杰函
·郭国汀评刘晓波之伪无敌论
·中共怪异重判刘晓波的意图旨在克意扶持默契能控的民运‘领袖’
·质疑刘晓波先生盛赞俞可平民主论 郭国汀
·我愿意出任刘晓波2006/guoguoting/68
·郭国汀与刘晓波先生关于人民起义权利的对话
·刘晓波案之我见
·郭国汀预言刘晓波与中共之间的默契
·刘晓波虚伪有余而真诚不足
·强烈谴责中共专制暴政公然践踏法律枉法刑拘刘晓波先生!
·为什么应当支持刘晓波?
·郭国汀邀请刘晓波公开论战的函
·告别自由中国论坛网友公开函
·郭国汀:质疑一个刘晓波超过全部民运人士
***(48)人权律师思想辩护策略论战
·律师应当如何为颠复及煽动颠复国家政权罪抗辩?----就如何为郭泉、谢长发、刘晓波、谭作人等民主斗士抗辩答网友咨询
·辩护律师为法轮功讲真相案件辩护的基本原则 郭国汀
·真正的刑辩大律师! 郭国汀
·深入骨髓的奴性!
·《九评共产党》是没有价值的政治大字报?
·如何识别网警共特?----答毕时园伙计的质疑
·中共网络别动队业已渗透大量西方中文网站
·什么是南郭之一不怕死二不爱钱?
·答草兄及建强兄质疑
·答张鹤慈先生质疑
·刘荻为何害怕这篇文章? 中国知识分子死了!
·郭国汀答小乔函
***(49)重大人权案件辩护
·民运英雄杨天水危在旦夕
·强烈谴责中共暴政企图暗杀冯正虎先生的流氓下三滥作为!
·关注声援支持人权律师刘士辉,强烈抗议流氓暴政的政治迫害人权律师!
·呼吁全球华人关注支持民族英雄郭泉博士
·真正的知识分子英雄郭泉博士
·决不以出卖灵魂出卖人格尊严为代价打官司
·严正警告流氓无赖中共匪帮
·南郭警告胡锦涛别再玩火!
·强烈谴责中共暴政枉法滥捕自由作家谭作人先生
·胡锦涛最害怕最恨谁?
·为申曦(曾节明)作证的证明函
·论颠覆及煽动颠覆国家政权罪
·颠覆国家政权罪的法理解析
·中共阉法院认定的颠覆国家政权案件"犯罪事实"简析
·关注声援支持中国知识分子英雄郭泉博士
·我为郭泉博士抗辩
·敬请各界朋友关注声援支持民主斗士郭泉教授
·郭国汀律师称中共颠覆(煽动颠覆)国家政权罪系违宪恶法
·烈女邓玉娇传记六则
·“法学专家”是因“理性”还是因“奴性”而胡说八道?!
·强烈谴责胡锦涛及中共专制暴政枉法杀害英雄义士杨佳!
·杨佳精神不朽 抗暴当走退党之路
·岂能将英雄义士杨佳与希特勒、哈尔曼、唐永明相提并论?!
·杨佳案7名涉案警察证人和杨佳的母亲必须出庭作证
·郭国汀预言死刑将造就更多杨佳
·杨佳略传六则一揽
·悼颂杨佳
·杨佳依自然法无罪而且是个值得国人敬重的英雄!
·郭国汀再谈杨佳案的辩护
·郭国汀律师的臭文
·正义、尊严、公道与犯罪----杨佳有罪吗?
·敬请关注声援失踪的律师英雄张鉴康
·强烈谴责中共胡氏当局非法剥夺人权律师张鉴康的执业权
·坚决支持李国涛先生的义举,反对极权专制独裁政治!
·严正责令胡锦涛及中共当局——立即无条件释放民运志士李国涛!
·强烈谴责中共恶意迫害自由战士杨天水、许万平/郭国汀
·强烈谴责中共流氓暴政政治迫害冯正虎先生
·历史耻辱柱上的中国法官
·中国律师受迫害的根源何在?-—声援支持高智晟律师
·良知律师朱久虎被刑拘突显中国司法制度的流氓化/郭国汀
·闻小乔遭警方驱逐毒打有感
·强烈谴责中共专制暴政纵容黑社会暴力侵袭郭飞雄先生的暴行!
·敬请各界朋友们关注声援支持正在为全民族承受无边苦难的英雄郭飞雄
·郭国汀敦促胡锦涛立即无条件释放人权英雄郭飞雄、高智晟的公开函
·强烈谴责上海市当局非法拘禁李剑虹 郭国汀
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
USA Constitution is in grave danger


   Al Gore speech on abuses of our Democracy by Bush
   Transcript: Al Gore On the Limits of Executive Power
   Monday, 16 January 2006

   by Al Gore
   Remarks as prepared
   Congressman Barr and I have disagreed many times over the years, but we have joined together today with thousands of our fellow citizens-Democrats and Republicans alike-to express our shared concern that America’s Constitution is in grave danger.
   In spite of our differences over ideology and politics, we are in strong agreement that the American values we hold most dear have been placed at serious risk by the unprecedented claims of the Administration to a truly breathtaking expansion of executive power.
   As we begin this new year, the Executive Branch of our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of American citizens and has brazenly declared that it has the unilateral right to continue without regard to the established law enacted by Congress to prevent such abuses.
   It is imperative that respect for the rule of law be restored.
   So, many of us have come here to Constitution Hall to sound an alarm and call upon our fellow citizens to put aside partisan differences and join with us in demanding that our Constitution be defended and preserved.
   It is appropriate that we make this appeal on the day our nation has set aside to honor the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who challenged America to breathe new life into our oldest values by extending its promise to all our people.
   On this particular Martin Luther King Day, it is especially important to recall that for the last several years of his life, Dr. King was illegally wiretapped-one of hundreds of thousands of Americans whose private communications were intercepted by the U.S. government during this period.
   The FBI privately called King the “most dangerous and effective negro leader in the country” and vowed to “take him off his pedestal.” The government even attempted to destroy his marriage and blackmail him into committing suicide.
   This campaign continued until Dr. King’s murder. The discovery that the FBI conducted a long-running and extensive campaign of secret electronic surveillance designed to infiltrate the inner workings of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and to learn the most intimate details of Dr. King’s life, helped to convince Congress to enact restrictions on wiretapping.
   The result was the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA), which was enacted expressly to ensure that foreign intelligence surveillance would be presented to an impartial judge to verify that there is a sufficient cause for the surveillance. I voted for that law during my first term in Congress and for almost thirty years the system has proven a workable and valued means of according a level of protection for private citizens, while permitting foreign surveillance to continue.
   Yet, just one month ago, Americans awoke to the shocking news that in spite of this long settled law, the Executive Branch has been secretly spying on large numbers of Americans for the last four years and eavesdropping on “large volumes of telephone calls, e-mail messages, and other Internet traffic inside the United States.” The New York Times reported that the President decided to launch this massive eavesdropping program “without search warrants or any new laws that would permit such domestic intelligence collection.”
   During the period when this eavesdropping was still secret, the President went out of his way to reassure the American people on more than one occasion that, of course, judicial permission is required for any government spying on American citizens and that, of course, these constitutional safeguards were still in place.
   But surprisingly, the President’s soothing statements turned out to be false. Moreover, as soon as this massive domestic spying program was uncovered by the press, the President not only confirmed that the story was true, but also declared that he has no intention of bringing these wholesale invasions of privacy to an end.
   At present, we still have much to learn about the NSA’s domestic surveillance. What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels the conclusion that the President of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and persistently.
   A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government. Our Founding Fathers were adamant that they had established a government of laws and not men. Indeed, they recognized that the structure of government they had enshrined in our Constitution - our system of checks and balances - was designed with a central purpose of ensuring that it would govern through the rule of law. As John Adams said: “The executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them, to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men.”
   An executive who arrogates to himself the power to ignore the legitimate legislative directives of the Congress or to act free of the check of the judiciary becomes the central threat that the Founders sought to nullify in the Constitution - an all-powerful executive too reminiscent of the King from whom they had broken free. In the words of James Madison, “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
   Thomas Paine, whose pamphlet, “On Common Sense” ignited the American Revolution, succinctly described America’s alternative. Here, he said, we intended to make certain that “the law is king.”
   Vigilant adherence to the rule of law strengthens our democracy and strengthens America. It ensures that those who govern us operate within our constitutional structure, which means that our democratic institutions play their indispensable role in shaping policy and determining the direction of our nation. It means that the people of this nation ultimately determine its course and not executive officials operating in secret without constraint.
   The rule of law makes us stronger by ensuring that decisions will be tested, studied, reviewed and examined through the processes of government that are designed to improve policy. And the knowledge that they will be reviewed prevents over-reaching and checks the accretion of power.
   A commitment to openness, truthfulness and accountability also helps our country avoid many serious mistakes. Recently, for example, we learned from recently classified declassified documents that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized the tragic Vietnam war, was actually based on false information. We now know that the decision by Congress to authorize the Iraq War, 38 years later, was also based on false information. America would have been better off knowing the truth and avoiding both of these colossal mistakes in our history. Following the rule of law makes us safer, not more vulnerable.
   The President and I agree on one thing. The threat from terrorism is all too real. There is simply no question that we continue to face new challenges in the wake of the attack on September 11th and that we must be ever-vigilant in protecting our citizens from harm.
   Where we disagree is that we have to break the law or sacrifice our system of government to protect Americans from terrorism. In fact, doing so makes us weaker and more vulnerable.
   Once violated, the rule of law is in danger. Unless stopped, lawlessness grows. The greater the power of the executive grows, the more difficult it becomes for the other branches to perform their constitutional roles. As the executive acts outside its constitutionally prescribed role and is able to control access to information that would expose its actions, it becomes increasingly difficult for the other branches to police it. Once that ability is lost, democracy itself is threatened and we become a government of men and not laws.

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场