Bush Wants Phone Firms Immune to Privacy Suits

[maddezmom]

Source: Washington Post

By Ellen Nakashima
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 4, 2007; Page A14

The Bush administration is urging Congress to pass a law that would halt dozens of lawsuits charging phone companies with invading ordinary citizens' privacy through a post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance program.

The measure is part of a legislative package drafted by the Justice Department to relax provisions in the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that restrict the administration's ability to intercept electronic communications in the United States. If passed, the proposed changes would forestall efforts to compel disclosure of the program's details through Congress or the court system.

The proposal states that "no action shall lie . . . in any court, and no penalty . . . shall be imposed . . . against any person" for giving the government information, including customer records, in connection with alleged intelligence activity the attorney general certifies "is, was, would be or would have been" intended to protect the United States from terrorist attack. The measure, which has not yet been filed, is contained in a proposed amendment to the fiscal 2008 intelligence authorization bill.

The immunity measure has stoked controversy following public uproar over news reports of warrantless access to both telephone conversations and records as part of the administration's post-Sept. 11 counterterrorism policies. It is part of a larger debate about the proper balance between guarding national security and civil liberties and the extent to which private companies have acted as an arm of the federal government. In March, the Justice Department inspector general found that the FBI had secret contracts with three telephone companies to obtain Americans' phone records, claiming "exigent circumstances," when, in many instances, none existed.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050302323.html

[HCE SuiGeneris]

1. NO! G'damnit. You can't change the law subsequent to breaking it.

Pay your dues you f'n criminals.

[truthisfreedom]

2. It's like they pulled out the old file of requests they made when there was a thug Congress

and are throwing it out there as a distraction to all of the HELL they are facing now. I personally think Rove was packing up for the weekend and found a file about this and just tossed it into the out-box.

[MGD]

3. The God damned gestapo fascists won't be happy until they have revoked our bill of rights completely

Impeach these assholes before America is irreversibly damaged.

[UNCLE_Rico]

4. DUer Requests Dem-Controlled House to Tell Bush Admin to Go Fuck Itself

Preferably gently ... with a chain-saw

[Puppyjive]

5. It's for protection of the elite

I'm sure there is a reason for this. It most likely will protect someone like Dick Cheney, who has been known to have many connections with countries in the Middle East.

[lpbk2713]

6. It's payback. After all, a deal's a deal.

The telcos allowed NSA easy access to their networks and their files and records and this is the reciprocal part of the deal from BushCo.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Everything that Bush wants at this point should be denied to him

In fact, a bill should should be crafted to strengthen and enforce the existing law.

The best thing that can be said is that he's not automatically getting his wishes.

[eShirl]

10. abso freaking lutely n/t

[Solly Mack]

8. If passed? then fuck those who pass it

if you enable Bush then you're no different than he is

[conspirator]

9. The Police State train is still on his rails and coming

[EnviroBat]

11. To hell with what this asshole wants!

More violations of our civil rights. FUCK HIM!

[Javaman]

12. To quote the Talking Heads

from the song "Life During Wartime"...

We got computers

We're taping phone lines

We know that that ain't allowed

[Orsino]

13. Corporations worked hard to place * above the law.

Of course he would like to return the favor.

[gulfcoastliberal]

14. Dems better stand tall on this.

If they don't then we're screwn.

[gratuitous]

15. Why do the phone companies need immunity?

I mean, if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide. And isn't it civilized how we work out our differences in a court of law with rules and procedures in place, instead of just allowing armed bands to roam the countryside bringing misbehaving companies to heel? Isn't that part of the magic of free markets - the right to enforce contracts and the law?

My goodness, how very un-Republican of George W. Bush!

[struggle4progress]

16. What an interesting suggestion! Congress should hold hearings on this proposal and

investigate it very very thoroughly. It's not clear to me why my phone company needs immunity from lawsuits resulting from illegal wiretapping or violations of my privacy rights, but I bet a gaggle of phone company executives and Administration officials are eager to discuss the issues in public under oath.

[MasonJar]

17. No way! And I want you impeached, George!