« If Only It Were True | Main | Election 2006 — House and Senate Summary »

May 14, 2006

Comments

Auth

It’s not about some nefarious plot to ‘protect’ the teocelm companies as to ensure their cooperationImmunity is not required to ensure the cooperation of the telcoms with legal wiretap requests. Participation in lawful wiretapping is not optional. However lawsuits against the telcoms for illegally handing over private information is to ensure that citizen's civil liberties remain protected. Remember agreed to take part in this program. If they broke the law, shouldn't they be held accountable? Is it wrong to challenge the legality of a government program in the courts? Or should we just take that it is .Of course there is also the problem that since Congress the and details of the spy plan, they do not know what actions they will be granting immunity to. Unless they know the full details of the program it would be irresponsible to grant immunity.And don't get me started on the fact that the new FISA legislation has virtually no checks and balances to ensure that the current administration and all future administrations cannot the that this new legislation provides them. The is a problem with both the House and Senate versions of the proposed legislation. which is essential.I . Even an unrealistically accurate wiretapping system would produce an overwhelming number of false alarms for every real terrorist plot that is uncovered. It simply doesn't work to prevent terrorist attacks.

The comments to this entry are closed.