[RP TownTalk] Md senator helps pass Telecom immunity

[Robert Oppenheim]

Roland wrote:
 > The sole subject of civil immunity is 13-week period in the
 > immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Actually, the period covered by the immunity is 5+ years, beginning
on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007.

Roland suggests reading section 202 of the bill. OK, here is a
portion of it:

Sec 202. LIMITATIONS ON CIVIL ACTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS
"... a covered civil action shall not lie or be maintained in a
Federal or State court, and shall be promptly dismissed, if the
Attorney General certifies to the court that--" [the action was]
"... authorized by the President during the period beginning on
September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007; ..."

The full text is here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2248

Roland writes:
 > if Barack Obama is elected President, his Attorney General
 > will be the one to determine whether the immunity applies

Actually the bill, if passed, would take effect immediately, so it
is Bush's attorney general (Michael Mukasey) that would make the
determinations. I think it is safe to say that the relevant current
law suits would immediately be dismissed.

The fact is the legality of the telecom actions have NOT been
established. The courts should be allowed to determine if the
telecom actions were lawful or not. If they were lawful, then there
is no need for immunity. If they were not lawful, then they should
be held accountable.

The scope of the spying was huge. It covered 5 years, and it
appears to have covered every single Internet activity.

Whistleblower Mark Klein said he was ordered to patch the backbone
of the Interent into the government's secret spy room. Every email,
every phone call, all web browsing - both domestic and international
were sent in. "It involves millions of communications, a lot of it
domestic communications that they‘re copying wholesale, sweeping up
into that secret room. ... my thought was George Orwell‘s 1984, and
here I am being forced to connect the big brother machine. ...
I felt I was in a funny position, but I needed my job so I didn‘t want
to make a fuss. After I retired, I thought about it some more."
[You can read his whole statement here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21690264/ ]

By the way, I can relate to his situation. In the late 1980's, I was
the project director to develop an international communication
network for the American Red Cross. The network was also to be
connected to a secure communication network used by the US Armed
Forces. I was asked to connect the two systems without going thru all
the proper channels to get it approved. This was not spying or
anything like that, they were just worried about the red-tape and
the delay it would cause the project. Still, I refused to do it. A
few higher ups dropped by to "urge" me to do it. I told them that I
would not. As they grew more insistent, I told them I would resign
if need be, and that if I ever found out that it had been done
without going thru proper channels, that I would report it to the
authorities. That ended the conversation. Eventually, the project
got the proper permissions and I connected the networks. My
stance probably cost me a promotion and a raise, but it was the
right thing to do.

-Rob Oppenheim, Cleveland Ave.