[RP TownTalk] Md senator helps pass Telecom immunity

[Dwight Holmes]

The Constitution and Bill of Rights ooze with distrust of government.
It's in our blood.

No one is objecting to FISA -- its the end run around FISA and
cover-our-buddies'-arses manoeuvers that reek here. If FISA hadn't
been ignored there'd be no issue of lawsuits and no reason to provide
retroactive immunity.

FISA as originally constituted allowed for actions without warrants
when need arose -- all they had to do was ask for the warrant within
72 hours.



On Feb 16, 2008 2:48 PM, cranky old coot <lking at knob.com> wrote:
>
>  Getting tired of partial quotes -- so here is one more cut and past from
> the link. In addition to the dates, I see several conditions, and a review
> process by the courts.
>
>  Now I admit I stopped reading about here. I'm beginning to believe that the
> real issue is trust in the government. If that is true, then there is
> nothing to be gained by discussion.
>
>  Those that are objecting to FISA, or the "Protections for Electronic
> Communication Service providers", I'm guessing would have also been apposed
> to similar procedures used during WWI and WWII.  At that time all cable
> traffic to  and from Europe was intercepted, decoded and read.  All mail
> to/from Europe was selectively opened, decoded, read and resealed.  There
> are several books on the subject and the contribution to the "war effort."
>
>  COC
>
>  S. 2248: FISA Amendments Act of 2007
>
> TITLE II--PROTECTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS
>
> SEC. 202. LIMITATIONS ON CIVIL ACTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE
> PROVIDERS.
>
> (a) Limitations-
>
>
> (1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 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--
>
>
> (A) the assistance alleged to have been provided by the electronic
> communication service provider was--
>
>
> (i) in connection with an intelligence activity involving communications
> that was--
>
>
> (I) authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11,
> 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007; and
>
> (II) designed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack, or activities in
> preparation for a terrorist attack, against the United States; and
>
> (ii) described in a written request or directive from the Attorney General
> or the head of an element of the intelligence community (or the deputy of
> such person) to the electronic communication service provider indicating
> that the activity was--
>
>
> (I) authorized by the President; and
>
> (II) determined to be lawful; or
>
> (B) the electronic communication service provider did not provide the
> alleged assistance.
>
> (2) REVIEW- A certification made pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be subject
> to review by a court for abuse of discretion.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TownTalk mailing list
> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org
> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org is for automated subscription processing
> only
> http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>
> For more information about Riverdale Park, visit
> http://www.ci.riverdale-park.md.us
>



-- 
Riverdale Park Community Wiki
http://rpwiki.wetpaint.com/