Privacy Digest

News that can impact your privacy.
Login/Register
What is OpenID?
  • Log in using OpenID
  • Cancel OpenID login
  • Create new account
  • Request new password
Home Blogs MacRonin's blog
    • FAQ
    • Wishlists
    • Contact
    • Categories/RSS

Bookmark Us

Bookmark Privacy Digest 
Bookmark This Page 

Syndicate

Syndicate content
more

Advertisements

Tracking System
Tracking System
Private Detectives
Quality Security Services in California
Fleet Management
Hosting

Popular content

Last viewed:

  • The UK's Surveillance Society: Half A Million Intercepts of Communications Data in 2008
  • Former Qwest CEO Says U.S. Punished Phone Firm
  • Five IRS Employees Charged With Snooping on Tax Returns
  • Combining BitTorrent With Darknets For P2P Privacy
  • NetFlix Cancels Recommendation Contest After Privacy Lawsuit
  • New York Times' NSA Whistleblower Reveals Himself
  • Mikko Hypponen - Technometria: The Virus Problem

tags in Topics

Activists Alert Anonymity Companies Congress Copyright Court (US) Databases Data Mining Editorial EFF Entertainment Exploits Fourth Amendment Government Hmmm ID Infrastructure Law Enforcement Laws Politics Privacy Remember Reports Rights Security Spin Zone Surveillance Telecommunications Tracking
more tags

View blog authority
Congressional Research
Broadcast Flag

Bush Wants Phone Firms Immune to Privacy Suits

Submitted by MacRonin on May 5, 2007 - 8:21pm
  • Companies
  • Congress
  • Data Breach
  • Databases
  • Department of Justice
  • Editorial
  • Government
  • Hmmm
  • Law Enforcement
  • Laws
  • Person Career
  • Privacy
  • Quotation
  • Rights
  • Spin Zone
  • Surveillance
  • Tracking

Bush Wants Phone Firms Immune to Privacy Suits - washingtonpost.com: "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.

Civil liberties advocates opposed the immunity measure. They said the government had yet to disclose to Congress the attorney general's legal opinion supporting the surveillance program and what role the phone companies played in it.

The government asserts that the blanket immunity is necessary to protect sensitive national security information. 'If companies are alleged to have cooperated with the government to protect our nation against another attack, they should not be held liable for any assistance they are alleged to have provided,' Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said.

The immunity would be limited to assistance from Sept. 11, 2001, to the date the measure becomes law.

"

(Read Original Article - Via washingtonpost.com .)

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Twitter Twitter
  • Digg Digg
  • StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
  • Technorati Technorati
  • del.icio.us del.icio.us
  • Facebook Facebook
  • Furl Furl
  • LinkedIn LinkedIn
  • Yahoo Yahoo
  • MacRonin's blog
  • Add new comment

Recent blog posts

  • Viacom Makes Its Case Against Yesterday's YouTube
  • Obama supports Senators draft plan to rework U.S. immigration policy - Includes National Biometric ID card for all.
  • Domain Names Can't Defend Themselves
  • Hacker Disables More Than 100 Cars Remotely
  • Judges Approves $9.5 Million Facebook ‘Beacon’ Accord
  • Hooking Up The Big Brother Machine... And Fighting It
  • Court: State Can Dump Non-Sex Offenders Into Registry
  • How Privacy Vanishes Online
  • Undercover Feds on Social Networking Sites Raise Questions
  • FBI Uses Fake Facebook Profiles To Spy On Suspects
more

Performancing Metrics

Compilation © Copyright 1997-2010 Paul Hardwick, with Web Hosting provided by MacRonin.com.