immunity // Current

Trying to save the bees through genetics

There are several causes for the decline -- including a mysterious phenomenon known as colony collapse disorder -- but the main... more

urlspotter
added this

Egyptian pleads innocent in slaying of pop star

An Egyptian tycoon, Hisham Talaat Moustafa, and his associate, Mohsen el-Sukkary, pleaded innocent to charges that they... more

nazbags
added this

Mumps outbreak raises ethical questions

There are far-reaching implications to a Chilliwack Christian group's refusal to have its members immunized against mumps,... more

urlspotter
added this

US and Iraq set pullout date

Iraq and US negotiators set troop pullout for end of 2011 but many Iraqis opposed to late date. US Secretary of State... more

Vierotchka
added this

Saudi Arabia immune in 9/11 case

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, four princes and other Saudi entities are immune from a lawsuit filed by victims... more

GrandKnow2
added this

Losing immunity would hurt Iraq mission

Can't imagine WHY American Security Contractors are so frightened about losing their immunity!?! (CNN) -- An American... more

riffhard98
added this

Benvenuti nel Fantastico Circo Italia!

Benvenuti nel Fantastico Circo Italia! - Calderoli indignato - Precariato bastonato - Brunetta spiritato - Gay risarcito -... more

NonLeggerlo
added this

Immune systems (Financial Times - Editorial comment)

"We have been here before, and it is no better second time around. Silvio Berlusconi’s success this week in getting the... more

NanoBurningRome
added this

E Giustizia sia!

Dovrei scrivere "Perchè è interessante" una storia come questa. Lo è perchè è un... more

NonLeggerlo
added this

Bush: Telecom Immunity More Important Than Surveillance Powers | Electronic Frontier Foundation

Today the Bush Administration released a letter threatening to veto the upcoming FISA legislation if it included the Bingaman Amendment, which puts both telecom immunity and the court cases on hold until after the Inspector General reports about the warrantless wiretapping program. If given the choice between new surveillance powers without immunity for telcos on the one hand, or surveillance under the existing law on the other, the Bush Administration said its choice was clear: keep with the existing law.

Even though the White House "strongly support[s]" the FISA bill, and contends it is necessary to provide "our intelligence professionals the tools they need to keep our Nation safe," and urges the Senate "to act as soon as it returns from its recess," the Bush Administration is willing to veto the legislation and forgo these tools unless the telecom immunity is given effect immediately.

The Administration has said "[t]hat the failure to enact long-term FISA modernization legislation is costly and dangerous is beyond any serious dispute," contending that "[i]t's vital that our intelligence community has the ability to learn who the terrorists are talking to, what they're saying, and what they are planning."

However, according to today's veto threat, none of this is as important as immediate immunity for the telecommunications carriers. Even if the President gets an unprecedented expansion of government surveillance power, and the bill merely delays telecom immunity until Congress has more information, this, Bush contends, is not better than continued surveillance under the current version of FISA.

Assuming that the President would not put the financial interests of large corporations ahead of the safety of the American people, today's veto threat puts the lie to the dire warnings put forth by the Bush Administration. Alternatively, if the government is being honest about the need for immediate legislation, today's veto threat shows a callous indifference to that purported danger, favoring special interests over security.

Senator Kennedy addressed this issue in his floor statement back in December:

Think about what we’ve been hearing from the White House in this debate. The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retroactive immunity. No immunity, no new FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he is willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies. The President’s insistence on immunity as a precondition for any FISA reform is yet another example of his disrespect for honest dialogue and for the rule of law.

It’s painfully clear what the President’s request for retroactive immunity is really about. It’s a self-serving attempt to avoid legal and political accountability and keep the American public in the dark about this whole shameful episode.

The Senate is set to vote on the FISA bill and the Bingaman Amendment this week. Please call your Senators and ask them to call the President's bluff by supporting the Bingaman Amendment and to vote against the unconstitutional FISA bill.Today the Bush Administration released a letter threatening to veto the upcoming FISA legislation if it included the Bingaman... more