Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Paul  Weyrich :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Need for Advance Intelligence as to Foreign-Based Terrorism
by Paul Weyrich
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Sarah Palin make a run at the GOP Nomination in 2012?


Last Thursday night the House of Representatives met in a closed session to debate H.R. 3773, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. It passed the House on Friday by a vote of 213-197.

The bill is intended to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to resolve the problems modern electronic communication poses for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other agencies which pursue international terrorist networks that seek to inflict harm upon the United States. It states that a "court order is not required for electronic surveillance directed at the acquisition of communication between persons [who] are not known to be U.S. citizens and are reasonably believed to be located outside the United States for collecting foreign intelligence information, whether or not the communication passes through the United States or the surveillance device is located within the United States." With regard to American citizens the bill provides specific procedures allowing Federal agencies to intercept such communication. The bill applies only to international communications.

Controversy surrounded the bill because Republicans wanted it to include retroactive immunity from prosecution for telecommunications companies which aided the Federal Government with its warrantless wiretapping program in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. Last month the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 68-31 and included an immunity provision. But the House version passed on Friday does not include such a provision. Instead, the House version would allow people to sue telecommunications companies, which would have to present their case to a judge in a closed hearing without the plaintiffs present. Both President George W. Bush and Senate Democrats have stated that they would reject the House bill if it did not include retroactive immunity.

While I am skeptical of many of the Federal Government's programs and bureaucracies, September 11 was a genuine threat to American citizens, and under the circumstances the Government needed to discover immediately whether there were other attacks planned against us and ready to be executed. Furthermore, the Government relies upon the continued assistance and cooperation of telecommunications companies to disrupt and intercept communications among those who continue to seek our destruction. It is unfathomable that the House Majority Leadership now wants to open these companies to criminal prosecution.

Instead of passing reasonable legislation to modernize FISA and to provide our security agencies the tools they need to defeat those who want to harm us, the House Majority Leadership is playing fast and loose with American security in order to score a few cheap political points. If Senate Democrats and Republicans were able to agree on the legislation the House Majority Leadership should be able to as well. Twenty-one members of the so-called Blue Dog Democrats even wrote a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) prior to the vote, urging her to support the Senate version of the legislation.

There is no excuse for the behavior of the House Majority Leadership other than the fact that they want something to take with them on the campaign trail during an election year. Oh yes, and they want to allow trial lawyers the freedom to file costly lawsuits against telecommunications companies. At least we know what the House Majority Leadership wants to protect - not American citizens but the pocketbooks of trial lawyers and other special-interest groups which would be involved in such frivolous lawsuits.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Paul M. Weyrich is the late Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Paul Weyrich's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Former Rep
We're speaking about civil suits brought on by the likes of the ACLU. You seem to be very misinformed. In today's internet centric world, a cellphone conversation between a person in Kabul and another in Hamburg more than likely gets routed through one of our backbones in New York, Chicago or LA. The origin and destination of the call is outside of the US and involves foreigners. The intransit route just happens to occur in the US. In this case FISA need not apply. But that is not how the Dems, and some judges see it. The telcos are exposed on this, and could spend millions of dollars just to defend themselves helping the goverment.

FISA needs to be updated, and the telcos need protection. The NSA and CIA admit that the foreign survaillance program has reaped many benefits -namely the break up of many terror plots. Foregin terrorists are on to this liberal interference. Many now purchase dozens of Track phones and minutes in the US and have them shipped to foregin nations. Current laws prevent the NSA from intercepting these calls. After one conversation, the phones are disposed of. This is a serious breach of security.

Former_Rep
1. This is the wrong question, as lawsuits are not brought for criminally "illegal" actions but as a means of extracting damages compensation from defendants. If what the telecoms had done was illegal according to statute, charges would be filed by the judicial authorities. But no such charges have been filed, or could be. The LAWSUITS are brought not by the authorities but by plaintiffs, and can produce judgments in favor of plaintiffs even if the defendants committed no actions that were illegal by statute.

Remember, the telecoms CANNOT, by definition, violate anyone's 4th amendment rights. Only the government can do that.

2. If the federal government demanded that YOU do something that would make you liable to lawsuits that could destroy your business, you would want immunity too, no matter how noble the reason for which your cooperation was being demanded. The telecoms have the option to not cooperate, if cooperation is certain to result in lawsuits. They can't be forced to accept self-destruction.

Remember, even if the telecoms were to win all the damages suits already brought against them, they would still have to spend millions on legal fees defending them in court.

3. Immunity is meaningless if it is not retroactive. Without it, telecoms would have to defend the suits already brought, and more suits would be brought on the basis that those suits are being heard in court, rather than dismissed.

If you don't want NSA doing warrantless wiretapping, direct your efforts at Congress and force the president, by a two-thirds majority, to stop doing it. The telecoms are not at fault for the practice; the federal executive is. It's the worst sort of cynicism to agree to the wiretapping but demand the option to sue the telecoms for it. Wanting to sue the telecoms is pure, unadulterated greed, and it does NOTHING for anyone except enrich lawyers.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.