Teleco Immunity

Sen. Dodd is planning on Filibustering the FISA reform bill which is up today. Reid has capitulated to Bush's insistence that Teleco Immunity should be included in the bill, and is not fighting to keep the administration accountable for who they spy upon, let alone for their lawbreaking actions.

You can watch the filibuster here:

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs_cspan2_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS2

Given that there is a 'good faith clause' already present in this case, why should there be any special immunity for telecos?

Given that the teleco spying started far before 9/11 (Here), as early as 2/21/2001, how can it be argued that this system was set up in an emergency situation?

What rationale gives the telecos the right to break their contracts - nearly all of which contain specific language preventing the telecos from giving your info to the gov't without a warrant?

Why is it that Dem Senators who are pushing for immunity, cannot explain the link between their opinions on the issue and the massive increases in donations to their campaigns by teleco agencies? Rockefeller especially. Feinstein. Others.

I can see no good reason to support immunity for any teleco company, who knowingly and willingly broke the law, in order to secure lucrative gov't contracts? Who are willing to cut off cut off the wiretaps if the bills aren't paid? Does that sound patriotic to you?

I would love to hear anyone try and defend the idea of providing immunity for the telecoms.

Cycloptichorn