Specter and Whiteside’s amendment is ridiculous as is Feinstein’s. The only surprise to me is that Whiteside started out like a ball of fire and has fizzled into a Bush mascot.

Never mind silly nuances like minimization, reverse targeting, basket warrants, etc.

When you get these terrrrisssts comin’ over here in droves, goin’ to Harvard law, and then tryin’ to spread slums like a pandemic, we need the strong forceful arm of imbeciles like Bush, Corynyn, Chambliss, and Hatch to ram through a FISA bill with no votes on amendments.

I also like the quote from the Britney midrift set of “secular midrassas.” *g* No oxymoron there.

The “will veto an extension” is attributed to an anonymous source. It’s bluster, IMO.

Still, on the telecom amnesty issue in general, I think there are easily 60 Senators who are willing to pass it. There will be drawing of straws to see who gets to take the high road.

The White House told Democratic congressional leaders Saturday that President Bush opposes a 30-day extension of an expiring eavesdropping law and instead wants an expanded version to be passed by Friday.

“The president would veto a 30-day extension,” a senior administration official said. “They’re just kicking the can down the road. They need the heat of the current law lapsing to get this done.”

link

But this is a quick and important utterance:

SPECTER:
The Specter-Whitehouse substitution amendment will place the Government in the shoes of the telephone companies to have the same defenses–no more and no less. For example, the
doctrine of governmental immunity would not be available to the Government. There have been those who have criticized the Specter-Whitehouse amendment, who have ignored the very basic proposition that the suits cannot be dismissed because of governmental immunity.

On the other hand, by the same token, the state secrets defense will be available. In the lawsuits that are being prosecuted now against the telephone companies, the government has intervened to assert the state secrets doctrine. In fact, the Government has precluded the telephone companies from saying very much under that doctrine. When the Government is substituted for the telephone companies, the Government will retain the defense of the state secrets doctrine.

That’s about as clear an admission of “smoke and mirrors” as one will ever see.

Glenn Greenwald is up with a stirring new piece on this topic over at Salon:

I just posed over at glens place;

Here’s a point I think even Glen is missing when we discuss or write about “retro active immunity”

If allowed, this “retro active immunity” those companies and officers of the company and even the lowest of laborers would have access to our property, the would have been allowed to take information they are not entitled, they will be given the cover of this law to keep the property they took and claim it as theirs.

And the courts will be forced to decide on their behalf!

Those stolen from will not be allowed redress when our property is discovered as stolen, nor will we be allowed discovery to find the extent of the theft, the level of damage.

for instance;

When we find our manuscript plagiarized, though we can prove such with no doubt, the telecom will be allowed to profit from that manuscript regardless that it was stolen.

If I have a new design that will give an auto 100 mpg and the telecoms has acquired that design through their wiretapping, they can sell my design and I will not be allowed redress.

If there is someone depraved enough to use the information they have to follow my daughter where she will be, I will not be able to find out who committed the crime and how they found the information they used to do whatever they did to my daughter

This is far more important then simply protecting constitutional freedom, there are real tangible issues.

We must be allowed redress when we find we have been harmed, when we find crimes have been committed against us, those criminals cannot have refuge under cover of making believe it was for national security