-
"The Senate on Tuesday approved new rules for government eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails, giving the White House much of the latitude it wanted and granting legal immunity to telecommunications companies that helped in the snooping after the Sept
-
The Washington Post has a good backgrounder on the whole abominable situation.
-
"The Senate choose to put the politics of fear ahead of the rights of Americans. It could have provided intelligence agencies the tools they need without sacrificing civil liberties. At the end of the day, the judiciary, not spy agencies acting alone, sho
-
"White House Press Secretary Dana Perino admitted that the defendants in the lawsuits against telecommunications carriers "certainly helped us," marking the first time the White House has admitted that the particular companies alleged to have participated
-
"The conference between the House in the Senate is the one, last chance to defeat the administration's outrageous push for telecom immunity, and the chambers are poised to complete the process by this weekend."
-
"Today, the Senate passed a terrible surveillance bill granting immunity to lawbreaking telecoms, putting the House and Senate at the brink of a face-off. Show your support for the House to keep telecom immunity out of the final bill!"
-
"This debate is not about whether the United States is going to spy on Al Qaeda, it is about whether it is going to destroy its democratic principles in doing so."
-
"The shamelessly fear-mongering claim that telecoms won't "cooperate" in the future without amnesty...is nothing more than the standard authoritarian tactic of warning that unless we succumb to Bush's demands...we're all going to die at the hands of the T
So the message we are sending to the Chinese is they can't have Yahoo respond to criminal investigation and put people like Shi Tao in Jail, but it's okay for AT&T to respond to criminal investigation and put people like Chi Mak in jail.
Posted by: Charles Liu | February 14, 2008 at 06:17 AM
Naw, apples & oranges, Chuck.
Posted by: Clarke | February 14, 2008 at 09:43 AM
Please back up your claim with some facts, clark.
Chi Mak was wrongfully convicted as the suppose "state secret" is in reality public domain information from IEEE.org, freely available for download in China.
Posted by: Charles Liu | February 14, 2008 at 04:01 PM