Subject: RE: BS: Where's the thread on Homeland Security?
From:
katlaughing
Date: 19 Nov 02 - 06:50 PM
And now this, the Senate has rejected an attempt by Democrats to remove an amendment from the Homeland Security bill which offers protecttion for pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits over the side effects of vaccines they create. The protections will be retroactive to lawsuits already in court.
The bill also includes liability protections for makers of airport screening equipment and airport security firms and weakens an amendment offered by the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., that would have barred companies that set up offshore tax havens from getting federal homeland security contracts.
Supposedly, Lott has promised they will be removed from the final version. Joh McCain voted with Democrats in an effort to dump this amendment. Ted Kennedy, IMO, needs to get his ass home; he was at a fashion tribute to Jackie Kennedy in Europe!
And, regarding internet and email privacy:
The bill also calls for greater legal protections for Internet providers, such as AOL or Microsoft Network, for giving government officials information about their subscribers during computer emergencies. If companies believe "in good faith" that there is risk of death or injury to any person, they can turn over details about customers - even their e-mails - without a warrant, under the bill.
Civil liberties groups, such as the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, contend the bill's language lets Internet providers reveal subscriber information to any government officials, not just investigators. Traditionally, U.S. companies have refused to act as agents for prosecutors without court-approved warrants, said Chris Hoofnagle, EPIC's legislative counsel.
The legislation requires government officials who obtain such information to report details to Attorney General John Ashcroft within 90 days. It also requires Ashcroft to report results to Congress after one year.
Another part of the Homeland Security bill gives U.S. authorities new power to trace e-mails and other Internet traffic during cyber attacks without first obtaining even perfunctory court approval. That could happen only during "an immediate threat to national security," or an attack against a "protected computer." Prosecutors would need to obtain a judge's approval within 48 hours.
Experts have noted that U.S. law considers as "protected" nearly any computer logged onto the Internet. And civil liberties groups have frequently complained that obtaining permission from a judge is too easy for this type of e-mail tracing; if an investigator merely attests that the information is relevant to an ongoing investigation, a judge cannot deny the request.
|
sj
