The purpose of the FISA is to allow the interception of foreign terrorist communication that occurs because 82% of all internet traffic passes through US company owned infrastructure. When this is combined with fax, satellite phone and cell phone transmission systems, the vast majority of this foreign traffic occures through the US. Who ownes this hardware? It is a combination of US owned and operated telecoms and the federal government who co-operates the satellites and downlinks. As is stands without FISA, we can not listen in on a terrorist call even if it starts and ends in a foreign country despite the fact that it is using our equipment. Additionally, a federal warrent is required for each tap.

To understand FISA it is necessary to understand Echelon which was inadvertantly recognized by a junior congressman. Through this program we were able to listen in on Osamas cell phone which received its signal though a US operated satelite. Without FISA we could not intecept his calls. This interception is made more difficult when you want a judge to issue a warrant. I can get on the internet, send emails to hundreds of sites with different addresses and names in seconds. Further, I can do this in a cave in Pakistan and send my messages to my cell in Jakarta, all though the US. Can a judge get the warrants that fast?

If we don't like FISA, then we need to fix it through the legislature. Fix it so we can get the information we need with all the inherent problems that are out there. Terrorists are using our telecoms systems to their advantage, to just say we want to sue the telecoms does nothing but creates more problems. This is like suing Smith and Wesson because MS13 shot someone in East LA. Be part of the solution, not the problem.

What is hoped to be accomplished with the lawsuits? Attorneys make money, terrorists and criminals use our internet to coordinate our attacks and we take away one of best tools to fight the war. (Echelon) If those who want to sue the telecoms think that they are doing it for a higher purpose, it is essential to determine whose higher purpose it will help. Saboteurs in the war on terror wear three piece suits and file motions. Al Qaeda does not need to attack the US, attorneys are already doing it for them.

throckmorton, you totally miss the point or refuse to see it. as you ask what is to be accomplished from the lawsuits, let's also ask what is to be accomplished from not holding lawbreaking corporations accountable for spying on the public, when there was already a process in place that allowed them to help the government legally. what is to be accomplished by allowing the executive branch to step above the law and then reach back and pull its corporate friends over with them? those corporations, and their attorneys, make money, the government abuses private citizens' rights to privacy, and we weaken one of the best tools to protect Americans' rights--the constitution's protections.

let's be clear: getting a FISA warrant is a cakewalk. literally 99% of requests for warrants were granted in the years since FISA was in place, according to congressman dodd and a washington post investigation. there are even procedures that allow the gov to get an emergency warrant when timing is an issue.

that said, you're right: problems with fisa should be fixed through legislation, not by trampling upon that legislation or ignoring it all together and then seeking a get out of jail free card for your accomplices, on the basis of arguments to which only a select few people are privy. this type of abuse fuels distrust in our government and loss of faith in the rule of law. that is why an open legislative process, driven by the facts surrounding a social problem and the legal/ethical concerns involved in solving it, not based upon fearmongering and secrecy, is the best way to make changes to the way government wiretapping works.

Your right, I really don't understand. If a terrorist uses the internet from Pakistan to contact a terror cell in London using hardware operated by a US company and Co-owned by the NSA, and the signal is intercepted we should sue the telecom company? If the foreign terrorist logs on and uses the moniker Akbar and we trace the IP address to Jakarta we should sue the telecom company? These are the issues that FISA is trying to address. How are the lawsuits going to help? More importantly what are they going to harm?

As to the warrents obtained easily. Again I suggest that you look at project Echelon. I can not go to a court and get a warrent for 50 thousand IP addressess that are coming from 30 countries. By the time I have the warrant, the signal is lost.

"If a terrorist uses the internet from Pakistan to contact a terror cell in London... These are the issues that FISA is trying to address." But Throckmorton, those are NOT the types of claims at issue in the suspended lawsuits against the telecoms, lawsuits filed by American citizens whose private international communications, initiated domestically, were wiretapped without warrants. (Click Here)

The problem with the warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens is that the US Constitution protects us against this, and FISA provides a legal way for telecommunications companies and government intelligence agencies to collect important information without denying us our important legal protections. One such measure was a quick and expedient process for obtaining warrants in emergency situations. And if government intelligence agencies and Bush had problems with the way that emergency procedure worked, they've had several years to make that known, and have been silent in this critique until regular Americans who were spied upon decided to actually hold corporations accountable for breaking the law.

Please also note that some telecommunications companies oppose retroactive immunity because it muddles the law and makes them much more vulnerable to governmental pressure to do spying that might be illegal. Without the protection and certainty of a clear law, with clear limits on what corporations and the government can and can not do, we are only rolling down a slippery slope toward a day when the President can make the law at breakfast, break it at lunch, and blame it all on "terror" by evening.

I still don't understand why it is necessary to sue the telecoms. In the article you cited it is clear that if the foreign intell picked up calls that originated or where directed to a person in the United States the Justice Department obtained the appropriate warrants.

The article tries to skirt around the details of Echelon. This is a system of supercomputers that search through the billions of emails, internet communicatons, cell phones, telephones signals and faxes that pass though US owned telecom hardware. The computers sift through all the information looking for targeted phrases or message shiftings that cold be possibly related to terrorist or terror financing. (Echelon also searches all financial transactions). When a target is found it is traced to its source and how it is propigated. Since billions and billions of signals are searched it is impossible to get a warrant for each.

Now if Echelon finds a trace here in the US (Domestic) is it from a person or is it yet another use of US owned hardware? IF it is a person, is it a citizen? Your article states that in this case, the warrants were obtained.

Now why again sue the telecoms? Are they doing the spying? No, the Federal Government is. How does the Federal Government get the information? The Federal Government is part owner of a of the hardware that carries the signals. No Al Gore did not invent the internet, it was the DOD.

If we decide that the courts are do make laws by suits, why not sue who is doing the spying like the NSA? Also, I don't think the President can make laws, I though that was the job of Congress. If we want a law changed, isn't it also up to congress?

I still don't understand why it is necessary to sue the telecoms. In the article you cited it is clear that if the foreign intell picked up calls that originated or where directed to a person in the United States the Justice Department obtained the appropriate warrants.

The article tries to skirt around the details of Echelon. This is a system of supercomputers that search through the billions of emails, internet communicatons, cell phones, telephones signals and faxes that pass though US owned telecom hardware. The computers sift through all the information looking for targeted phrases or message shiftings that cold be possibly related to terrorist or terror financing. (Echelon also searches all financial transactions). When a target is found it is traced to its source and how it is propigated. Since billions and billions of signals are searched it is impossible to get a warrant for each.

Now if Echelon finds a trace here in the US (Domestic) is it from a person or is it yet another use of US owned hardware? IF it is a person, is it a citizen? Your article states that in this case, the warrants were obtained.

Now why again sue the telecoms? Are they doing the spying? No, the Federal Government is. How does the Federal Government get the information? The Federal Government is part owner of a of the hardware that carries the signals. No Al Gore did not invent the internet, it was the DOD.

If we decide that the courts are to make laws by suits, why not sue who is doing the spying like the NSA? Also, I don't think the President can make laws, I though that was the job of Congress. If we want a law changed, isn't it also up to congress?

I still don't understand why it is necessary to sue the telecoms. In the article you cited it is clear that if the foreign intell picked up calls that originated or where directed to a person in the United States the Justice Department obtained the appropriate warrants.

The article tries to skirt around the details of Echelon. This is a system of supercomputers that search through the billions of emails, internet communicatons, cell phones, telephones signals and faxes that pass though US owned telecom hardware. The computers sift through all the information looking for targeted phrases or message shiftings that cold be possibly related to terrorist or terror financing. (Echelon also searches all financial transactions). When a target is found it is traced to its source and how it is propigated. Since billions and billions of signals are searched it is impossible to get a warrant for each.

Now if Echelon finds a trace here in the US (Domestic) is it from a person or is it yet another use of US owned hardware? IF it is a person, is it a citizen? Your article states that in this case, the warrants were obtained.

Now why again sue the telecoms? Are they doing the spying? No, the Federal Government is. How does the Federal Government get the information? The Federal Government is part owner of a of the hardware that carries the signals. No Al Gore did not invent the internet, it was the DOD.

If we decide that the courts are to make laws by suits, why not sue who is doing the spying like the NSA? Also, I don't think the President can make laws, I though that was the job of Congress. If we want a law changed, isn't it also up to congress?