House Passes Wiretap Bill Shielding Telecoms
Law would protect telecommunication firms from privacy lawsuits for cooperating with administration's warrantless spying program.
Paul Kane
If you communicate with anyone in another country, they can read your email if this bill passes in the Senate. Thanks to Nancy Pelosi, it passed the House. They can in fact read my email just because I help people all over the world with PTSD. I helped some in Canada. I helped some in Australia. I helped some in the UK and in Scotland. A psychologist in Argentina emailed me. A professor in the Netherlands emailed me. What now? Are all of these people going to have their emails read too? What about the rest of the people who email me here in the US wanting help? Will they have their emails read too just because other people email me? Where does this end? Does it end?
People say "I don't care if they read my email. I've done nothing wrong." but that's pretty selfish considering the people who do email them may not want their emails read. The rules for being able to wiretap have been fine as they were. The White House would be able to do whatever they wanted and then seek a court order after but they would have to prove a reason to do it. What's wrong with that? What would that tie up except for the fact that they would need to be able to show a reason they felt the need to do it? Nothing! Start using your brains people. If this passes, no one has any privacy. Not even people dealing with PTSD. Think about the National organizations who also happen to be International. Their emails won't be safe either. What about soldiers overseas emailing their families? Is there anything to protect their privacy?
Senior Chaplain Kathie Costos
Namguardianangel@aol.com
http://www.namguardianangel.org/
http://www.woundedtimes.blogspot.com/
"The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation."
- George Washington
Agency says 7,000 sites at 'high risk' of terrorist attack
Story Highlights
Agency to notify 7,000 facilities that they are "high-risk" targets for terrorist attacks
List includes chemical plants, hospitals, colleges, food processing sites
Facilities evaluated for proximity to population centers, volatility of chemicals on site
Sites have 90 days to assess vulnerabilities; list won't be released to public
Next Article in U.S. »
From Mike M. Ahlers
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- More than 7,000 facilities, from chemical plants to colleges, have been designated "high-risk" sites for potential terrorist attacks, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
I wonder if this is why they did it. Did Bush put fear into them again?
Next week, the department will send letters to the facilities notifying them that they present the highest potential consequences in the event of a successful terrorist attack, said Robert Stephan, the agency's assistant secretary for infrastructure protection.
The facilities include chemical plants, hospitals, colleges and universities, oil and natural gas production and storage sites, and food and agricultural processing and distribution centers, Stephan said.
The names of the sites will not be released to the public.
The department compiled the list after reviewing information submitted by 32,000 facilities nationwide. It considered factors such as proximity to population centers, the volatility of chemicals on site and how the chemicals are stored and handled.
Experts long have worried that terrorists could attack chemical facilities near large cities, in essence turning them into large bombs. Experts say it is a hallmark of al Qaeda, in particular, to leverage a target nation's technological or industrial strength against it, as terrorists did in the September 11 terrorist attacks
go here for more
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/20/terror.risk/index.html
