Goodbye, 4th Amendment

[alfaphlex]

ACLU Announces Legal Challenge To Follow President’s Signature

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312, media@dcaclu.org or
(212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

WASHINGTON – Today, in a blatant assault upon civil liberties and the right to privacy, the Senate passed an unconstitutional domestic spying bill that violates the Fourth Amendment and eliminates any meaningful role for judicial oversight of government surveillance. The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 was approved by a vote of 69 to 28 and is expected to be signed into law by President Bush shortly. This bill essentially legalizes the president’s unlawful warrantless wiretapping program revealed in December 2005 by the New York Times.

“Once again, Congress blinked and succumbed to the president’s fear-mongering. With today’s vote, the government has been given a green light to expand its power to spy on Americans and run roughshod over the Constitution,” said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “This legislation will give the government unfettered and unchecked access to innocent Americans’ international communications without a warrant. This is not only unconstitutional, but absolutely un-American.”

The FISA Amendments Act nearly eviscerates oversight of government surveillance by allowing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to review only general procedures for spying rather than individual warrants. The FISC will not be told any specifics about who will actually be wiretapped, thereby undercutting any meaningful role for the court and violating the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

The bill further trivializes court review by authorizing the government to continue a surveillance program even after the government’s general spying procedures are found insufficient or unconstitutional by the FISC. The government has the authority to wiretap through the entire appeals process, and then keep and use whatever information was gathered in the meantime. A provision touted as a major “concession” by proponents of the bill calls for investigations by the inspectors general of four agencies overseeing spying activities. But members of Congress who do not sit on the Judiciary or Intelligence committees will not be guaranteed access to the agencies’ reports.

The bill essentially grants absolute retroactive immunity to telecommunication companies that facilitated the president’s warrantless wiretapping program over the last seven years by ensuring the dismissal of court cases pending against those companies. The test for the companies’ right to immunity is not whether the government certifications they acted on were actually legal – only whether they were issued. Because it is public knowledge that certifications were issued, all of the pending cases will be summarily dismissed. This means Americans may never learn the truth about what the companies and the government did with our private communications.

“With one vote, Congress has strengthened the executive branch, weakened the judiciary and rendered itself irrelevant,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “This bill – soon to be law – is a constitutional nightmare. Americans should know that if this legislation is enacted and upheld, what they say on international phone calls or emails is no longer private. The government can listen in without having a specific reason to do so. Our rights as Americans have been curtailed and our privacy can no longer be assumed.”

In advance of the president’s signature, the ACLU announced its plan to challenge the new law in court.

“This fight is not over. We intend to challenge this bill as soon as President Bush signs it into law,” said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. “The bill allows the warrantless and dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international telephone and email communications. It plainly violates the Fourth Amendment.”

For more information, go to:
www.aclu.org/fisa

source (http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/35928prs20080709.html)

I honestly don't know what to say anymore. Someone please explain to me what 'good' reason(s) the Senate had for passing this? I hope it's not just "terrorism" because if that's the case, then any/everything the government does is justifiable. What allowable limit can the govt. reach to protect us from "terrorism".

Discuss (please keep religion out).

[DaDesiCanadian]

The real question is, how will this news affect your wife's booty?

[Adam Warlock]

The real question is, how will this news affect your wife's booty?

Now we can all tap it without consent!:party:

[maxx]

Now we can all tap it without consent!:party:

hey oooohhhhh!!!

[Satomiblood]

What's an amendment? Is that some type of candy?

[Pablo_the_Mex]

I don't agree with such legislation, but at least the US gives us the common courtesy to let us know that they are in fact spying on us. Any other shitty country would just do it, break into our homes, and jack our electronics.

[Gumbercules]

well this sucks

[Seijuro-HIko]

Say good by to our freedoms. All the government has to do is say *Terrorism...* and they can do whatever they want...

[pherai]

I don't agree with such legislation, but at least the US gives us the common courtesy to let us know that they are in fact spying on us. Any other shitty country would just do it, break into our homes, and jack our electronics.

Who says they aren't doing worse and not letting us know about it?

The ACLU can be wacky at times, but other times its spot on. Give em hell!

[fishjie]

wow we got owned

[Satomiblood]

Hey guys, what's the terror alert color now?

[Zal]

Hey guys, what's the terror alert color now?

ITS GONE PLAID!

but in all honesty i can't believe this shit

fuck you congress, you fucking pussy liberals!

they're all fucking woried about not seeming tough on terror

THE ERA OF TERRORISM IS FUCKING OVER

sometimes i hate my country

but i'm gonna stick it out trying to make it better!

[Bernard]

source (http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/35928prs20080709.html)

I honestly don't know what to say anymore. Someone please explain to me what 'good' reason(s) the Senate had for passing this? I hope it's not just "terrorism" because if that's the case, then any/everything the government does is justifiable. What allowable limit can the govt. reach to protect us from "terrorism".

Discuss (please keep religion out).


NOES!!!! THE ACLU AND TRIAL LAWYERS CAN"T SUE TO MAKE BIG $$$$$ HOW WILL WE EVER SURVIVE!!!!!!11111!!ONE!11!ELEVENTY!!

I have no problem with the governemnt doing this. I myself do not recvieve or place calls to known terrorist. I also do not believe someone bouncing their call from Derkastan to Germany through the US counts as a domestic call. The only Fear Mongering is comeing from the left whose trial lawyer cash cow is not going to be able to sue telephone companies for billions of dollars.

[EveryFlowerFlow]

wait what's all the fuss about? according to some clever folks in the other thread, the government is doing nothing wrong. this law is for our own good. never question authority, that only helps the terrorists.

^edit: see, there's one of them right now.

[Satomiblood]

All I know is that at Memphis International Airport, the alert is always set at orange with reminders every 15 minutes or so.

[Zal]

NOES!!!! THE ACLU AND TRIAL LAWYERS CAN"T SUE TO MAKE BIG $$$$$ HOW WILL WE EVER SURVIVE!!!!!!11111!!ONE!11!ELEVENTY!!

I have no problem with the governemnt doing this. I myself do not recvieve or place calls to known terrorist. I also do not believe someone bouncing their call from Derkastan to Germany through the US counts as a domestic call. The only Fear Mongering is comeing from the left whose trial lawyer cash cow is not going to be able to sue telephone companies for billions of dollars.

ok...

do you even fucking know how the ACLU makes money?
it sure as fuck isn't made trying to get unconstitutional laws changed

those who'd take security over liberty deserve neither...

i'd rather rather go down from a terrorist attack than live under a facist state.

cause here's a simple fact, i'm not gonna die from terrorist attack.

[HoneyBBQGrundle]

Say good by to our freedoms. All the government has to do is say *Terrorism...* and they can do whatever they want...

People have known this forever, there are books about this very subject that are required reading in most high schools, and yet it will still happen. It's outrageous, but not so much so when you really take a look at human history. We're just not that smart.

[Rioting Soul]

Anybody up for a game of Sedition? First person to get DHLS/FBI/SS/CIA to knock on their door loses.

[RoboGem II]

Amendments are more like suggestions and guidelines really than something woven into the fabric of US government nowaday.

[Zal]

Anybody up for a game of Sedition? First person to get DHLS/FBI/SS/CIA to knock on their door loses.
we're gonna get V&

[Dragonsend]

This isn't suprising. Most city's have tons of cameras everywhere nowdays anyway. So big brother is always watching. It isn't that much of a shock they want to listen to. I don't agree with it either but it is the way of the world now.

[King9999]

The terrorists win?

[Dhalsimowns]

And then in the year 2017, a mob descended on the Bush ranch in bloody terror...

I'll be in front.

[Zal]

This isn't suprising. Most city's have tons of cameras everywhere nowdays anyway. So big brother is always watching. It isn't that much of a shock they want to listen to. I don't agree with it either but it is the way of the world now.

sure they can watch
but are they really paying attention?

The terrorists win?
they already have, they already have...

[Luciano Leone]

source (http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/35928prs20080709.html)

I honestly don't know what to say anymore. Someone please explain to me what 'good' reason(s) the Senate had for passing this? I hope it's not just "terrorism" because if that's the case, then any/everything the government does is justifiable. What allowable limit can the govt. reach to protect us from "terrorism".

Discuss (please keep religion out).

Thanks for voting democrats into congress everyone

[Phoenix Wright]

Obama voted for this.

Change? Bullshit.

[DarthTrey]

Hey guys, what's the terror alert color now?

It's always orange, I don't remember the last time it changed.

fucking terror alert color.... so fucking stupid....

[ocelot_357]

"OMG, we have a code black, I repeat a code black!"
"Ruckus what the hell is a code black?"
"We got ourselves a group of hungry looking niggras, hanging outside the gate!":amazed:

[MrQuotes]

NOES!!!! THE ACLU AND TRIAL LAWYERS CAN"T SUE TO MAKE BIG $$$$$ HOW WILL WE EVER SURVIVE!!!!!!11111!!ONE!11!ELEVENTY!!

I have no problem with the governemnt doing this. I myself do not recvieve or place calls to known terrorist. I also do not believe someone bouncing their call from Derkastan to Germany through the US counts as a domestic call. The only Fear Mongering is comeing from the left whose trial lawyer cash cow is not going to be able to sue telephone companies for billions of dollars.

you do realize that shit like this was how they nailed spitzer on the prostitutes thing? i dont think he was placing calls to terrorists either but they were like, "yea we got this law so this counts too," and got away with it.

and if obama voted for this to get passed, then yea....
democratic party needs to die

[Zal]

Obama voted for this.

Change? Bullshit.

i've been for him this whole time, and then he went and did this shit

i don't know if i'm voting anymore

edit: my rep voted nay on this shit, so i guess voting dem was the right way to go!

[HeaT]

Say good by to our freedoms. All the government has to do is say *Terrorism...* and they can do whatever they want...

the illusion of freedoms...

im outi

Roberth

[AzN_Skater]

Slippery slope to big brother.

[Adam Warlock]

Obama voted for this.

Change? Bullshit.

Why are you here? You should be saving us! HELP!

[angryliberal]

does irony escape the democrat bashers in here?

number of dems voting for the bill: 105 - against: 128
number of republicans voting for the bill: 188 - against: 1

edit: source - http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml
yeah, blame the democrats for this...

[Sephiroth_KMFDM]

Fuck Obamba, do you really think he gives 2 shits about us.. no.

If he did he would have voted against this shit.

[Satomiblood]

:u: Lol.

[Alex]

In Obamas defence, he only said there would be change, he never specified what kind of change, and if it would be for the better

[suleman]

Maybe the terrorists will dislike us less when we give up our 'freedom'? it's why they hate us, you know...

[Shiro887]

wow, looks like it's time for me to make plans to move to Canada =/

Also, Obama is pissing me off. I was thinking of voting for him since Ron Paul didn't make it, but now he's saying some bullshit that EVERYONE needs to learn Spanish. Wtf is he running for president of Mexico?? Seems he cares more for the illegal immigrants than the actual U.S. citizens. Now everyone is debating whether or not English should be the official language of the United States.

[Doctor Shaft]

does irony escape the democrat bashers in here?

number of dems voting for the bill: 105 - against: 128
number of republicans voting for the bill: 188 - against: 1

edit: source - http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml
yeah, blame the democrats for this...

Thanks for the list. You know, you're right, a majority of Dems didn't vote for it... however, the most OUTSPOKEN sure did. It's hilarious. Jack Murtha voted yes? Mr. "Bush is Evil" himself? Nancy Pelosi. Oh, she's right there on the list, saying "Yea."

Face it, while a good number of Dems voted against it, the ones that are in charge, RUNNING the party itself, are busy adjusting their many, many faces. It's hilarious to watch.

And anyone who just saw this thread and replied with the standard, canned, and terribly misinformed "Let's line up at Bush's ranch and kill him now for this bill" better be prepared to stab their heroes in the Congress as well...

And then correct themselves because Bush doesn't vote on laws like this... your congressmen do.

Anyway, you can make a point about how our "liberty" is being taken away yet again, but truth be told, the government has been surveilling you since your infancy. This just makes the newest forms more legitimate. If you think any super-power government was ever going to leave it's population completely unsupervised, you're kidding yourself.

and I'll get in line with that other poster in saying: well, I haven't been making too many illegal calls to destroy or blow something up lately, so I suppose I have nothing to worry about.

Go Team Red- er Blue - er... oh wait, none of them are going to save us or stop any war.

[ThePurpleBunny]

In Obamas defence, he only said there would be change, he never specified what kind of change, and if it would be for the better

In other words, he said it like a politician.

[Humbag]

Yay my life will be different!!! (not)

[Rik]

LMAO, you guys in the state's just got owned.....or should I say NWO'ed lol. It's a good thing Canada is still a free country, life sure is sweet.

[DietSoap]

LAWL WHUPS :clown:

Okay seriously, what the fuck... I bet they'll be catchin a lot more drug dealers among other things now by coincidence.


Maybe the terrorists will dislike us less when we give up our 'freedom'? it's why they hate us, you know... :rofl:

[altergenesis]

Oh, I'm proud to be a Canadian....

You know the song.

No, seriously. This is both funny and wack.

[gamingsage]

It probably won't take long before we are being spied on with Surveillance Camera's everywhere. So everybody should not get their panties in a bunch. The wire-tapping policy I can see why they are doing it. It would protect us honest people from serious harm that could take place from inside the US. Nowhere is safe in this world anymore is what they're trying to say.

The question is though... where do they get enough $$$ to monitor all of these calls??? All of these people that monitor the calls in the U.S. has got to get paid. This is just a BS job for the U.S. to steal more and more money from it's citizens. We are going to have to pay more taxes because of the govt monitoring us.

There isn't a place in the Constitution that says we have the right to be safe.

[FurryCurry]

Amendments are more like suggestions and guidelines really than something woven into the fabric of US government nowaday.

and that's positively disgusting.

Even back when I was learning about US History in middle school I would think to myself "Man, the Judiciary really doesn't have that much power. The other two are going to run them ragged."

[pherai]

The wire-tapping policy I can see why they are doing it. It would protect us honest people from serious harm that could take place from inside the US.

Are you interested in Dinosaur repellent? It has worked wonders for me.

[Se7in]

The question is though... where do they get enough $$$ to monitor all of these calls??? All of these people that monitor the calls in the U.S. has got to get paid. This is just a BS job for the U.S. to steal more and more money from it's citizens. We are going to have to pay more taxes because of the govt monitoring us.

I doubt it'll actually be that major of a surveillance. This act basically gives the government the right to monitor any call regardless of jurisdiction or reasonable cause. Believe it or not, they don't want to listen to you and your girlfriend's conversations. This won't lead to some major monitoring of all telecommunications; that'd be futile, unrealistic, and a waste of resources.

Come to think of it, that sounds exactly like our government.

Hm...

[angryliberal]

Go Team Red- er Blue - er... oh wait, none of them are going to save us or stop any war.

i agree with this the most...

[UltraDavid]

Any other shitty country would just do it, break into our homes, and jack our electronics.
And that's exactly what our government was doing, conducting it very secretly. It wasn't until a random AT&T employee happened to stumble across a secret room in his building that had splitters going to NSA headquarters recording all available telephone and internet traffic data that anyone outside the government knew. That guy then secretly compiled as much information as he could and went to the LA Times with it. The editor of the LA Times was then contacted by the NSA, and somehow the story was dropped completely and never published. Finally the guy went to the NY Times, which did publish the story. When the Times published the story, the government initially completely denied it, until the evidence was just too obvious for it continue to do so. It's not like the government just decided to be nice and let all of us know they were spying on us. How long was this going on and what was the extent of the spying? We'll never know, because the lawsuits that were pending to find exactly that kind of stuff out are now all gone.

As for Bernard, know that while the update to FISA just passed allows for surveillance of telephone calls between foreign countries that happen to be routed through the US (the previous law already let the government surveil communications between the US and foreign countries), it also blatantly allows for surveillance of people in the US calling for other people in the US. And the illegal spying program that was going on was not about spying on people outside of the US, it was about taking in literally all the available data on phone and internet communications between ordinary people like you and me. And the granting of immunity to the telecommunication companies who illegally helped the government do that means that they have no have no incentive to not help the government break the law even more egregiously in the future, since they know if they do, Congress will cover their asses for it.

Basically, the question before Congress was, "Where telecommunications companies employing professional communications attorneys were illegally asked by a runaway crazy government to perform unconstitutional searches and data seizures on American citizens and where those companies agreed and knowingly infringed upon the Constitutionally-protected rights of the American people, do the people have any redress at all?" Or even more shortly, "Do the people have ANY POWER AT ALL against wealthy corporations knowingly acting in an unconstitutional way at the unconstitutional request of a fucking batshit INSANE executive branch?"

And apparently the answer is no! Congress says "Fuck you, The People, you are worthless and have no power at all in your own country, despite the constitutional guarantees that protect your rights." And Barack Obama is right there with them, chiming in against us.

Are you interested in Dinosaur repellent? It has worked wonders for me.
Hahaha ohh man, this is too good.

Edit:
There isn't a place in the Constitution that says we have the right to be safe.
Have you graduated high school? I feel like calling up all your old history and government teachers and shoving this in their face, because they'd think twice about having passed you.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violatedWhat does this mean to you??

[Mixah]

i can't stand america anymore....

[starboy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/washington/10fisa.html?ex=1231300800&en=5698e1aaa4ebbb64&ei=5087&excamp=GGGNfisalaw&WT.srch=1&WT.mc_ev=click&WT.mc_id=GN-S-E-GG-NA-S-fisa_law

An article that isn't so blatantly one sided.

[MAGUS1234]

Well now that they passed this they can pardon all the politicians who committed felonious acts of spying on American people....yay

[Mixah]

Well now that they passed this they can pardon all the politicians who committed felonious acts of spying on American people....yay

ex-post-facto works both ways.

[Gumbercules]

I'm pretty shocked some of you don't think this is that bad at all when it's horrible

[Mixah]

I'm pretty shocked some of you don't think this is that bad at all when it's horrible

SRk doesn't care about politics typically, minus a few, hence why I don't participate in political discussions on SRK.

[mastermind]

Yo mama got no arms and bought a vest.

Wait, my bad. Wrong thread.

[Doctor Shaft]

i can't stand america anymore....

Honestly, this is a ridiculous statement to make. I know it's just an opinion, and you're allowed to have it, but it reeks of an individual who is spoiled by what he has in life... but doesn't know it.

It's okay to be spoiled. I am too. We all are. And to say we should feel guilty for being spoiled is ridiculous. You can't control that. However, when people sit there and say, "Oh, I'm tired of america, it sucks," are completely ignoring the following:

1.) Despite our poverty levels, we're still one of, if not the most, prosperous nations on the planet. At least for now.

2.) Racism still exists... and yet tremendous progress has been made.

3.) America has a lot of guilt in terms of being part of the slave trade... and yet, those who's ancestors were brought over for the wrong reasons are now living the life of opportunity along with the rest, instead of remaining in a nation that is STILL plagued with genocide, racist revolts, and religious wars.

4.) You're on the internet, posting about how you're sick of your country. God Bless America right there.

Sorry, while I'm not putting on the blinders and thinking that everything about American history is just rosy, there's no denying that from where I'm sitting, I've got it pretty darn good. And not just pretty darn good. I've got it great. China alone has had enough genocides and cultural revolutions that they're people are just happy to be seeing economic prosperity for the moment. And they're under an authoritarian government. The continent of Africa... let's not get started.

Human history is bloody and terrible. It always has been. Always will. America, comparatively speaking, even with this amendment, isn't that bad.

Oh, and whoever said Canada is "more" free.. please. I'll just hit on one point. Healthcare.

"But it's free!"

No, you're just being forced to pay for a single system that has no competition by design. But anyway, keep enjoying that extra freedom.

[ThePurpleBunny]

I'm pretty shocked some of you don't think this is that bad at all when it's horrible

I'm more shocked that people seem to be surprised.

[pherai]

Honestly, this is a ridiculous statement to make.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't honestly mean that.

[Chachi]

Looks like I gotta be more careful about how I word over-the-phone invitiations for Third Strike...

Also, I have a feeling too many people were too busy spending their stimulus checks rather than voicing their opinions to their senator and/or house rep. The congressmen are just gonna go along with the program if they don't hear from the people they're supposed to be the figurehead for...

[Mixah]

snip

There's more to it than that, and yes, I'm educated on all that you've stated in your reply, but, LIKE many others, don't take it forget granted that I speak out of ignorance (such as on MIRC when I say that I think guns are stupid and get kicked for it). I just don't feel like elaborating on things, so I make stark generalizations, and will continue to do this, as this is SRK, and doesn't actually affect my everyday life.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't honestly mean that.

I don't, or I'd have already made several attempts to move out of the country.

[UltraDavid]

Some points.
I happen to feel the same way as Mixah on this. My standard for what makes a good United States of America is not its goodness relative to Somalia but its goodness relative to what I believe a good United States of America is. And we are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy off that course, we need gps to find that course, we need a map of the constellations to find our way back to that course's solar system, even. I'm very sorry for a lot of people in this world and their crappy standard of living makes me glad I don't live where they do, but it sure doesn't make me not unhappy with the way things are currently going in my own country. That kind of complacency is extremely dangerous in a constitutional democratic republic, because if you're not constantly out there trying to keep the channels of democracy clean, you're letting them get dirty, and it should be no distraction from that duty that the channels in other countries are frickin filthy.

[Bowza]

Honestly, this is a ridiculous statement to make. I know it's just an opinion, and you're allowed to have it, but it reeks of an individual who is spoiled by what he has in life... but doesn't know it.

It's okay to be spoiled. I am too. We all are. And to say we should feel guilty for being spoiled is ridiculous. You can't control that. However, when people sit there and say, "Oh, I'm tired of america, it sucks," are completely ignoring the following:
.

Although some may disagree- America's prosperity was brought about by people acting individually or in cooperation through the market to create innovation and jobs- not by the government(although the gov't will take credit for a private individual's ideas). This country is as susceptible to authoritarian pressures as any other country- so I don't see what's wrong with people not liking the idea that we could go down that road.

[archetype]

snip

lol. I saw all of what you said on a episode of Frontline. Glad someone else knows about that whole fiasco. I was utterly shocked when I saw it.

[Mixah]

I happen to feel the same way as Mixah on this. My standard for what makes a good United States of America is not its goodness relative to Somalia but its goodness relative to what I believe a good United States of America is. And we are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy off that course, we need gps to find that course, we need a map of the constellations to find our way back to that course's solar system, even. I'm very sorry for a lot of people in this world and their crappy standard of living makes me glad I don't live where they do, but it sure doesn't make me not unhappy with the way things are currently going on in my own country. That kind of complacency is extremely dangerous in a constitutional democratic republic, because if you're not constantly out there trying to keep the channels of democracy clean, you're letting them get dirty, and it should be no distraction from that duty that the channels in other countries are frickin filthy.

THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL.

The biggest reason I can't stand the way America is, is the whole, "MORE STUFF" attitude. People tend to be self-centered, and gluttonous. I see people that have 20 cars, that make 20M a year. WHY DO YOU NEED THAT!? Other than figuring out how to get my masters, financially, I'm perfectly happy with all the material possessions that I have. Why do you need to destroy the way the world looks at ALL OF US by being gluttonous, fat, self-centered pigs? This self-centeredness completely separates people from their government, and you can't have democracy with this. If people were in tune, there would have been RIOTS about the subject of this thread starting yesterday, but alas, there were not.

If you were to ask an Ancient Greek if we have a Democracy, they'd laugh at you. We supposedly have this government that was originally based off of Greek and Roman governments with influences from people like Montesqueiu (SP?) with checks and balances, and John Locke... The constitution was meant to be changeable to fit the times of the world, BUT, it wasn't meant to be overridden.
</rant>

[fishjie]

obama voted for this?

damn

oh well, i'll probably still vote for him cause he's black and having a black president would be cool.

[MAGUS1234]

Well I hate people who don't want more stuff damn it!

[Pablo_the_Mex]

I like buying stuff.

[Mixah]

obama voted for this?

damn

oh well, i'll probably still vote for him cause he's black and having a black president would be cool.
Apparently so... I still wont vote for McCain though, so here's my vote... If nothing else, I see less evil in Obama than in McCain... Even though I'd rather Ron Paul.... :sad:

Well I hate people who don't want more stuff damn it!

:lovin:

[Bowza]

THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL.

The biggest reason I can't stand the way America is, is the whole, "MORE STUFF" attitude. People tend to be self-centered, and gluttonous. I see people that have 20 cars, that make 20M a year. WHY DO YOU NEED THAT!? Other than figuring out how to get my masters, financially, I'm perfectly happy with all the material possessions that I have. Why do you need to destroy the way the world looks at ALL OF US by being gluttonous, fat, self-centered pigs? This self-centeredness completely separates people from their government, and you can't have democracy with this. If people were in tune, there would have been RIOTS about the subject of this thread starting yesterday, but alas, there were not.
</rant>

People who want "more stuff" shouldn't be blamed for any problems- if some rich guy want 20 cars, then let him get 20 cars as long as its done legally. Complancey with government actions and buying more stuff at the store have no correlation.

[MAGUS1234]

SO has Obama actually given a reason for this vote? I'm sure it be some vague BS, but I want to see what he has to say.

[Satomiblood]

obama voted for this?

damn

oh well, i'll probably still vote for him cause he's black and having a black president would be cool.

His name is also pretty badass.

[fishjie]

i felt sorry for obama because he was going to inherit the shitfest that is george bush's legacy, and probably get blamed for it.

but then he voted for this, so i guess he supports bush's shitfest legacy. so he'll get what's comin to him.

[Pablo_the_Mex]

And that's exactly what our government was doing, conducting it very secretly. It wasn't until a random AT&T employee happened to stumble across a secret room in his building that had splitters going to NSA headquarters recording all available telephone and internet traffic data that anyone outside the government knew. That guy then secretly compiled as much information as he could and went to the LA Times with it. The editor of the LA Times was then contacted by the NSA, and somehow the story was dropped completely and never published. Finally the guy went to the NY Times, which did publish the story. When the Times published the story, the government initially completely denied it, until the evidence was just too obvious for it continue to do so. It's not like the government just decided to be nice and let all of us know they were spying on us. How long was this going on and what was the extent of the spying? We'll never know, because the lawsuits that were pending to find exactly that kind of stuff out are now all gone.


Word I know what you are talking about. It is fucked up, I remember hearing/watching that not too long ago. Tons of lawsuits were filed, and Bush proclaims it to be for the greater good which is bullshit. What sucks is that most of these concerns are well out of our reach. However for the time being it has no impact on my life. That probably comes across eerily stoic to the situation, but such is the price to pay for living in the most powerful nation in the world. I am not leaving, and never will.

[UltraDavid]

Complancey with government actions and buying more stuff at the store have no correlation.
Yeah, I agree with this.

Magus you can read his statement about it here (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/gGxsZF), but you're pretty much right, it's mostly vague, has some questionable points, and doesn't even address a lot of the issues with the bill.

Pablo, it has an effect on you, because for all either of us knows, the NSA might be reading your post or my post right now, or if you've been on the phone recently it might have tapped in, and even if it's not happening right now, the spying will only continue and might even become more pervasive. That pisses me right the crap off, it's totally and completely unacceptable to me. If you don't care, well, I guess you're in luck because right now the government doesn't plan to change its ways, but in my opinion it's really sad for the future of the country if lots of people share your feelings. I don't plan to leave either, but I am trying to do something about it.

[Bowza]

i felt sorry for obama because he was going to inherit the shitfest that is george bush's legacy, and probably get blamed for it.

but then he voted for this, so i guess he supports bush's shitfest legacy. so he'll get what's comin to him.

He considers Iran to be a "grave threat" and has not ruled out the military option and has considered economic sanctions(which only serve to hurt the average Iranian citizen). His disagreement with Iraq also seems to be more like "There should be more troops in Afghanistan" instead of "There should be NO troops in the middle east". So he seems like the same as bush to me.

[Mixah]

People who want "more stuff" shouldn't be blamed for any problems- if some rich guy want 20 cars, then let him get 20 cars as long as its done legally. Complancey with government actions and buying more stuff at the store have no correlation.

I can't stand it though, when I see somebody on TV having 20 cars and a 13 year old kid eating out of a garbage can on the corner of my Brooklyn block. I just feel that there are actual humane things that can be done with your money. Shit, if I honestly had the option to buy a Vette or a Civic and have money to give to kids (not bums who were lazy or drunks or other misc things in life, but poor kids under 16 years old), I'd do the latter. No reason to have a Vette, even though I love them, of course, if I had enough to do both, I'd do both... no reason to buy TWO VETTES...

In a country as rich as ours, there's no reason there should even be a poverty level. Is it not stupid that a corporate CEO makes enough to support 200 people, and 5K of his employees can't even make ends meet without working two or sometimes more jobs? Why is minimum wage well below the cost of living standard? The average full-time employee works 2000 hours per year... If you're making minimum wage in Pennsylvania, it's $7.25, which is $14,500/year... If rent is a G a month, you have $2,500 to spend on healthcare, food, water, and bills... GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.

I'm not necessarily blaming the consumers, but I'm blaming the overconsumption of things, especially amongst rich people. I buy stuff at stores and at WalMart... It's whatever, but it just seems like there's so much that Americans can consume, that it just makes rich people richer, and the poor people left in the dust. Why can't somebody live off of $20k per year in this country? They gotta make that gross margin...

This forum requires that you wait 330 seconds between posts. Please try again in 155 seconds.

Wait... what?

[pherai]

In a country as rich as ours, there's no reason there should even be a poverty level. Is it not stupid that a corporate CEO makes enough to support 200 people, and 5K of his employees can't even make ends meet without working two or sometimes more jobs?

Yes, because that CEO is making the investors money. Ultimately, its the investors decision if an executive is being payed too much. Some artificial pay decrease will send him packing to another company. You're arguing against the incentive inherent in capitalism. We'd be living in a much different country if people weren't allowed to work towards having huge salaries.

[thrust07]

Human history is bloody and terrible. It always has been. Always will. America, comparatively speaking, even with this amendment, isn't that bad.

You're right. It's isn't that bad... we're not executing CEO's who fail to do their job when lead paint gets into children's toys. But still, if we don't do our job to uphold higher standards for our country, it's only going downhill. \/

My standard for what makes a good United States of America is not its goodness relative to Somalia but its goodness relative to what I believe a good United States of America is. And we are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy off that course... That kind of complacency is extremely dangerous in a constitutional democratic republic, because if you're not constantly out there trying to keep the channels of democracy clean, you're letting them get dirty, and it should be no distraction from that duty that the channels in other countries are frickin filthy.

_____

The biggest reason I can't stand the way America is, is the whole, "MORE STUFF" attitude. People tend to be self-centered, and gluttonous. I see people that have 20 cars, that make 20M a year. WHY DO YOU NEED THAT!? Other than figuring out how to get my masters, financially, I'm perfectly happy with all the material possessions that I have. Why do you need to destroy the way the world looks at ALL OF US by being gluttonous, fat, self-centered pigs?
</rant>

http://www.storyofstuff.com Annie Leonard sums it up well. That shit will blow your fucking mind if you didn't know it already.

[fishjie]

go sweden

http://torrentfreak.com/swedes-massively-protest-wiretap-law-080707/

[Mixah]

Yes, because that CEO is making the investors money. Ultimately, its the investors decision if an executive is being payed too much. Some artificial pay decrease will send him packing to another company. You're arguing against the incentive inherent in capitalism. We'd be living in a much different country if people weren't allowed to work towards having huge salaries.

Oh, I know that. I have a very socialist leaning, and I'm well aware of it. I still stand by my opinion though.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/ is pretty cool. I've seen things like it in the past, but not this in-depth... *still watching* it's got a lot of interesting facts that back up a lot of my personal beliefs

[Bernard]

ok...

do you even fucking know how the ACLU makes money?
it sure as fuck isn't made trying to get unconstitutional laws changed

those who'd take security over liberty deserve neither...

i'd rather rather go down from a terrorist attack than live under a facist state.

cause here's a simple fact, i'm not gonna die from terrorist attack.

1. You do understand how the racket works? The ACLU and the trial lawyers stand to make a fat profit on lawyer and court fees by taking this to the courts.

2. How is it unreasonable to listen into someone talking to a person on the terrorist watch list from a no-no country? Better yet how is listening to someone from Iran calling Germany who happens to bounce through a relay in the US a domestic call?

3. Wow, you can parrot every fucktard since the 60's with the most overplayed Ben Franklin quote ever. Tell ya what Sparky, the Federal government long ago took away any real liberty you once had. Complaning about this is as stupid as the Romans bitching the Praetorian guard did not wear tunics to cover their swords so they could not see them.

4. Do you even understand what the word Fascist means? Do you understand the pratical application of it as a form of government? Do you know the criteria that it would take the US to go down that path? Or are you simply mouthing what some asshole who listens to green day told you.

Obama voted for this.

Change? Bullshit.

Pffft, he also co-sponsered an attachment to the housing bill that would require the setup of a national fingerprint database. They are madly spinning trying to say it is only required for people in banking and mortgage industries which of course means it will be expanded and in 10-15 years it will be everyone who has a paycheck will have to give their info up because we need to change.

you do realize that shit like this was how they nailed spitzer on the prostitutes thing? i dont think he was placing calls to terrorists either but they were like, "yea we got this law so this counts too," and got away with it.


Really, I thought he was caught up in an ongoing investigation of X prostitution ring of which he was #9 John. Of course the Washington Post and NYT must be completely lieing.

does irony escape the democrat bashers in here?

What that they voted for thier bread and butter or some voted against? I fully expected the Elephants to vote with thier Bread and Butter, and assume they buttered up the other side of the aisle enough to cause some defections.

LMAO, you guys in the state's just got owned.....or should I say NWO'ed lol. It's a good thing Canada is still a free country, life sure is sweet.

Ha, Canadians canot even make fun of Muslims without going in front of a Human Rights Tribunal that can make summary judgement outside the law. Yeah, go Canukistan!


As for Bernard, know that while the update to FISA just passed allows for surveillance of telephone calls between foreign countries that happen to be routed through the US (the previous law already let the government surveil communications between the US and foreign countries), it also blatantly allows for surveillance of people in the US calling for other people in the US. And the illegal spying program that was going on was not about spying on people outside of the US, it was about taking in literally all the available data on phone and internet communications between ordinary people like you and me. And the granting of immunity to the telecommunication companies who illegally helped the government do that means that they have no have no incentive to not help the government break the law even more egregiously in the future, since they know if they do, Congress will cover their asses for it.

Please provide the actual wording of this, and also the restrictions. Please also explain to SRK that a warrant still has to be given after thefacto. Unless there was some major change which you would need to point out in the exact bill and practical application in the real world.

[Bowza]

I can't stand it though, when I see somebody on TV having 20 cars and a 13 year old kid eating out of a garbage can on the corner of my Brooklyn block. I just feel that there are actual humane things that can be done with your money. Shit, if I honestly had the option to buy a Vette or a Civic and have money to give to kids (not bums who were lazy or drunks or other misc things in life, but poor kids under 16 years old), I'd do the latter. No reason to have a Vette, even though I love them, of course, if I had enough to do both, I'd do both... no reason to buy TWO VETTES...

Well then you should convince people to start giving more money to charity- either that or try to somehow get government to lower taxes- since if people had more money they would be able to donate more of it. Or you can try to strike it rich yourself and then distribute it the way you want.

In a country as rich as ours, there's no reason there should even be a poverty level. Is it not stupid that a corporate CEO makes enough to support 200 people, and 5K of his employees can't even make ends meet without working two or sometimes more jobs? Why is minimum wage well below the cost of living standard? The average full-time employee works 2000 hours per year... If you're making minimum wage in Pennsylvania, it's $7.25, which is $14,500/year... If rent is a G a month, you have $2,500 to spend on healthcare, food, water, and bills... GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE.

Well you have to ask why is the cost of living going higher and higher it has nothing to do with the fact that the CEO is making a lot of money- but because of government actions that have devalued our currency, regulations of all kinds that make it too expensive for most people to start a new business(and impossible to compete with another business), and high taxes that erode people's income.

This is a big argument but what minimum wage does in the end is cause unemployment- because not every business is able to afford it. If the cost of living is rising- the solution isn't to increase the minimum wage(because if that's all it took, why not make the minimum wage $100/hr?), its to see why the cost of living is going up and why the dollars of yesterday are not worth as much as the dollar of today. Monetary policy, government spending, and many rules and regulations in the market have nearly EVERYTHING to do with this.

I'm not necessarily blaming the consumers, but I'm blaming the overconsumption of things, especially amongst rich people. I buy stuff at stores and at WalMart... It's whatever, but it just seems like there's so much that Americans can consume, that it just makes rich people richer, and the poor people left in the dust. Why can't somebody live off of $20k per year in this country? They gotta make that gross margin...


There IS a problem with people's savings being eroded and being told that "Consumption is what drives the economy! So go buy a Flat screen TV to help America!". Its a faulty idea thats been in this country for years(the stimulus checks are an example)- and has turned us from a producer and creditor nation, to a debtor nation that consumes with borrowed money. This is caused by the Federal Reserve printing out more money, and thus creditors having lax lending standards and giving to people who can't afford that kind of debt. So I can't exactly go and blame consumers when that type of thing wouldn't happen without the Federal Reserve in action.

[gamingsage]

Okay okay, we do have a right to be safe, as was written in the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. Sorry that I hate govt. and politics and that I don't think that it means crap. Although this situation does mean a little bit to me, as it is the beginning of a trend that will continue till we end up losing all the privileges that we had in the past. The president can work his way around any Amendment he wants anyways. This is why the next election is very important to the future of our country.

The next president will either have a really hard time and work really hard to try to get this country out of the ditch that we dug ourselves, or worst case scenario, we're gonna go on the path we have been continuing on, becoming enemies of the world, with the President "leaning back" and not anticipating/worrying what will happen to us. Basically neglecting the constitution. This could happen next year if we don't be careful of who we vote for.

I feel that this whole power of protection and security (The Constitution) is about to be overthrown by some Communist China or some other power. And I'm already living my life accepting that this has already happened, so that when it does, I will be ready and I will not have to fight against the govt in a futile effort, defending our Constitution which doesn't exist, because the people with the money make the rules and the people without money have to live by them.

/end rant /emotional fallacies
I hope gas goes up to $20 a gallon. So people have to stop driving.

[archetype]

I hope gas goes up to $20 a gallon. So people have to stop driving.

:confused: I'll assume your joking.

[Mixah]

snip.The truth

as far as helping poor kids, i do my share, but i don't even bother telling people. I don't do it to be seen as some sort of "ghetto hero" or anything. I do it because it makes me feel good about my day, so I volunteer when I can and do my share... I'm not doing it to look like a better human being.

By the way, thanks Ocelot for negging me. You're my hero and I want to slap myself in the face with your penis for writing such a hideous post. This is America and the first amendment doesn't matter.

[gamingsage]

Okay i didn't mean $20, I meant $100. That might stop everybody (from needlessly driving).

[Spirit Juice]

It's disappointing that Obama voted for this, but everyone and their dog knows that McCain would have voted for this too if he was in the Senate. :\

To be honest, I really don't see it as THAT big of a deal, but it's still an issue due to princeaple. It's not like the common person has to worry about this since the common person isn't a terrorist or planning to assassinate the presi

[thrust07]

go sweden

http://torrentfreak.com/swedes-massively-protest-wiretap-law-080707/

This is should be very interesting to those who don't mind the govt listening in/reading their emails/etc.

If Google (yes, fucking google) had to move servers to protect their interests because of the listening govt, what does that mean for OUR businesses? Any company secrets aren't secrets any more, and that information is what makes us money.

Sure, a lot of you SRKers are saying "well, shit, I don't have a business". Well, then, are you willing to throw away the opportunity to make that money? Do you still really believe that govt listening is harmless? Even if they say that it's only for "stopping terrorism" what's to stop them from using it for different means? Hasn't stopped them in the past... /rant

[UltraDavid]

Please provide the actual wording of this, and also the restrictions. Please also explain to SRK that a warrant still has to be given after thefacto. Unless there was some major change which you would need to point out in the exact bill and practical application in the real world.
Heh, well, I've dealt with trolls and uninformed ideologues before, so I'm pretty sure you didn't intend me to be able to do this, but... sure!

Here's the original law (http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/50C36.txt), and here are the changes (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:4:./temp/~c110lvBndb::) to it (unfortunately there isn't a compiled version of the whole new thing up on the government's site yet, it's too recent). You can go through the whole thing and see the changes, if you'd like. If you don't want to, it's cool, here's some baby food for ya:


(e)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, the Attorney General may authorize the emergency employment of a physical search if the Attorney General--
(A) reasonably determines that an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of a physical search to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing such physical search can with due diligence be obtained;
(B) reasonably determines that the factual basis for issuance of an order under this title to approve such physical search exists;
(C) informs, either personally or through a designee, a judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ an emergency physical search; and
(D) makes an application in accordance with this title to a judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as soon as practicable, but not more than 7 days after the Attorney General authorizes such physical search.
So here are some points. First, note that the standard is "reasonably determines." This kind of standard is almost always upheld in court, and basically means that if you want to do something, you can do it, so all the government has to do is want to think there's an emergency situation, and all it has to do is just say that a factual basis exists for issuance. Second, note that the intelligence being obtained is not information from outside the US or information obtained from foreigners, but the way seedier and more easily over-interpretable "foreign intelligence information," in other words, intelligence that the government "reasonably determines" has anything at all do with foreign information. And what counts for that? Me talking about Japanese players playing Street Fighter? Because it sure doesn't mention anything having to do with terrorists or rogue states or anything else that's bad. If you think this is a tortured reading, don't, because the government (especially under the Bush administration) is very well known for having made way, way worse ones. And lastly, as you can, see there's no requirement for a warrant, all the government needs to do is inform a FISA court within 7 days of beginning the search. This FISA court? Yeah, since its inception in 1979, it went 24 years without rejecting a single application, and through 2004 (the last year for which reports are available), it had only rejected 6 out of the more than 18,000 applications, a third of which of which came in the first 3 years of Bush's presidency alone. Who knows how many more have been applied for since? (Source (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/253334_nsaspying24.html?source=mypi), one of many places where that info is available). So this is a rubber stamp court that requires no warrants (which is facially unconstitutional) and virtually always agrees to the application, which, as you can bet, means its standard for interpreting this stuff is about as low and easy as you can get, and the government can go a week without even letting the thing know what it's doing anyway.

But! It gets even worse. From near that same section:
(3) In the absence of a judicial order approving such physical search, the physical search shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 7 days from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest. This means the government has unlimited search powers. It's already established that it doesn't need a warrant, but now even in the absence of a judicial order approving the search, it can still obtain what it's searching for with absolutely no repercussions as long as it gets it within 7 days. This part of the section doesn't even have to pass the "foreign intelligence information" part, because the search can be denied (say, if it has nothing to do with foreign intelligence) and it can still go on anyway!! And what does that mean, you guessed it, you and I can be searched for any reason at any time as long as the search only lasts a week, which is approximately infinity times longer than any phone conversation I've ever had.

But wait, it gets even worse than that! The telecom immunity portion of the bill sends a couple messages to both the corporate world and the government.

1. If the government decides not to follow these rules (as it decided in the warrantless wiretapping fiasco), it will face no repercussions.
2. If any company aids the government in breaking these rules, that company will not be punished (as happened this time with the granting of immunity to telecommunication companies)

If any of these rules is broken, Congress has set the precedent that all will be forgiven. THIS MEANS THAT NONE OF THE ABOVE RULES HAVE TO BE PAID ATTENTION TO! AT ALL! AT ALL!!!

Unnnnggggghhhhhhhhh

[gamingsage]

This increases the gap between the poor and the rich. hmmmmmmmm. Aren't we headed in the same direction as China? Rich/expensive/smart(not necessarily rich) companies will not have a problem with this. But the upcoming businesses who aren't smart enough to encrypt information will be at a loss. We will all be forced to become hard workers after this. It seems that any public company would be at the mercy of the government unless they are willing to make themselves more private. The new company must form a trust relationship with the government if they want to succeed and be lazy at the same time. Hard work can get around this trust issue that the government has with our private data.

[archetype]

its brings a smile to my face thinking that if Mark Klien never found that secret room the government would still be doing this in complete secrecy and wouldn't tell us at all.

[N-Ken]

David is there any remote possibility the ACLU case will get anywhere?

[UltraDavid]

I don't know, man. I've read about the lawsuit and I know more or less what they're suing about (to get the new bill thrown out as unconstitutional on a few grounds), but there's a host of crap I don't know about, so, I can't really say. One thing I'm not 100% clear on is how they're even going to have standing (like, whether they're the proper party) to sue because you need to show that you've been injured or will imminently be injured by something the government did, so in this case, they have to show that they have been or will be injured by the new FISA law by being unconstitutionally spied on etc. It's possible, even likely, that the people suing have been spied on or will be spied on soon, but you need to be able to actually show that, and without more info I'm not sure how they're gonna do that. Just last week a judge decided an organization couldn't sue because while it had proof that the government had spied on it, it got that proof because of accidental governmental disclosure, which, I don't know, I guess is important for some reason, and it meant that they couldn't use that disclosure to gain standing even though it was actual proof that they should have standing. That was in a different jurisdiction from the one the ACLU etc are suing in, so it's not binding or anything, but it shows you what kind of argument the government can make and even succeed with. But I certainly don't have all the details, so it might not be a problem in the first place.

Anyway, basically... I don't know whether the ACLU's case will get anywhere. Sure hope it does.

[N-Ken]

Its really getting harder and harder to find reasons to stay here, this is not what the founding fathers wanted. Whats worse though is seeing people trying to shrug this off as no big deal, this is terrifying.

[BBQ]

I think the term "complacent" fits best when describing how the general consensus(people in the US) feels about this. Though that's just my vague opinion.

[white shadow]

In Obamas defence, he only said there would be change, he never specified what kind of change, and if it would be for the better

HA HA HA.... HA HA!!! </Blackheart>

obama voted for this?

damn

oh well, i'll probably still vote for him cause he's black and having a black president would be cool.

fishjie, this is how they get the populous. They give you the option between eating shit and drinking piss and people will opt for guzzling down piss because while it's still degrading it's at least sterile. There is no real choice just strategical options.

I have reached a state of apathy regarding the fate of this country. This is all just a game, and we're not even the players, merely the dice.


I still can't get over the fact that billions of dollars are used for secret black projects that not even high ranking military men and CONGRESS aren't allowed to see. With shit like that this going on "OUR" country isn't even a Constitutional Republic let alone a democracy.

[Septimus Prime]

HOPE. :rofl:

[AzN_Skater]

LOL @ someone arguing with UltraDavid over the legal system.

[30_60_90]

Hey guys, what's the terror alert color now?

Rush- Moving Pictures.
I repeat we are at terror alert Rush- Moving Pictures.

Time to move to Canada.

[bbq sauce]

“This legislation will give the government unfettered and unchecked access to innocent Americans’ international communications without a warrant. This is not only unconstitutional, but absolutely un-American.”

aka this only affects you if you make call outside of the US.

so i could give a fuck less.

[Pablo_the_Mex]

The New World Order has arrived.

[fishjie]

I think the term "complacent" fits best when describing how the general consensus(people in the US) feels about this. Though that's just my vague opinion.

nah more like ignorant. isn't the stat that 10% of americans can't even find america on a map? people are too stupid and fat to care about the shit thats going down, let alone understand the implications.

i don't really care either. at the end of the day, i am just a peon in the system with no real control or voice. so i don't really sweat it. i guess its a good to know what's going on, so i'll be prepared and ready, but i don't have any delusions about my rights or anything. i'm just glad i'm not an arab. although, if US ever goes to war with China, i'm probably gonna end up getting wiretapped, waterboarded and sent to a chinese internment camp.

[Zal]

1. You do understand how the racket works? The ACLU and the trial lawyers stand to make a fat profit on lawyer and court fees by taking this to the courts.

2. How is it unreasonable to listen into someone talking to a person on the terrorist watch list from a no-no country? Better yet how is listening to someone from Iran calling Germany who happens to bounce through a relay in the US a domestic call?

3. Wow, you can parrot every fucktard since the 60's with the most overplayed Ben Franklin quote ever. Tell ya what Sparky, the Federal government long ago took away any real liberty you once had. Complaning about this is as stupid as the Romans bitching the Praetorian guard did not wear tunics to cover their swords so they could not see them.

4. Do you even understand what the word Fascist means? Do you understand the pratical application of it as a form of government? Do you know the criteria that it would take the US to go down that path? Or are you simply mouthing what some asshole who listens to green day told you.

.

ha ha green day, good stuff i gotta say.

1. Well no shit the trial lawyers get money. But the ACLU isn't the same as trial lawyers. Yes they employ them, but the ACLU is a NON-PROFIT organization.

The distribution and amount of funding for state affiliates varies from state to state. For example, the ACLU of New Jersey reported $1.2 million in income to both the ACLU-NJ and its affiliated tax-exempt foundation in the 2005 fiscal year. Of that income, 46% came from contributions, 19% came from membership dues, 18% came from court awarded attorney fees, 12% came from grants, 4% came from investment income and the remainder from other sources. Its expenses in the same period were $800,000, of which 12% went to administration and managemen

HOLY SHIT! 18 percent, man those trial lawyers really like to fuck the american people they're alegedly trying to protect. what a bunch of scam artists

2.This bill allows the government to listen to ANY call. Period. Not to and fro other countries. Calls placed between two citizens. Emails too. No warrant or anything. Is this ok with you? Do you want somebody reading your personal emails ? listening to your phone calls? you don't mind? how about next time you call your signifigant other you make a three way phone call with me so i can listen in. That'd be fun huh? How about "homeland security" agents going through your home and your belongings when you're not home? how about they search your locker at the gym, or your car, WHENEVER THEY WANT TO? sound like fun to you? me too!

3. no shit my liberties have been stripped, thats why we're here debating today. I'm not fucking complaining about anything! the congressman i voted for, voted against this brilliant legislation. I did my damn part. I'm simply stating that i will fight for my liberty, I'm not scared of this bullshit illusion of "terrorism". Yeah it happened once, but where's this imminent danger? when was the last attack? I'll go one step further and say that the government should've fucking stoped 9/11. I mean george bush blew off hunting for bin laden when Clinton had been on his ass for years. I don't fucking get it.

4. you know what you're right, that was fucking stupid, childish and ignorant on my part. Thanks for callin me out, i'll be sure not to make this mistake again, it fucks up my credibility ha ha.

but hey man, seriously no hard feelings, this is a good debate

[UltraDavid]

“This legislation will give the government unfettered and unchecked access to innocent Americans’ international communications without a warrant. This is not only unconstitutional, but absolutely un-American.”

aka this only affects you if you make call outside of the US.

so i could give a fuck less.
Please read my post (http://forums.shoryuken.com/showpost.php?p=5333139&postcount=92) on the previous page, dude, this is just too important for you to be uninformed on.

And Bernard... you scared yet? Cause I sure as crap am.

[thrust07]

Well, the thing that I couldn't stop thinking about is... what can we actually DO about this?

[Reigning]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4799447112501062338&q=4799447112501062338&ei=aqJzSKXlE5SK2wLd6JGoAQ

Please, watch. You may disagree with some of his theories and I'm not sure myself, but what he is speaking here is happening.

Edit: David Davis did win, btw. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7501029.stm

[JackTenrac!]

How's that middle finger, that you call Bush, up your ass, America?

[Adam Warlock]

LOL @ someone arguing with UltraDavid over the legal system.

lol really. You might as well pick servbot.

[thinctanc]

Is there something I'm not getting? I'm not in any way in favor of telco civil immunity, however, Obama's decision on this bill is not enough to make me disavow him.

In his opinion, the benefits of the revised FISA bill outweighed his disagreement with civil immunity, and that was the basis for his decision. I disagree with it, but his rationale does make sense. there are a couple of details in the bill which he may have supported, such as requiring FISA court approval for overseas Americans, or even the idea that the government can't invoke war powers to circumvent restriction on surveillance. These tweaks were necessary I hope you'll agree. And in order to expedite the process, he took the bad with the good.It's called compromise, I believe. You know, that thing that politicians are supposed to do.

[m121akuma]

How's that middle finger, that you call Bush, up your ass, America?

About as good as his buddies Barack "Index Finger" Obama, John "Ring Finger" McCain and the rest of the two fisted threat known as Congress.

[Reigning]

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/congress-holds.html

Does anyone remember the secret meeting held by congress back in march earlier this year? Well this was supposedly talked about in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFlouOozpk

Speaking of the Rex 84 mentioned...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0IL7k3elQ

I'm still looking into all of this.. scary stuff though. Everyone in the USA should be concerned about this if this turns out to come true... and it may look like we might be headed into it.


Also another thing is that Dennis Kucinich, who also spoke out against the secret meeting is moving on with his articles of impeachment. Particularly one just yesterday.

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=96842

[Dirt Mc Girt]

freemasons IMO

[UltraDavid]

It's called compromise, I believe. You know, that thing that politicians are supposed to do.
Compromise on politics, fine. If someone wants single payer government-provided health insurance and someone else wants purely privatized healthcare, a compromise has to be reached and should be reached. But there are some things you don't compromise on, and one of them is the Bill of Rights and another is the rule of law. I mean for the rule of law, either the government and corporations have to obey the law or they don't, there's really no middle ground. And it turns out they don't.

And there's really no compromise in this bill anyway. It's the same one that was offered at the beginning of this year except instead of granting outright immunity it makes the telcos jump through a hoop (or more like walk through an open door) to get it, in that now they have to present to a court a writing from the government saying they were asked to break the law (which the government has already confirmed they have). Oh, and also now the government can wait 7 days instead of 3 to let the FISA court know what it's doing. A Republican senator (Bond, if I recall correctly) said on the floor that this is the same bill as before, it just gives the Democrats an out with their base, because they can say they didn't directly grant immunity. That's just semantic nonsense that the Democrats wanted, this bill absolutely grants immunity, but Bond is right, it's the same bill.

Even more ridiculously, the Democrats are in control in both houses of Congress with a strong majority in the House and a bare majority in the Senate. They can pass whatever they want in the House, they have enough votes for that, although they don't have that kind of control in the Senate. What they do have, though, is absolute authority in allowing bills to reach the floor and in deciding what the bills look like when they get there. This means that while they might not have been able to pass whatever kind of bill they wanted, they did not have to pass the bill they did. They chose to, plain and simple, and in overwhelming numbers no less.

So to say a compromise happened, I don't believe that for a second. I believe this was a concerted effort on the part of both parties to ram this thing through as quickly as possible. Any talk of a compromise is meaningless; after all, when two sides want the same thing, their agreement is not called a compromise. I mean, the bill was brought up and voted on in the House so quickly that nobody could even talk about it, it literally happened in a 24-hour period. No, I think there's something else going on here, and it makes me pretty sad and scared to think about it.

[Serpent]

I don't have the time to really worry about anything besides this: what does this mean for my BAR exam essays?

[UltraDavid]

Throw out that Terry standard and get ready to say you can be stopped and searched for any reason under the sun.

[Rhio2k]

lol really. You might as well pick servbot.

Boku Kobun desu! Engo yoro shiku!

[Kromo]

Well, Nobody liked the 4th amendment anyway...I mean, its not like we're talking about guns or something. Now there's something worth creating an uproar about. Damn fascists and their ammo restrictions.

[manji187]

That pretty much means that i can't call the weedman on the house phone...:mad:

[Sage]

Dont vote for one of the 2 peas in a pod. Chuck Baldwin is your only hope...

www.revolutionmarch.com ftw

[TS]

Horse shit
Please keep your retarded conspiracy theory bullshit out of this and all other threads.

Thanks.

Better yet, how about you do some reasearch into that "info," instead of spreading your disease here.

[AdverseSolutions]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4799447112501062338&q=4799447112501062338&ei=aqJzSKXlE5SK2wLd6JGoAQ

Please, watch. You may disagree with some of his theories and I'm not sure myself, but what he is speaking here is happening.

Edit: David Davis did win, btw. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7501029.stm

Did you really just link to a David Icke video?? Really??? LOL

I never realized that living in Arizona would make one lonely to the point where their only friends were youtube videos by crackpots and reptilian sighting blogs.

----

More on topic, yeah I am completely opposed to the FISA amendments. As someone who makes a lot of international calls I don't feel like having some spook on the other end listening in. I feel like these domestic spying efforts are more aimed at dissident groups in general than just international terror networks which have been massively weakened during the period of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

[thinctanc]

Um, there has always been compromise in the political process. Even in the determining the need for an existence of a Bill of Rights, how many and which rights would be there, not to say how they would be worded. The divergent assumptions of the Bill of Rights as a static document versus being subject to the interpretation is what allows for the lack of democrat unity on the subject.

That being said, I reiterate that that there are significant portions of the bill with which I disagree. However, the greater mobility with which the government can collect information related to the defense of the state is essential to equivalent response to combatants who practice asymmetric warfare

A few get it, that this bill grants civil immunity, not from criminal prosecution. And that is relevant as far as abuses of this legislation in the future are concerned.

[pherai]

In other news, there was a bill proposed to allow anyone to rape thinctanc. Naturally it wasn't passed however they were able to come to a compromise and say he could only be raped every other day. Woo compromise!!

[Son Them All]

Probably a good time to post THIS link. For those with the patience to watch the whole thing yea....

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm

[AdverseSolutions]

probably a good time to post this link. For those with the patience to watch the whole thing yea....

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm

ahaahahaaahahhaah

[TS]

This is one of the many problems with propogation of conspiracy theories. They interfere with, you know, actual news.

[Zal]

This is one of the many problems with propogation of conspiracy theories. They interfere with, you know, actual news.

that and they discredit the whole notion of dissent by making those who ask questions look like douche bags

[Rhio2k]

That pretty much means that i can't call the weedman on the house phone...:mad:

And that's pretty much all it means...and they might not even give a shit about it. Just keep your stupid drug habits off the phone, and you won't notice ANY change. Why are people bitching about something they won't even notice, and that doesn't affect them? It's not like you're gonna be talking to your girl on the phone about what you want to do when you get home, and some guy jumps in and goes "Oh, that's hot...right in her pooper." *fapfapfapfap*

[UltraDavid]

And that's pretty much all it means...and they might not even give a shit about it. Just keep your stupid drug habits off the phone, and you won't notice ANY change. Why are people bitching about something they won't even notice, and that doesn't affect them? It's not like you're gonna be talking to your girl on the phone about what you want to do when you get home, and some guy jumps in and goes "Oh, that's hot...right in her pooper." *fapfapfapfap*Does the fact that he'll only think it and not verbalize it make it better to you? Or how about I set up a webcam in your bedroom? I promise I won't talk through it, and I promise I'll only use it if I suspect you of something. You trust me, right? (Note: talking security cameras already in use in some places (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6524495.stm).)

The very idea of someone not caring that other people can watch what they say and do without checks and without cause is entirely foreign to me and more than a little disgusting.

[Rhio2k]

Does the fact that he'll only think it and not verbalize it make it better to you?

The very idea of someone not caring that other people can watch what they say and do without checks and without cause is entirely foreign to me and more than a little disgusting.

As long as you don't fuck around and talk about terroristic shit like setting bombs or taking out political figures (or order a call girl if you're a member of congress), you ain't got shit to worry about, so you can ignore this shit. You ain't gonna find Jack Bauer and co at your telephone pole with sets of headphones jacked into the junction box and with binocs trained on your place's windows. You can say whatever else the fuck you want on the phone. It's like my job: the company's gonna put gps devices on out vehicles cuz some of out employees like to go places they shouldn't while in company trucks. This shit don't bother me. Know why? I don't have shit to hide. You can watch and listen to me all you want. You're only gonna be bored, and I won't notice anyway, so why BAAAW about it?

[UltraDavid]

Alright, look. The way this whole warrantless wiretapping scandal was publicized was that a guy working at AT&T found a secret room in his building with splitters sending ALL available phone communications and internet traffic data to the NSA. ALL. Not some, not just the stuff relating to terrorism or illegal activities, but everything. Still cool with that?

Edit: in my hypo above, I shouldn't have put that I promise only to use the camera if I suspect you of anything, because that's not really what the NSA was doing. How about I put a camera in your room and a bug in your phone and a key logger on your computer and use them all the time?

[Rhio2k]

Alright, look. The way this whole warrantless wiretapping scandal was publicized was that a guy working at AT&T found a secret room in his building with splitters sending ALL available phone communications and internet traffic data to the NSA. ALL. Not some, not just the stuff relating to terrorism or illegal activities, but everything. Still cool with that?

Hmmm...as a bittorrent user...well, no. Thanks for clearing that up. I thought it was only phone info. So...now what? Peerguardian?

[UltraDavid]

I guess, but really, who knows? This is literally unprecedented on Earth, for the government to not only have the unlimited ability to search and keep tabs on its citizens (happened plenty often in history), but for it to have the ability to search all communications that don't take place in person at a time when a giant percentage of all communications happen over the phone, online, or via text. Maybe we'll start using snail mail again?

[Manx]

The "good" reason for this is a lot of lawsuits against telecoms are going to be thrown out of court now that these companies have government-backed immunity. Sad. Sad. There were innocent people who got eavesdropped on. They should have to pay every one of them.

Basically, the government should say "We finds sum terrorists, so gimme dem records!" and the telecoms should be obligated, but not required to give them up. The government should then be able to get quickly processed warrant to force them to give up the records and they should compensate the companies for any damages done to their customer's personal privacy. The government should not compensate them if they choose to willingly hand over the records.

[Manx]

As long as you don't fuck around and talk about terroristic shit like setting bombs or taking out political figures (or order a call girl if you're a member of congress), you ain't got shit to worry about, so you can ignore this shit. You ain't gonna find Jack Bauer and co at your telephone pole with sets of headphones jacked into the junction box and with binocs trained on your place's windows. You can say whatever else the fuck you want on the phone. It's like my job: the company's gonna put gps devices on out vehicles cuz some of out employees like to go places they shouldn't while in company trucks. This shit don't bother me. Know why? I don't have shit to hide. You can watch and listen to me all you want. You're only gonna be bored, and I won't notice anyway, so why BAAAW about it?

You need to read this (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565). Nothing to hide is bunk. :tup:

[Son Them All]

ahaahahaaahahhaah

So in a thread, in the line of many similar ones in fact, where it's reported that the rights of Americans are being grabbed right from under them, the assertion that there is a specific plan and reason for doing so, is so goddamn "far fetched" that you can do nothing but laugh? Lol wow, where is your reading comprehension?


I do NOT subscribe to conspiracy theory. Roswell Area 51 is a military base, who knows/cares what the fuck is there, we DID land on the fuckin moon, but as far as the three pronged attack to control american citizens you can't argue with results.

- The country is getting dumber, much dumber and is far behind the rest of the world
- We are losing basic rights the country was founded on under the guise of "homeland security"
- religion is bucking science and knowledge in general every step of the way, again leading to the above mentioned stupidity problem
- the country as a whole, is scared to death of Islamic fundamentalists "terrorizing" them since 9/11. We use that fear as a basis for many every day decisions and many turn a blind eye to Bush's unconstitutional behavior because of that very fear.


The proof is in the pudding. Those conclusions are pretty solid and hard to ignore. I'd at least entertain it with some REAL thought, you prick.

[jae hoon]

Newsflash: You have been getting wiretapped since the 50s, they are just now stupid enough to tell you about it.

[Se7in]

Newsflash: You have been getting wiretapped since the 50s, they are just now stupid enough to tell you about it.

You plan to back that up?

Or just make a bold ass claim you heard somewhere just to appear more enlightened and smarter than everyone else?

[Shotokan Symphony]

It's jae hoon, so no.

[FistsofFury]

2.This bill allows the government to listen to ANY call. Period. Not to and fro other countries. Calls placed between two citizens. Emails too. No warrant or anything. Is this ok with you? Do you want somebody reading your personal emails ? listening to your phone calls? you don't mind? how about next time you call your signifigant other you make a three way phone call with me so i can listen in. That'd be fun huh? How about "homeland security" agents going through your home and your belongings when you're not home? how about they search your locker at the gym, or your car, WHENEVER THEY WANT TO? sound like fun to you? me too!



The question I have is...when the g-men break into your house and go through all your shit...are they going to put everything back...or are you going to come home to all your shit on the floor and every drawer hanging open. Maybe 'Freedom aint free motherfucker!' spray painted in the kitchen.

I guess it wouldn't make sense to let them know they were being monitored at all...but I can't expect government agents to carefully go through all my shit and put everything back as it was. They seem like the 'throw all your important shit on the ground/empty your drawers and piss on the piles' type.


Newsflash: You have been getting wiretapped since the 50s, they are just now stupid enough to tell you about it.


Back then you had to at least belong to a suspicious organization...or just be down south and into miscegenation. Or someone reported you. We have to admit that now it is a larger scale. Is is recording everything and picking through it later? I don't know.

About the I aint got shit to hide mentality: WORSE CASE SCENARIO: You make a joke on the phone about 9/11-injuring a politicaion or just mention that the Rockefellers are behind too much and you get thrown in jail (who knows how much later) and not told why and not permitted to see anyone. You aren't given a chance to explain yourself. Things can be taken out of context. People around you could be into some illegal shit that you can get fucked up over and have no knowledge of. Just because it has been noted by them (wiretappers) that this person has called you on the regular, is seen with you a lot/are brothers. Due process is to prevent the justice system from sprinting away with assumptions.

I'm fine with not being able to say the phrase 'hi jack' in an airport, on a plane/near any public trans. I'm grumpy about having to be paranoid about my weed. The line is I start being monitored because of the ideas I have....not plans I've made or acts I've committed.

But come on you guys we are tripping. The government has this under control! I just want them to prove it to me:(

[Rhio2k]

About the I aint got shit to hide mentality: WORSE CASE SCENARIO: You make a joke on the phone about 9/11-injuring a politicaion or just mention that the Rockefellers are behind too much and you get thrown in jail (who knows how much later) and not told why and not permitted to see anyone. You aren't given a chance to explain yourself. Things can be taken out of context. People around you could be into some illegal shit that you can get fucked up over and have no knowledge of. Just because it has been noted by them (wiretappers) that this person has called you on the regular, is seen with you a lot/are brothers. Due process is to prevent the justice system from sprinting away with assumptions.

I'm fine with not being able to say the phrase 'hi jack' in an airport, on a plane/near any public trans. I'm grumpy about having to be paranoid about my weed. The line is I start being monitored because of the ideas I have....not plans I've made or acts I've committed.




If you're dumb enough to say some shit that they'd take as planning for an attack, you kinda deserve what you get (I really lost count of the dumb stoner types who've been thrown out of buildings or arrested for saying shit with terroristic themes "Dude I oughta blow this fuckin' place up, bra!", or "There's a bomb in my hall locker just for people like you." etc. Not smart to do it before this, not smart to do it AFTER this. It's called "Making A Threat". Not something that's wise to joke about. They don't know if you're serious or not). They can't getcha for thinking it, though. They can't read minds. But if they start some shit with the internet (as in snitching on downloads)...*somebody throws a chair*...I'M MAD!!!

[pherai]

I don't want to live in a country where you can't joke about terrorism in private phone conversations.

Seriously though, it's silly to say people should be censoring themselves in private conversations.

[UltraDavid]

Newsflash: You have been getting wiretapped since the 50s, they are just now stupid enough to tell you about it.
No, they didn't tell us about it. Again, the only reason this was found out was because a random AT&T employee happened to stumble on it, and he had to get the NY Times to publish it because his first choice, the LA Times, was bullied into not publishing it by the NSA. The real difference between the FBI wiretapping MLK etc is that now we're stupid enough to make it legal. Wiretapping was illegal back then and the FBI was seriously smacked down in the 70s for it, and in fact one of the reasons the original FISA law was passed was to guarantee that no one was wiretapped illegally. But now we communicate much more via non-personal communication and the government now has the ability to record literally all of our communication instead of particular people's communications at particular times. Not only is the situation much, much worse, but now it's actually legal! Incredible.

I don't want to live in a country where you can't joke about terrorism in private phone conversations.

Seriously though, it's silly to say people should be censoring themselves in private conversations.
It's not just silly, it's disgusting. First amendment concerns, especially the impact on journalists, are a big part of the ACLU's lawsuit.

[manji187]

Free to do what you want is out the window now...

Think about this...They're wiretapping because of terrorism. That's a point, ok at most. But, that ain't the issue in all states. There could be many reasons...

Drug trafficking
Illegal porn (Child porn, beastiality, etc.)
Possible Killings/Hits
Hacking
Illegal downloading

There could be more. But regardless of these reasons, it still ain't cool to get in on someone's personal business. Them niggas don't want people in their business, but they'll get in someone elses. Though I said the thing about weed, that's also an example, cuz there's been hella strike force around, & now this shit. One more thing, If there's people like me & many others who ain't been catchin cases, or ain't been doin shit to catch attention, then they really wanna keep tabs on those who are low key. Just an idea...That's my Minority Report.









What's next? Maybe gov. video surveillance...