US Senate votes to give Telecom Companies Immunity

[Correction]

but these people that "give up" you aren't outraged over?
Jesus christ you people are walking hypocrites. We elect people to check other branches of power and to do the things we can't. When they don't, they are just as much at fault as those that do the shit things in the first place

We can't name every person we're pissed at because it'd take ages but I don't recall saying I wasn't pissed at Joe Lieberman. Unfortunately since I don't live in Connecticut I can't do shit about it. I can only punish the senators from my own state and that really doesn't make me a hypocrite.

Meanwhile, your only stand is 'stfu bush haters you're all hypocrites and there's nothing we can do about domestic spying blah blah terrorism.' The current fight over the immunity granted to telcos is much more urgent than hating men like Joe Lieberman and therefore the topic exists.

p.s. you can make your points without being a complete dick once in a while. Try it.

[Olo401]

Will it happen? I don't know and you don't either. But the possibility is there.

And this is what prompted my first post bitching about this sort of thread. We don't know the possible outcome so why start a thread with a title "The Senate just voted to screw you over" other than to start a debate based on an unsubstantiated fear?

Because the country needs to talk about it. We can't just hide from our problems and pretend that it won't happen. This debate needs to happen in civil society. The entire point of an informed electorate is to talk about these things. If you don't want to talk about it you don't need to hit reply to this thread as simple as that.

THANK YOU.

A pure democratic society, or even a democratic republic like ours without civil discourse and reasoned discussion is a farce. Even the dismissive opinions we've seen here are still part of the reasoning process and are healthy, regardless of how much I or anyone else might disagree.

I apologize if I came off as obnoxious in my original post to you. I would have reacted differently if you titled the thread something like "Senate awards immunity to telecom wiretappers". I've seen many a thread that was started that was an overeaction and I felt this was one of them. Friends?

Sounds good to me.. all apologies for the over-the-top headline. I tend to be passionate about this sorta thing.

[Korietsu]

I figured I'd jump in on this post, as I had recently written a paper over how the FISA Act coupled with the USA PATRIOT Act to violate our basic rights and privacy. I'm going to apologize in advance for not staying with the tune of the thread.

As of now, FISA uses a document called a "National Security Letter" to retrieve any information needed under the authority given to the FISA court, and are compared to a Delayed Notice Search Warrant, which is used when dealing organized crime, allowing for delayed notice of investigation. However, under the current standings for NSL's, no notice has to be given within a reasonable time, and you may never be notified of searches on your background and what you've been reading / visiting. As such, NSL’s do not follow the same rules as a “Delayed Notice Search Warrant.” The person who is under investigation is not given notice in a reasonable amount of time, and the NSL’s are not procured in the same method as they state. As for objectivity of the FISA court, this sums it up.

“A good indicator of the objectivity of the FISA court: It rejected only five of the 14,000 warrant applications it received before `2001, as it recently became clear that many of those warrants were based on false allegations” (Dahlia Lithwick, in the article, "A Guide to the Patriot Act - Should you be scared of the Patriot Act?" )

Before the advent of the patriot act, such warrants could only be used for information gathering, if it was a significant source of the investigation, similarly, they could only be used for information gathering, and not prosecution. However, with an amendment provided by the Patriot Act, these secret warrants can now be used in prosecution as probable cause.

As for how the government can attach a NSL to you? Simple, if they can loosely link you to any foreign country FISA can authorize a NSL on you, and for those of us who have relations to people from foreign countries via family or any other contacts, you can be in danger. Finally, as with these NSL's, I'll leave you with one more little gem.

As codified in Section 802, this new and very broadly defined crime encompasses activities which (1) “involve acts dangerous to human life that are [(2)] a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;” and which (3) appear intended to (a) “intimidate or coerce civilian population,” (b) “influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;” or (c) “affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;” and which (4) “occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

In conjunction to FISA and the NSL’s, this is an easy tool that blurs the lines and allows anyone whom disagrees with the government could be potentially labeled as a “domestic terrorist.” Thus, an organization that uses “fear mongering” could be potentially labeled as a domestic terrorist group by simple distortion of the facts. By being a member of a group, or by campaigning against in a "harsh" manner, you can be subject to investigation by Section 218 of the USA PATRIOT Act.


So, when you let the government have full control and access to your communications, we have what could be the beginnings of another McCarthy era witch hunt.

[Ushallbeasgods]

Will it happen? I don't know and you don't either. But the possibility is there.

And this is what prompted my first post bitching about this sort of thread. We don't know the possible outcome so why start a thread with a title "The Senate just voted to screw you over" other than to start a debate based on an unsubstantiated fear?

Because the country needs to talk about it. We can't just hide from our problems and pretend that it won't happen. This debate needs to happen in civil society. The entire point of an informed electorate is to talk about these things. If you don't want to talk about it you don't need to hit reply to this thread as simple as that.

That's about as dumb as me telling you to stop replying to me because you disagree with what I say. It's like saying water is wet.

No it is not that at all. I am saying that in a democracy the electorate must question its government. However by the very nature of democracy you do not need to participate in this discussion. If you choose to opt out that is your own choice. But whether you agree or disagree with me it is this kind of debate in civil society that makes democracy strong and healthy.

[Demosthenes11]

but these people that "give up" you aren't outraged over?
Jesus christ you people are walking hypocrites. We elect people to check other branches of power and to do the things we can't. When they don't, they are just as much at fault as those that do the shit things in the first place

We can't name every person we're pissed at because it'd take ages but I don't recall saying I wasn't pissed at Joe Lieberman. Unfortunately since I don't live in Connecticut I can't do shit about it. I can only punish the senators from my own state and that really doesn't make me a hypocrite.

Meanwhile, your only stand is 'stfu bush haters you're all hypocrites and there's nothing we can do about domestic spying blah blah terrorism.' The current fight over the immunity granted to telcos is much more urgent than hating men like Joe Lieberman and therefore the topic exists.

p.s. you can make your points without being a complete dick once in a while. Try it.

no, I am a dick by nature so it would be fake not to be in a political argument, and I don't want to be fake around all of you

I wasn't talking about you, because you know what you are talking about, what you believe in, and the appropriate action to take. A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

[sunb1ind]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

[Demosthenes11]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

and yet people only talk about bush, only contributing to the conceived power the presidential branch has

Hurricanes - Bush's fault; possibly faulty intelligence - Bush's fault; I don't have healthcare - Bush's fault; my school system sucks - Bush's fault; I have a sandy vagina - Bush's fault.

[sunb1ind]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

and yet people only talk about bush, only contributing to the conceived power the presidential branch has

Hurricanes - Bush's fault; possibly faulty intelligence - Bush's fault; I don't have healthcare - Bush's fault; my school system sucks - Bush's fault; I have a sandy vagina - Bush's fault.

I think you just described how people are voting this election, placing easy blame to 1 man for all our problems instead of focusing on the real causes. Not that he doesn't deserve it lol

[Ushallbeasgods]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

and yet people only talk about bush, only contributing to the conceived power the presidential branch has

Hurricanes - Bush's fault; possibly faulty intelligence - Bush's fault; I don't have healthcare - Bush's fault; my school system sucks - Bush's fault; I have a sandy vagina - Bush's fault.

And you know what it will always be like that. When you have three distinct branches of government: legislative, judicial and executive, the executive is always the most high profile and thus blamed for everything (whether that is fair or not). Live with it. The people who have the means to make change recognize that the US is a system of checks and balances and each branch plays a role in making public policy.

At the end of the day though you can't deny Bush has a heavy influence on the direction of the country.

[skurlover]

Not even bothering with the fear mongering going on in this thread. But when I see "The Senate just voted to screw you over" right around tax time and a big rebate coming back to most of us Americans, you can see why we bothered to click on this thread. Stop making stupid fucking titles that will get people riled up before they click it.

Post the info (not the kneejerk), they will come.

[sunb1ind]

Not even bothering with the fear mongering going on in this thread. But when I see "The Senate just voted to screw you over" right around tax time and a big rebate coming back to most of us Americans, you can see why we bothered to click on this thread. Stop making stupid fucking titles that will get people riled up before they click it.

Post the info (not the kneejerk), they will come.

Lol its not like America is already getting screwed getting that fat check in the mail

[Olo401]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

I've been disgusted with the whole bunch of them for at least 6 years, since the whole talk about war with Iraq started. Before that I was both too young to fully grasp what was going on and too pissed off from the epic BS at the end of the Clinton years and the 2000 election fiasco.

Man, I thought I knew everything back I needed to know back in 1992. I was right.. now I've learned a lot of the stuff I wish I never knew.

[sunb1ind]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

I've been disgusted with the whole bunch of them for at least 6 years, since the whole talk about war with Iraq started. Before that I was both too young to fully grasp what was going on and too pissed off from the epic BS at the end of the Clinton years and the 2000 election fiasco.

Man, I thought I knew everything back I needed to know back in 1992. I was right.. now I've learned a lot of the stuff I wish I never knew.

I can defintely relate to this. I think alot of people woke up after the Iraq war announcement.

[Slott]

I have a sandy vagina

I left the important part in

[Tristam]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought all the information collected by the telecom companies simply included "who, where, how long" information. I'm pretty sure the gov't only uses this to filter, sort, and identify people who are contacting people/networks outside the US that have already been placed under suspicion by FBI or CIA? In which case, yes, you would have to be acting very suspiciously to draw even the slightest bit of attention.

[Olo401]

A shitload of people still have BushBlinders which makes them see only what Bush does as bad and nobody else. Bush is a cockbag don't get me wrong, but solely holding him responsible for this is irresponsible

Pretty sure nowadays, people are naturally disgusted with our government as a whole and not just at Bush anymore.

I've been disgusted with the whole bunch of them for at least 6 years, since the whole talk about war with Iraq started. Before that I was both too young to fully grasp what was going on and too pissed off from the epic BS at the end of the Clinton years and the 2000 election fiasco.

Man, I thought I knew everything back I needed to know back in 1992. I was right.. now I've learned a lot of the stuff I wish I never knew.

I can defintely relate to this. I think alot of people woke up after the Iraq war announcement.

No one ever said doing your civic duty was easy.

BTW, thread title changed for less divisiveness. Don't fault me for being brutally honest.

[sunb1ind]

The hardest part, I think, is forcing yourself to read through all the terrible shit without going insane Sometimes I wish I didn't take the time to research it and just went back to living my life through closed blinds. I make less friends online too nowadays lol

[aurik]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought all the information collected by the telecom companies simply included "who, where, how long" information. I'm pretty sure the gov't only uses this to filter, sort, and identify people who are contacting people/networks outside the US that have already been placed under suspicion by FBI or CIA? In which case, yes, you would have to be acting very suspiciously to draw even the slightest bit of attention.

The telecoms have the ability to tap your communication lines, much like the post office has the ability to open your mail.

However, thanks to the 4th amendment, they have the obligation to refuse to tap your communications for the government if
1) they have not been shown a correct warrant
and
2) they do not have good faith that a correct warrant exists.

This is what the immunity is about. The telecom companies knew they were tapping communication lines without a warrant. And yet, at the request of the government, they illegally violated our 4th amendment rights.

It is a right of the people to know whether their lines have been tapped, and whether there was a warrant for intercepting their private communications. It is also a right of the people to seek fair relief, through the judicial system. These are rights enshrined in the constitution, and no legislation short of a constitutional amendment can strip them.

[Norelco]

It is a right of the people to know whether their lines have been tapped, and whether there was a warrant for intercepting their private communications.

Isn't the point of a wiretap to do so without the user's knowledge so they can say something incrimating about what it is they are suspected of?

[Olo401]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought all the information collected by the telecom companies simply included "who, where, how long" information. I'm pretty sure the gov't only uses this to filter, sort, and identify people who are contacting people/networks outside the US that have already been placed under suspicion by FBI or CIA? In which case, yes, you would have to be acting very suspiciously to draw even the slightest bit of attention.

The telecoms have the ability to tap your communication lines, much like the post office has the ability to open your mail.

However, thanks to the 4th amendment, they have the obligation to refuse to tap your communications for the government if
1) they have not been shown a correct warrant
and
2) they do not have good faith that a correct warrant exists.

This is what the immunity is about. The telecom companies knew they were tapping communication lines without a warrant. And yet, at the request of the government, they illegally violated our 4th amendment rights.

It is a right of the people to know whether their lines have been tapped, and whether there was a warrant for intercepting their private communications. It is also a right of the people to seek fair relief, through the judicial system. These are rights enshrined in the constitution, and no legislation short of a constitutional amendment can strip them.

At this point, the bill goes to the House.. they will most likely pass it, though there's a chance it could be shelved in favor of another version or a stop-gap measure that will simply reauthorize the original FISA law until after the next election.

If it does pass, I'm hoping for a federal court seeing the constitutional issue and striking the law down. With all the courtpacking that Bush has managed to get through in the past seven years though, the chances are slim.

It is a right of the people to know whether their lines have been tapped, and whether there was a warrant for intercepting their private communications.

Isn't the point of a wiretap to do so without the user's knowledge so they can say something incrimating about what it is they are suspected of?

Yes, but a certain threshold of proof is needed in order to obtain a warrant for a wiretap, and normally you can only get a warrant before you start the wiretap.. This is where FISA comes into play with its 3-day window to obtain a warrant after a time-sensitive wiretap has occurred.