Who's Protecting America? Not Congress

[FFTT]

"The Protect America Act." http://logo.cafepress.com/7/6582804.2358197.jpg?r=633038657774347500
Another example of a Congressional Bill that does everything exactly opposite of it's noble deceptive title.

Congress just granted the Bush administration even broader powers
allowing warrantless surveillance under the control of Alberto Gonzales!!!

I sure as hell hope all of you take the time to voice your disgust with
your local representatives.

I am furious that Jim Webb voted to pass this bill.

The Senate bowed to White House pressure last night and passed a Republican plan for overhauling the federal governmentís terrorist surveillance laws, approving changes that would temporarily give U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a due process.

The 60 to 28 vote, which was quickly denounced by civil rights and privacy advocates, came after Democrats in the House failed to win support for more modest changes that would have required closer court supervision of government surveillance. Earlier in the day, President Bush threatened to hold Congress in session into its scheduled summer recess if it did not approve the changes he wanted.

The legislation, which is expected to go before the House today, would expand the governmentís authority to intercept without a court order the phone calls and e-mails of people in the United States who are communicating with people overseas.

No Republicans voted against the bill.

The following Democrats voted for it: Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawai?i); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); Nancy Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).

Senators Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama all opposed the bill, as did 23 other Democrats and Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont. Joe Lieberman voted ...well, you know how he voted.

It just keeps getting better don't it?

[solvs]

Yeah, I guess there isn't a thread on this is there?

Of course it's disgusting. It doesn't protect us at all. All it does is remove the need to bother with an easy to get warrant. Even after the fact. All it does is remove oversight and give more power to people who've proved time and time again that they can't be trusted. Waiting for some one to come in here talking about how we all hate America and want to be blown up, even when confronted with the obvious facts about this. I'm reminded once more of Pastor Martin Niemöller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...).

Hopefully, in six months when this is up for review again, they actually grow some spines and do something to stop it... if it isn't too late.

[Swarmlord]

60 to 28 with a Democrat majority? Sounds like a really contested piece of legislation.

Don't take calls from terrorists and you won't have anything to worry about. If you think that all our calls aren't already monitored, you'd be fooling yourself.

[imac/cheese]

I am not really worried about this personally, but I really think there should be some sort of oversight other than the AG. I find it strange that so many democrats actually voted for this. I guess they wanted to go on vacation more than stand up to the president.

[leekohler]

I am not really worried about this personally, but I really think there should be some sort of oversight other than the AG. I find it strange that so many democrats actually voted for this. I guess they wanted to go on vacation more than stand up to the president.

I'd say you're right.

[mactastic]

Fear mongering still works. Bunch of spineless wussies we've got on the D side of Congress eh? Mr. 26% says jump, and you do? Seriously, grow a pair. The rabid right isn't going to cut you any slack for voting for this bill. News flash! The right is going to call you soft on terror NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU VOTE.

And to all the righties supporting this - would you have been fine with Janet Reno reviewing warrantless wiretapping? Be honest...

[FFTT]

Most likely they've re-worded their language to make sure what they have
already been doing is not illegal.

Therefore we can't say they were illegally wire tapping people retroactively.

[Thomas Veil]

Don't take calls from terrorists and you won't have anything to worry about. That reasoning is very...Kremlinesque.

If you think that all our calls aren't already monitored, you'd be fooling yourself.And that's no excuse. It's a little like arguing because we have corruption in government, we shouldn't get upset by even more corruption.

[Winterfell]

I write and email my representatives fairly often, not that it does any good. Good ol' Oklahoma senators and congressman are pretty useless, and I've no illusions that my letters/emails make any difference.

Watching Oklahoma congressman/senators debating during election time is like watching them debate which one is more backwards.

[solvs]

60 to 28 with a Democrat majority? Sounds like a really contested piece of legislation.
No one is going to argue that the Dems suck.

Don't take calls from terrorists and you won't have anything to worry about.
With no oversight, you don't worry about abuse? You'd be ok with Hillary doing it? You're ok if we're spying on people who don't have anything to do with terrorism? Without the oversight, how would anyone know?

As we've already seen, they've abused their power in other similar cases, like what happened with the protestors in NY during the Repub convention and others that had nothing to do with terrorism, yet you honestly say you're not worried they're going to do the same or worse with no oversight?

If you think that all our calls aren't already monitored, you'd be fooling yourself.
Do you even read what you're posting anymore? What was that you said in the other thread about freedom? You really think this is ok? You aren't worried about privacy? Abuse? You really think this is all about terrorism and nothing else?

If they have nothing to hide, why can't they just get warrants like the Constitution clearly states?

[atszyman]

60 to 28 with a Democrat majority? Sounds like a really contested piece of legislation.

Don't take calls from terrorists and you won't have anything to worry about. If you think that all our calls aren't already monitored, you'd be fooling yourself.

I take it you support a national gun registry as well? Last time I checked guns tend to be more dangerous than phones. To be even more analogous we should have a registry and tag every gun with a GPS locator so we can tell when you use your gun and who you use it with...

If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear...

[Swarmlord]

No one is going to argue that the Dems suck.


With no oversight, you don't worry about abuse? You'd be ok with Hillary doing it? You're ok if we're spying on people who don't have anything to do with terrorism? Without the oversight, how would anyone know?

As we've already seen, they've abused their power in other similar cases, like what happened with the protestors in NY during the Repub convention and others that had nothing to do with terrorism, yet you honestly say you're not worried they're going to do the same or worse with no oversight?


Do you even read what you're posting anymore? What was that you said in the other thread about freedom? You really think this is ok? You aren't worried about privacy? Abuse? You really think this is all about terrorism and nothing else?

If they have nothing to hide, why can't they just get warrants like the Constitution clearly states?

I'll repeat again what I said. The government has been monitoring phone calls for years and will continue to do so whether a Republican or Democrat is in office. IF calls are elevated to "interesting" status then there are procedures for escalating the investigation and if a decision to move forward is made then warrants and such are sought. No prosecution can take place until a warrant is obtained. That doesn't keep the government from trying to establish probable cause.

By the way, there were several Supreme Court rulings on phone calls and especially on communication that is broadcast over the airways and the bottom line is that now adays you have little expectation of privacy if you can be overheard whether you use a phone or not.

Of course I'm worried about abuse, but that's never going to prevent it from happening. All you can do is count on your attorney to make sure that the letter of the law is followed if you are ever charged with anything.

[imac/cheese]

Of course I'm worried about abuse, but that's never going to prevent it from happening. All you can do is count on your attorney to make sure that the letter of the law is followed if you are ever charged with anything.

We are trying to discuss what things should be done and you come back and say nothing can be done except count on your attorney. If congress changes the law enough, your attorney wil not be able to do anything to help you. I think something could have been done and congress could have stood up to the presidents demand.

[leekohler]

We are trying to discuss what things should be done and you come back and say nothing can be done except count on your attorney. If congress changes the law enough, your attorney wil not be able to do anything to help you. I think something could have been done and congress could have stood up to the presidents demand.

Exactly-no one should have to have an attorney to protect what is already stated in the constitution- right to privacy. If that's where we're at, then we need to throw in the towel on this government.

What happens to people who can't afford attorneys and are innocent? Oh- that's right, I forgot. According to some people here, poor (or lower middle class) people are immoral therefore deserve whatever happens to them.

[Swarmlord]

I take it you support a national gun registry as well? Last time I checked guns tend to be more dangerous than phones. To be even more analogous we should have a registry and tag every gun with a GPS locator so we can tell when you use your gun and who you use it with...

If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear...

We're talking about wiretapping here. People kill people. A registry of dangerous people would be more useful than a registry of inanimate objects. How about tagging people convicted of a crime with a GPS locator. I'd rather know where they are.</sarcasm>

[Swarmlord]

We are trying to discuss what things should be done and you come back and say nothing can be done except count on your attorney. If congress changes the law enough, your attorney wil not be able to do anything to help you. I think something could have been done and congress could have stood up to the presidents demand.

Either investigators got a valid warrant for evidence against you or they didn't. Even the dumbest public defender could work with that.

Phones, internet, email, text messaging - it's all monitored and if flags are raised then it will be followed up and a proper investigation put together. It's a fact and will continue to be no matter who's in charge.

[atszyman]

We're talking about wiretapping here. People kill people. A registry of dangerous people would be more useful than a registry of inanimate objects. How about tagging people convicted of a crime with a GPS locator. I'd rather know where they are.</sarcasm>

And phones are inanimate objects as well. Someone could just as easily break into my house and use my phone or steal my cell phone.

If we could track the terrorists via GPS great. Why not monitor weapons for signs of illegal usage like you seem to think we should monitor phones. A gun registry would be a start but to be close to wiretapping we'd need the GPS tags. Cell phones can be triangulated and land-lines map to addresses. Knowing what number called what number when/where would be similar to tracking every time a gun was used and where. I fail to see the difference. Yet any sort of gun control is bad, but for phone calls, "if you have nothing to hide, why worry?"

I'd also be willing to wager that a lot more people have been killed in this country by criminals with guns than by terrorists, so why is it that we are not tracking firearms for signs of criminal activity?

[Mord]

Team america?


F@%k yeah.

[killr_b]

Exactly-no one should have to have an attorney to protect what is already stated in the constitution- right to privacy. If that's where we're at, then we need to throw in the towel on this government.

Good. Really Patriotic.
NOT.

Because some men are hijacking the country and leading it into tyranny we should give up and become socialistic slaves- I mean caring employees…

Yeah, that's how we got America. That's what winners do- throw in the towel.

REAL men get guns and protect their communities. They stand up to people who come to town looking to oppress us. They kill other men who think that this republic will ever be in the hands of someone other than every free man born here. Real men fight and die for liberty, never giving in to the demands of slaves or BANKERS. Never giving up one speck of the freedom that our ancestors fought for.

I can guarantee that Bush and all the R's and D's can say they will pass all the laws they want, but if they came to enforce them on my street, there will be the second American civil war.

Oh, they listen to the calls, how you gonna fight that????
Don't care what they hear. Let them hear this and tremble in fear of the three hundred million firearms in this country and the 70 million gun owners. Let them hear that me and mine are ready for their martial law and we've got one hell of a response planned. And you know what? None of that response has to do with throwing in the towel. :mad:

[skunk]

Keep taking the tablets.

[killr_b]

Come to my town waving that flag of socialism. No really, I dare you.

[skunk]

Come to my town waving that flag of socialism. No really, I dare you.Why on earth would I want to go to your town? :confused:

[Peterkro]

Good. Really Patriotic.
NOT.

Because some men are hijacking the country and leading it into tyranny we should give up and become socialistic slaves- I mean caring employees…

Yeah, that's how we got America. That's what winners do- throw in the towel.

REAL men get guns and protect their communities. They stand up to people who come to town looking to oppress us. They kill other men who think that this republic will ever be in the hands of someone other than every free man born here. Real men fight and die for liberty, never giving in to the demands of slaves or BANKERS. Never giving up one speck of the freedom that our ancestors fought for.

I can guarantee that Bush and all the R's and D's can say they will pass all the laws they want, but if they came to enforce them on my street, there will be the second American civil war.

Oh, they listen to the calls, how you gonna fight that????
Don't care what they hear. Let them hear this and tremble in fear of the three hundred million firearms in this country and the 70 million gun owners. Let them hear that me and mine are ready for their martial law and we've got one hell of a response planned. And you know what? None of that response has to do with throwing in the towel. :mad:

Jesus Wept! I don't believe you just typed that.

Incidentally your location is home to two major publishers of socialist material. Should you not be out waving your gun/dick at them.

[killr_b]

Jesus Wept! I don't believe you just typed that.

Incidentally your location is home to two major publishers of socialist material. Should you not be out waving your gun/dick at them.

Who?

[skunk]

Who?SocialistGoogle is your friend.

[it5five]

Come to my town waving that flag of socialism. No really, I dare you.

Are you a subscriber?

http://www.fstdt.com/funnyimages/uploads/403.jpg

[leekohler]

Good. Really Patriotic.
NOT.

Because some men are hijacking the country and leading it into tyranny we should give up and become socialistic slaves- I mean caring employees…

Yeah, that's how we got America. That's what winners do- throw in the towel.

REAL men get guns and protect their communities. They stand up to people who come to town looking to oppress us. They kill other men who think that this republic will ever be in the hands of someone other than every free man born here. Real men fight and die for liberty, never giving in to the demands of slaves or BANKERS. Never giving up one speck of the freedom that our ancestors fought for.

I can guarantee that Bush and all the R's and D's can say they will pass all the laws they want, but if they came to enforce them on my street, there will be the second American civil war.

Oh, they listen to the calls, how you gonna fight that????
Don't care what they hear. Let them hear this and tremble in fear of the three hundred million firearms in this country and the 70 million gun owners. Let them hear that me and mine are ready for their martial law and we've got one hell of a response planned. And you know what? None of that response has to do with throwing in the towel. :mad:

You obviously missed the point of my post. My point was- if the government is going to ignore the Constitution, then why do we have one? Obviously, Bush has decided to ignore it, and no one does anything.

Another thing- you are either drunk or off your meds. That reaction was ridiculous at best.

[Peterkro]

Who?

Given the tone of your post and your general attitude,I'll pass on that one.

Also ignore Skunks post about SocialistGoogle, it doesn't exist,oh no.

(loose lips sink ships on our heroic war for world Socialist Government comrade :mad:)

[killr_b]

Are you a subscriber?


Are you a troll in children's clothing?

[hulugu]

...REAL men get guns and protect their communities. They stand up to people who come to town looking to oppress us. They kill other men who think that this republic will ever be in the hands of someone other than every free man born here. Real men fight and die for liberty, never giving in to the demands of slaves or BANKERS. Never giving up one speck of the freedom that our ancestors fought for....Let them hear this and tremble in fear of the three hundred million firearms in this country and the 70 million gun owners...

I really don't understand this post, are you saying that we've reached the ammo box stage of the old adage: "soap box, ballot box, ammunition box?"

I may be naive, but I still think we're at the ballot box stage—especially considering how rarely it's actually tried—and that your guns and ammo speech is misguided.

Furthermore, without a attentive populace, your "Thousand Oaks Uprising" would be nothing more than a sad and unfortunate tragedy. Without the media, without a citizenry that can be appalled into action, and without generous outside support, a small citizen army has little chance against the modern military force. Sad, but true.

Now, as for Swarmlord's statement, can we please make it possible for some people to give up their Constitutional rights without damaging mine? Frankly, the FISA courts were stop-gap between the federal government and the remnants of the Fourth Amendment. That even the original FISA courts are now bypassed seems ripe for abuse and now there are few provisions a lawyer will be able to dispute. Frankly, the inclusion of the "Lone Wolf" section makes it all the more likely that all your communications are monitored and will be used against you when convenient. I hate arguing slippery slope, but considering the new legal precedence here, I expect to see FISA expanded to other types of crimes in the coming years. What was once used against "terror" suspects, will also be convenient against a number of other criminal activities. Like changes made to Federal law in order to fight the mob, I expect the changes to FISA to be used in a gradually expanding set of rules until the Fourth Amendment is an anachronism.

[solvs]

The government has been monitoring phone calls for years and will continue to do so whether a Republican or Democrat is in office.
Which would be fine. With oversight. Which is what we're arguing here, because that's what they're basically getting rid of.

Of course I'm worried about abuse, but that's never going to prevent it from happening.
Well that's a good attitude to have.

All you can do is count on your attorney to make sure that the letter of the law is followed if you are ever charged with anything.
If you ever get to the part with an attorney, which some don't, which is part of the problem we have.

We are trying to discuss what things should be done and you come back and say nothing can be done except count on your attorney.
It's a pattern with him. Still waiting for it to be Clinton's fault somehow. It's always about Clinton.

Either investigators got a valid warrant for evidence against you or they didn't.
Er, again, that's the problem is the lack of warrants.

Even the dumbest public defender could work with that.
Again, not the point.

It's a fact and will continue to be no matter who's in charge.
Which would be fine... with oversight.

Do you not understand the problem here?

[FFTT]

I find it interesting that after all the "disclosed" reports of waste, fraud and abuse, some of you still support this administration blindly accepting that they must know what's best for us.

You vote for leadership based on ideology rather than fact.

I just do not understand how some people refuse to accept the reality
that our government has been hijacked to benefit a small handful of
business tycoons at the expense of the rest of us who only want to
live and let live in peace.

You don't seem to get it that some seriously GREEDY people are using
religion to drive the masses to self inflicted madness.

Kill Muslims, Kill Americans, Kill Jews can't you guys get it that rational people are not running things?

We have people looking forward to Armageddon for crying out loud.

These misguided sheeple can't seem to see past the lies and deception
of it all.

This is about massive resources, money and power.

We shed the blood, reduce the population a bit and they profit from the
safety of their castles.

We are the peasantry, the commoners and the slaves.

A few of us are brave enough to stand up to these criminals as we should.


Guess I'm wasting my time trying to open your eyes.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>
You don't seem to get it that some seriously GREEDY people are using
religion to drive the masses to self inflicted madness.

Kill Muslims, Kill Americans, Kill Jews can't you guys get it that rational people are not running things?

We have people looking forward to Armageddon for crying out loud.

These misguided sheeple can't seem to see past the lies and deception
of it all.

This is about massive resources, money and power.

We shed the blood, reduce the population a bit and they profit from the
safety of their castles.

We are the peasantry, the commoners and the slaves.

A few of us are brave enough to stand up to these criminals as we should.


Guess I'm wasting my time trying to open your eyes.

Whether I agree with any of that or not, what do you propose that will turn all these people around? You going to coffee klatch them into passivity?

[leekohler]

Whether I agree with any of that or not, what do you propose that will turn all these people around? You going to coffee klatch them into passivity?

Care to deal with the issue at hand, or is this the best you can do?

[Swarmlord]

Care to deal with the issue at hand, or is this the best you can do?

I already commented on the "issue at hand" earlier in the thread. I was commenting on FFTT's usual rant points. I was curious how he wanted us to cure people of this greed he rants so much about.

[FFTT]

The first solution is to stop stereotyping human beings as if they all
think the same or feel the same.

And yes actually, if our collective education systems functioned as they
should, we might all benefit from learning to respect each other's culture.


Over tea if you will.


My rant as you like to call it, comes from frustration with mankind in general too. It was not directed at any one personally.


The answer is not so simple.

Enlightenment

[KingYaba]

My opposition to this bill is hypothetical and based upon principle. I believe this violates the very aspect our founding fathers bled for during the revolution by under no circumstances should any "wiretapping" be done without a warrant. We ought not to sacrifice any shred of liberty in the name of safety. No matter how miniscule it seems. This bill perverts the spirit our founding fathers fought and died for.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/05/AR2007080501404.html

President Bush signed into law yesterday an expansion of the government's power to eavesdrop on foreign terrorism suspects without warrants.

The law, which updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was deemed a priority by Bush and his chief intelligence officials.

"We must remember that our work is not done," Bush said upon signing the bill at Camp David. "This bill is a temporary, narrowly focused statute to deal with the most immediate shortcomings in the law."

The new law, which aims to capture foreign communications that pass through the United States, will expire in six months unless Congress renews it.

Are not these "shortcomings" what America fought for three hundred years ago? Something about unreasonable search and seizure?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll836.xml

Democratic YEAS- 41
Democratic NAYS- 181

Republican YEAS- 186
Republican NAYS- 2

The fact that this expires in six months and after so many Democratic Yeas (it must mean something if so many Democrats jumped on board) leads me to believe there may actually be some urgent situation. But what laws are we defending when we so readily break them?

Granted not one report of abuse has surfaced, this bill is a perversion.

[Chef Medeski]

The first solution is to stop stereotyping human beings as if they all
think the same or feel the same.

And yes actually, if our collective education systems functioned as they
should, we might all benefit from learning to respect each other's culture.


Over tea if you will.


My rant as you like to call it, comes from frustration with mankind in general too. It was not directed at any one personally.


The answer is not so simple.

Enlightenment

Unfortunately you have about a yr until your just cynical cause you realize that the world has always had **** like that and there are always trouble. Nothings goin become utopia. You get angry then you get indolent and uncaring.

[FFTT]

Of course there will never be a perfect world, but we shouldn't be trying to make it worse.

This administration is using a perpetual state of war to undermine our
protections under the U.S. Constitution, plain and simple.

In reality, they are trying to shield themselves retroactively from criminal prosecution for illegal activities already a matter of record.

[mactastic]

Of course I'm worried about abuse, but that's never going to prevent it from happening. All you can do is count on your attorney to make sure that the letter of the law is followed if you are ever charged with anything.
But what if the abuse that occurs changes the outcomes of elections? What if it is used for political blackmail purposes, or to influence any number of aspects of justice by those very same people who are in charge of such an oversight-less program?

Can any pissant attorney handle THAT for you?

No, that's why you have a panel of experienced judges to review these things. Within 72 hours.

Why on earth would I want to go to your town? :confused:
Because if you fly into LAX, you pass through TO on the way to mactastic's house!

[skunk]

Because if you fly into LAX, you pass through TO on the way to mactastic's house!Bummer. :(
Isn't there a route which bypasses the asylum?

[mactastic]

Bummer. :(
Isn't there a route which bypasses the asylum?
Why yes there is. But if you take it, you'll miss the giant IMPEACH banner hanging across the freeway in Santa Barbara. :p

[killr_b]

Bummer. :(
Isn't there a route which bypasses the asylum?

Fly into Camarillo.

Except that's where we had the asylum…

Why yes there is. But if you take it, you'll miss the giant IMPEACH banner hanging across the freeway in Santa Barbara. :p

There's a Ron Paul 4 Pres. sign over the freeway in Ventura.

[mactastic]

Fly into Camarillo.Oh yeah, I hear Camarillo has quite the international airport...

There's a Ron Paul 4 Pres. sign over the freeway in Ventura.
Somehow I doubt Skunk will appreciate that quite as much.

[killr_b]

Oh yeah, I hear Camarillo has quite the international airport...

Hmm, you could fly into LAX, then charter a jet to Camarillo and not drive through TO. One, two, step.

Just thought of PCH too.

[solvs]

I was curious how he wanted us to cure people of this greed he rants so much about.
Not helping to enable them would be a good start.

Granted not one report of abuse has surfaced, this bill is a perversion.
Actually there have. Several liberal activist groups and churches were discovered to have been investigated for no real reason. One Muslim charity had been shut down and one of it's proprietors personal computers were all taken by the gov, even though they were never proven to have any connections to terrorism. They were trying to fight back, but all of the records were made classified, and could only do anything afterwards because they were accidentally sent some of the "classified" documents. Which were then taken back and destroyed.

Agree with the rest of what you posted, you'd think any real conservative or libertarian would feel the same way.