If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Senator Leahy has created a bill, aptly named the "NSA Castration Act" and it's 72 pages of ball busting glory   (politico.com) divider line 15
    More: Hero, Leahy's, NSA, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Jon Tester, Mark Udall, FISA Amendments Act, Internet access, Ron Wyden  
•       •       •

4016 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jun 2013 at 8:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-06-25 08:30:13 AM
5 votes:
So the sunset date on collecting data is two years shorter but still 2 years away?  And as an added coincidence, it is AFTER the next midterm election when a bunch of new congressmen can change it back.

Someone asked me why I was not more outraged by this whole thing.  My response to him was that (tin foil hat time) I assumed the government had been doing this for years at least beginning with the passage of the Patriot Act, if not well before.  It is hard to get wound up about something 10 years after it started.  If this was a new bill being passed I would be more vocal but, quite frankly, it has been going on since at least Bush, if not Clinton, and there has been no difference in the way I act.  If the gov't wants to review my extensive history on youporn or espn, they are free to do so.  The only other thing they might find is my wierd Netflix viewing habits, but since the people at Netflix probably already are laughing at me, the gov't added in to that is not going to bother me.
2013-06-25 08:26:58 AM
2 votes:
They'll stall the bill until the controversy is out of the news cycle, then drown it.
2013-06-25 08:23:44 AM
2 votes:
I wish I knew why our government is so scared of terrorists. Do the higher ups know some kind of disturbing truth that we dont?

I for one welcome anything that limits the scope and power of legislation like the patriot act simply because is never ok to give up your rights for perceived safety.
2013-06-25 08:20:53 AM
2 votes:
1. Hero? Guy is a politician
2. Wont pass.
2013-06-25 03:34:12 PM
1 votes:

bluenote13: I assumed the government had been doing this for years


I hear this a lot.

I assumed the government wouldn't do this, since our founding law says not to do this.

Perhaps that was naive.

But, hey, I'm a liberal who trust his government to do the right thing.  Well, I was, at least.

Now I'm arguing with other liberals who say the wrong thing is OK when the right party does it.

It leaves a bit of a sour taste in the mouth.

/more scotch will fix that
//the taste, I mean, not the country
///the country is farked
2013-06-25 12:02:03 PM
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: [farm6.staticflickr.com image 526x239]

// I know he's serious
// still gonna call him Shirley


Nice.

/That's Senator Leahy himself looking at Joker, for the uninformed
2013-06-25 10:47:05 AM
1 votes:

AnonAmbientLight: I wish I knew why our government is so scared of terrorists.


They're not afraid of terrorists; they're afraid of the people.
2013-06-25 10:24:09 AM
1 votes:
This is the same guy who introduced PIPA of SOPA/PIPA infamy.  The use of the hero tag is severe stretch.
2013-06-25 10:17:16 AM
1 votes:
Can we attach Charles Rangel's amendment re-instituting the draft?

We'll never have another war if senators' sons and daughters have to fight alongside the children of money.

Besides,  next time we have several thousand murdered in a terror attack, nobody might volunteer to find the men who did it and kill them. You know, because Iraq. And 15 month repeated combat tours with no time off. And no armor. And contractors getting rich while volunteers wonder where OBL has his comfortable house with his wives and children.
2013-06-25 09:46:50 AM
1 votes:

imontheinternet: catpuncher: They'll stall the bill until the controversy is out of the news cycle, then drown it.

I'd like to think that isn't true, but

FTFA:  The bill would also require a report be made public on government surveillance's effect on Americans' privacy and demand audits of the Patriot Act.

No way does this pass.  At this point, I'm not even sure Obama would sign it with that provision in it.


Sadly, I think you're right.  Gotta respect Leahy for trying, though.
2013-06-25 09:40:11 AM
1 votes:
Here's a suggestion, get rid of the FISA court and have regular federal judges do what the FISA court does. There's no real need to worry about secrecy for general information gathering warrants, after all the law allows for them, if the NSA wants the phone records from Verizon, given that it's right there in the law they can ask for such a thing, no need to be all hush hush about it. In the case of requests for specific access to specific things in regards to specific people, a federal judge is certainly capable of keeping his or her mouth shut about it and you can skip even officially having it on the docket.

Another thing is the NSA seems to love Top Secret classification like no one else. That needs to be changed, if you can't change it by general expectation, then changing it by law will have to do. The CIA has tons of stuff that is confidential or secret, which is part of why so much CIA stuff gets declassified. They have a lot of stuff they're willing to go "Eh sure, why not?" about when it comes to declassifying it because they never though it was a huge super secret thing to begin with. Of course part of that has to do with the people, who are very different from those at the NSA. The NSA should have to learn to live with the fact that no not everything merits Top Secret status, only those select few things where you absolutely positively want to make sure very few people have legitimate access deserve that status. Granted it's not an easy path given that SIGINT can be odd ducks and the NSA doubly so.
2013-06-25 09:09:09 AM
1 votes:

bluenote13: Someone asked me why I was not more outraged by this whole thing.  My response to him was that (tin foil hat time) I assumed the government had been doing this for years at least beginning with the passage of the Patriot Act, if not well before.  It is hard to get wound up about something 10 years after it started.


I can partially understand that sentiment, but only as it applies to something you didn't think was a big deal in the first place.  Would you feel the same if you found out the government had been castrating people of a certain ethnicity for the last ten years?  How about if they had been deliberately putting carcinogens in our water supply for the same amount of time?

Not that those things have happened; I'm just curious about when your threshold of caring gets exceeded.
2013-06-25 08:56:30 AM
1 votes:
farm6.staticflickr.com

// I know he's serious
// still gonna call him Shirley
2013-06-25 08:45:32 AM
1 votes:

AnonAmbientLight: I wish I knew why our government is so scared of terrorists. Do the higher ups know some kind of disturbing truth that we dont?


Terrorists are just an excuse. A few decades ago, they'd be using the fear the Commies to collect information on citizens. They like having that sort of power, and no politician is going to give it up.

The time to fight this shiat was when the PATRIOT act was being discussed. If it had been struck down, that would have been a good starting point to go after the older parts of the surveillance state. But instead, because Americans are cowards, it passed almost unopposed. And now, we have almost no chance of getting RID of any of this garbage.
2013-06-25 08:34:15 AM
1 votes:

AnonAmbientLight: I wish I knew why our government is so scared of terrorists. Do the higher ups know some kind of disturbing truth that we dont?


Its more about politics than real fear of terrorists.  If any president (though especially a democrat with a funny name) were to cut back on any kind of intelligence gathering measure what so ever, and then there was an attack, the other party (especially republicans) would immediately play the "he allowed us to be attacked" card.
 
Displayed 15 of 15 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report