REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Warrantless Wiretapping Legal

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Thursday, July 10, 2008 09:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2264
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:38 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

The US senate has passed a bill to shield telephone companies who helped in the White House's controversial warrantless wiretaps programme.

The bill also grants the US government the power to continue with the telephone surveillance scheme.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7498753.stm

And current lawsuits against the phone companies become moot.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.





Unless the Constitutionality of the law is challenged. Not that I hold out much hope of SCOTUS defending the Constitution.


---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 2:34 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Unless the Constitutionality of the law is challenged. Not that I hold out much hope of SCOTUS defending the Constitution.


That Law will NEVER pass...Obama promised to filibuster it.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 3:32 AM

JONGSSTRAW


You better watch out
You better not cry
You better not pout
I'm telling you why
NSA is coming to town

They know if you are sleeping
They know if you're awake
They know if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake.....Oh....

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 3:33 AM

SERGEANTX


Things will be so much better when the Democrats get the majority in the Senate. Then they can put a stop to this kind of crap.

Oh, wait.... uhh......

Lookie, here's a quote from the "Candidate of Change" .

Quote:

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama voted in favor of the measure.

His decision to back the bill drew criticism from some of his supporters, who pointed to past statements in which Mr Obama had pledged to block any bill which granted immunity to telecommunication companies.

"I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this," said Mr Obama, in a statement on his website.

However, he added, "in a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people".



So much for the audacity of hope...

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 3:49 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:
Things will be so much better when the Democrats get the majority in the Senate. Then they can put a stop to this kind of crap.

Oh, wait.... uhh......

Lookie, here's a quote from the "Candidate of Change" .

Quote:

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama voted in favor of the measure.

His decision to back the bill drew criticism from some of his supporters, who pointed to past statements in which Mr Obama had pledged to block any bill which granted immunity to telecommunication companies.

"I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this," said Mr Obama, in a statement on his website.

However, he added, "in a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people".



So much for the audacity of hope...

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock


He voted for it, and Hillary voted against it. Once he comes back from Iraq his journey to the dark side will be complete. The monied Left will skedaddle back to Hillary like an abusive husband trying to console his batterred wife. Terry McCauliff & Lanny Davis are working their svengaliesque magic behind the scenes with the Supers...Denver will be a real hoot!@

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:04 AM

KHYRON


Bush's approval rating is at 28%. If current trends continue, it looks like the only people in the country left to support him at the end of his presidency will be the Democrats in the Senate and the House.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:21 AM

RIGHTEOUS9


I give you that one Hero,

well played.

True, and sad that he did not. STRANGE, being that his voting record is "the most liberal" of anyone in the senate...unless that's gasp...

a lie also!

.............

Not sure why he is moving so quickly to the ridiculously right scewed "middle". Right after getting the nomination he was polling like 54 to 40 something versus Mccain on his "for change", left leaning, if more centrist than I'd prefer, credentials. He was owning. So WTF? Why change what's working, especially when it is also right?

I'll throw out a bipoartisan bone here. The suggestion made by Sygm, and many more that I've heard from in other circles is that some dems were complicit in this program. That's the only thng that makes sense at this point. It was Bad for the constitution, it's reality is bad for the Republican Party, and yet they aren't being outed on this program,and yet everybody is being given immunity pre discovery.

It's fucking appaling. I'm not sure if Obama thinks he needs certain dem senators in his court, or if he's being consistent(while being inconsistent) by trying to extend a hand across the aisle for future gop support if he makes it into office, but I'll admit the enthusiasm is dead here. He has my vote, he almost had my money, but I think I'll send it to Dean instead, when I scrape up enough for a 50 dollar donation.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:30 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:
So much for the audacity of hope...


His next book will be called 'The Audacity of Doing or Saying Anything to Get Elected'

The sequel to that will be 'The Audacity of Being the Black Jimmy Carter'...look for that one in about four years.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:34 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by Righteous9:
I'm not sure if Obama thinks he needs certain dem senators in his court, or if he's being consistent(while being inconsistent) by trying to extend a hand across the aisle for future gop support if he makes it into office, but I'll admit the enthusiasm is dead here.

I think he did it so that the GOP can't spin it into looking like he's weak on national security by voting against it.

I guess it's about pissing off the smaller constituency. Vote against it, you'll lose all those people in the centre gullible enough to believe the BS that would've come from the right about him voting against this bill was a victory for the terrorists. Vote for it, you'll piss off some people mostly on the left, most of whom will vote for him anyway. Either way, Obama would've lost on this (politically speaking), it's just a shame that the right thing to do would've been to give the right a major opening.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:44 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
I guess it's about pissing off the smaller constituency. Vote against it, you'll lose all those people in the centre gullible enough to believe the BS that would've come from the right about him voting against this bill was a victory for the terrorists. Vote for it, you'll piss off some people mostly on the left, most of whom will vote for him anyway.



Trying to be too clever can backfire. This might just as well piss off the considerable number of Americans, republican and democrat, fed up with police-state government.

More than anything it's just more proof that the system doesn't work - sorry, Geezer, it's true - and that we'll never see anything but politics-as-usual come out of it.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 4:50 AM

RIGHTEOUS9



I just think that that message of "soft on terror" wasn't resonating as much as it used to...people were starting to see through it...like I said, he was polling WELL, he'd already stated his perspective on this "unequivically", heh, so the right wing was free to run with it all they wanted to...

he was the Presidential nominee for the democratic party and he could have put pressure on the leaders not to include that part of the legislatin in the bill, or at least I assume he could have...

meaning that when bush vetoed a bill without the immunities, the repubs would have had to double talk about how the democrats were holding up the fisa bill, even though HE vetoed it. Seems like it would have been a good place for democrats and Obama to be in...

this? Not sure why he needed to do it. Not convinced that it was a neccesary political move, which concerns me more than anything, because one does not vote for that bill as a matter of principle.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:03 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
I think he did it so that the GOP can't spin it into looking like he's weak on national security by voting against it.


Yeah, that worked real good for Kerry.

Lets see...Obama was against wiretapping before he was for it....or was he for it or against it? Just like public financing, date-certain troop withdrawls, the DC gun ban, town hall debates, doing things differently, supporting his minister, etc.

Now he wants to go give a speech in Berlin, cause we get so many foriegn leaders coming here to give election speeches.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:12 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:
Trying to be too clever can backfire.

Yeah, especially when it leads to the damping of the enthusiasm of grassroots activists, which is what got him where he is.
Quote:

This might just as well piss off the considerable number of Americans, republican and democrat, fed up with police-state government.
I don't think Obama voting for this will piss off too many Republicans, after all, it was the Republicans who drew it up and overwhelmingly voted for it. But if you meant Republicans unhappy with FISA, then one can only hope. The more people pissed off about living with a police-state government, the more likely it is that it becomes an election issue in the down-ticket races and we get people into Congress who wouldn't vote for bills like this.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:18 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Just like [...] town hall debates

Are those not going to happen anymore? I thought they agreed to have some in September? Could you provide a link?

I'm not trying to be snarky here, it's just that I may have missed something in the news. I think McCain's idea for the two to have unmoderated townhall debates was excellent, it'd be a shame if it wouldn't go ahead anymore.

As for the other things you listed, I don't think they can be regarded as flip-flops, unless one does a lot of spinning. Apart from the wiretapping, which I think is a genuine flip-flop.
Quote:

Now he wants to go give a speech in Berlin, cause we get so many foriegn leaders coming here to give election speeches.
Not that I think going to foreign countries during an election should be seen as a good thing, but to be fair, McCain did go on a lenghty tour of Europe back in March or April (not sure anymore). Kind of unfair to slam Obama for doing it too.

Although I'd rather have neither of them do it.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:26 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:
So much for the audacity of hope...


His next book will be called 'The Audacity of Doing or Saying Anything to Get Elected'

The sequel to that will be 'The Audacity of Being the Black Jimmy Carter'...look for that one in about four years.

H

How dare you post something I cannot make fun of?

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I'm not sure that people will get tired of right-wing government. What they ARE tired of is weasley politicians who don't do what they say, and say what they mean. I hope Obama gets roundly b*tchslapped in the polls.

Of the Dems who voted for this bill:
Baucus (MT), Bayh (IN) Carper (DE) Casey (PA)Conrad (ND) Feinstein (CA) Inouye (HI) Johnson (SD) Kohl (WI) Landrieu (LA) Lincoln (AR)McCaskill (MO) Mikulski (MD) Nelson (FL) Nelson (NE) Obama (IL) Pryor (AR) Rockefeller (WV) Salazar (CO) Webb (VA) Whitehouse (RI)

I'm most surprised by Inouye , who overall has a decent voting record, and entirely fed up with Feinstein.

Feingold OTOH said (and I wish I could find the quote) that he was on the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, which allowed him to be FULLY BRIEFED on the extent and nature of the wiretapping program, and when the Senators received that information as it became declassified THEY WOULD REGRET having voted for the bill.

So, most Senators voted for a pig in a poke.


I note for the record that ALL Republicans (except McCain, who was mysteriously absent) voted for the frigging bill.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:36 AM

KHYRON


Chris, you could've said something like:

McCain's next book will be called 'Faith of my Lobbyists'.

The sequel to that will be 'Faith in Pandering and Bottom-Trawling for Votes'.

Followed by 'Faith in Being the Next George W Bush'.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:41 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I hope Obama gets roundly b*tchslapped in the polls.

[...]

I note for the record that ALL Republicans (except McCain, who was mysteriously absent) voted for the frigging bill.

Surely even the average American isn't so stupid that he'll say he'd rather vote for the Republicans because he's disappointed Obama voted for FISA?

I have the feeling that, sadly, to most people, this will blow over as a non-issue, if they even know it happened.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:47 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
Surely even the average American isn't so stupid that he'll say he'd rather vote for the Republicans because he's disappointed Obama voted for FISA?


No, I think we're just expressing a fear of business as usual....

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 5:49 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Ron Paul on the Wiretap Bill

June 24, 2008

Ron Paul explains why he is opposed to the “compromise” FISA wiretap bill (June 20):

Mr. Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure.



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 6:02 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


AFA Obama is concerned... I'm ready to vote for someone else. The rest of you can vote for him, but I'd rather send a message to the Dem Party.

Yes, I know "Papa Munster" McCain is a horrific candidate with an anger management problem and his finger on the button. But I think the American public needs to grow the frak up, and live with the consequences of being coccooned in their own little narrow comfy worldview.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 6:10 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
I think he did it so that the GOP can't spin it into looking like he's weak on national security by voting against it.


Yeah, that worked real good for Kerry.

Lets see...Obama was against wiretapping before he was for it....or was he for it or against it? Just like public financing, date-certain troop withdrawls, the DC gun ban, town hall debates, doing things differently, supporting his minister, etc.

Now he wants to go give a speech in Berlin, cause we get so many foriegn leaders coming here to give election speeches.

H



What, you don't think flip-flopping is a good strategy? So I guess you definitely WON'T be voting for McSame, huh? After all, you're the one who tells others that it would be in their best interests to just not vote at all...

Let's see, McBush has flip-flopped on The Surge, VA benefits, the GI Bill (he opposed it for the last 18 months, then he didn't even show up to vote on it, and NOW he's taking credit for it!), campaign finance reform, public election financing (he was against it, then for it, then borrowed millions against it, then was for it again, then... who knows!)

In short, there's absolutely no way to know how McSame will vote on any issue, because he's so often been on the opposite sides of the same issue already!

And still, the Repugnicans will blindly follow...



Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock

The Myrmidons were an ancient nation of very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. - Wikipedia

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 7:27 AM

THATWEIRDGIRL


I just threw up a little in my mouth.



---
Sometimes I lie awake at night, and I ask, "Where have I gone wrong?" Then a voice says to me, "This is going to take more than one night."
-- Charlie Brown
www.thatcostumegirl.com
www.thatweirdgirl.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 7:48 AM

WHODIED



I'm guessing The Temerity of Hope


At least the communications branch of our fascist corporate overlords is safe.



--WhoDied


_______________________

Security feeds are a traipse to access...
and I wasn't the first one in.
This has prints on it. So somebody else has been fed this.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:24 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
AFA Obama is concerned... I'm ready to vote for someone else. The rest of you can vote for him, but I'd rather send a message to the Dem Party.

So you're a single-issue voter?

I know Obama's position on FISA sucks, but come on, let's not get carried away here. There are only two viable candidates in this race for the White House, one of them is a hell of a lot better than the other one and he needs all the help he can get. Anyone as opposed to Bush's policies (and hence McCain's policies) as you are shouldn't be willing to throw Obama under the bus, even if it's a serious disagreement like this one. There are too many other things at stake in this election.

------------------------------

This isn't my signature. I have to type this every time I make a post.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:42 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I know Obama's position on FISA sucks, but come on, let's not get carried away here. There are only two viable candidates in this race for the White House, one of them is a hell of a lot better than the other one and he needs all the help he can get. Anyone as opposed to Bush's policies (and hence McCain's policies) as you are shouldn't be willing to throw Obama under the bus, even if it's a serious disagreement like this one. There are too many other things at stake in this election.
No, I'm way more than a single-issue voter. I don't agree with Obama on a lot of things: funding faith-based groups, FISA, the death penalty.

But mainly, I'm sick to death of Dem candidates courting their left-wing during the primaries and then ditching them once they have the nomination.

Now, IF the left-wing is a necessary part of the party, the only way to get the Party hacks' attention (it seems) is to defect at election. If not... then it doesn't matter what I vote, does it?

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:58 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
There are only two viable candidates in this race for the White House, one of them is a hell of a lot better than the other one and he needs all the help he can get. Anyone as opposed to Bush's policies (and hence McCain's policies) as you are shouldn't be willing to throw Obama under the bus, even if it's a serious disagreement like this one. There are too many other things at stake in this election.



But this is the same carrot they dangle in front of us every goddamn election. Until we learn to reject BOTH of the pre-approved, statu-quo candidates, we'll only get more of the same.

Let's face it, the election was over six months ago. All they're really after at this point is some semblance of public approval for their sham 'process'. I see no reason to give it to them.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
MAGA movement
Sun, November 24, 2024 01:26 - 13 posts
Where is the 25th ammendment when you need it?
Sun, November 24, 2024 01:01 - 18 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sat, November 23, 2024 23:46 - 4761 posts
Australia - unbelievable...
Sat, November 23, 2024 19:59 - 22 posts
Elections; 2024
Sat, November 23, 2024 19:33 - 4796 posts
More Cope: David Brooks and PBS are delusional...
Sat, November 23, 2024 16:32 - 1 posts
List of States/Governments/Politicians Moving to Ban Vaccine Passports
Sat, November 23, 2024 16:27 - 168 posts
Once again... a request for legitimate concerns...
Sat, November 23, 2024 16:22 - 17 posts
What's wrong with conspiracy theories
Sat, November 23, 2024 15:07 - 19 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Sat, November 23, 2024 14:38 - 945 posts
Convicted kosher billionaire makes pedophile Roman Polanski blush
Sat, November 23, 2024 13:46 - 34 posts
The worst Judges, Merchants of Law, Rogue Prosecutors, Bad Cops, Criminal Supporting Lawyers, Corrupted District Attorney in USA? and other Banana republic
Sat, November 23, 2024 13:39 - 50 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL