Democrats pass warrantless wire tap bill

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 08:34 AM

So here we have the result of the bruhaha and posturing over the FISA courts and the governments attempts to monitor suspected terrorists inside and outside the US we get this from the Demoncratically controlled Congress:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...828088,00.html

The bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It gives the government leeway to intercept, without warrants, communications between foreigners that are routed through equipment in United States, provided that ``foreign intelligence information'' is at stake. Bush describes the effort as an anti-terrorist program, but the bill is not limited to terror suspects and could have wider applications, some lawmakers said.

yesman065 · 08-06-2007, 08:44 AM

"Congressional Democrats won a few concessions in negotiations earlier in the week. New wiretaps must be approved by the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, not just the attorney general."

The new law also will expire in six months unless Congress renews it."

This seems like a fair compromise - lets see where this goes and take it from there. I think that 6 months is too short a time period to really tell though.

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 08:54 AM

I agree. It takes quite a bit of time to develop the intel which is why we are years behind now. Should be interesting. I just found it ironic that this bill has passed both houses, came out of committe, and has been signed by the President when it essentially provides for warrantless wire taps of US citizens, the same issue everyone was falling on their sword over a while back. Interesting to note as well that the mainstream UK press picked the story up before any large US news hounds did. Why do you think that may have been???

yesman065 · 08-06-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Interesting to note as well that the mainstream UK press picked the story up before any large US news hounds did. Why do you think that may have been???

time zone?

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesman065

time zone?

Possible. I did not think of that.

yesman065 · 08-06-2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Why do you think that may have been???

Then again it may not be a good thing for the democratic candidates and therefore not newsworthy in the eyes of the "mainstream media."

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesman065

Then again it may not be a good thing for the democratic candidates and therefore not newsworthy in the eyes of the "mainstream media."

I guess I just find it soooo ironic that there was this HUGE outcry over the whole issue and then the Democrats turn right around and pass essentially the same issue making it law. Now not even a whimper. Ok, a few whimpers, but not this threat of Congressional hearings and all the other political posturing that went on after the program made it to the public.

bluecuracao · 08-06-2007, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I guess I just find it soooo ironic that there was this HUGE outcry over the whole issue and then the Democrats turn right around and pass essentially the same issue making it law. Now not even a whimper. Ok, a few whimpers, but not this threat of Congressional hearings and all the other political posturing that went on after the program made it to the public.

Well..most of the Democrats voted 'no,' so really, the Republicans were the most responsible for passing it.

Since this issue has to be revisited over the next few months, there will still be plenty of time for hell-raising. After everyone gets back from vacation, anyway.

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 09:52 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/wa...gewanted=print

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 05:36 PM

So I hear that one of the biggest issues is that the private telecom companies now will get money for the time and resources that they contribute to the effort. A big plus since they are a huge contributor to Democratic political election campaigns.

deadbeater · 08-06-2007, 05:59 PM

They want Congress themselves to watch over the program, not someone like Gonzalez.

How fitting that they probably passed it during late night/early morning, like a stealth law.

Ibby · 08-06-2007, 07:35 PM

There is actually a huge outcry in the netroots and, actually, mainstream left-wing movement against the tiny handful of democrats that caved to the executive branch yet again.

TheMercenary · 08-06-2007, 07:49 PM

"In the final vote, 41 Democrats joined all but 2 Republicans in backing the measure; 181 Democrats opposed it."

The dems could have stopped the vote through any number of measures. They let it go. Same goes for the Senate. So the actual number of people who were elected to make change really supported the issue after all.

08-06-2007, 08:47 PM

Makes me want to start a company that makes it impossible for them to track or tap calls.
This is sick.

08-06-2007, 08:34 AM	#1
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Democrats pass warrantless wire tap bill So here we have the result of the bruhaha and posturing over the FISA courts and the governments attempts to monitor suspected terrorists inside and outside the US we get this from the Demoncratically controlled Congress: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...828088,00.html The bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It gives the government leeway to intercept, without warrants, communications between foreigners that are routed through equipment in United States, provided that ``foreign intelligence information'' is at stake. Bush describes the effort as an anti-terrorist program, but the bill is not limited to terror suspects and could have wider applications, some lawmakers said. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

08-06-2007, 08:54 AM	#3
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	I agree. It takes quite a bit of time to develop the intel which is why we are years behind now. Should be interesting. I just found it ironic that this bill has passed both houses, came out of committe, and has been signed by the President when it essentially provides for warrantless wire taps of US citizens, the same issue everyone was falling on their sword over a while back. Interesting to note as well that the mainstream UK press picked the story up before any large US news hounds did. Why do you think that may have been??? __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

08-06-2007, 09:52 AM	#9
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/wa...gewanted=print __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

08-06-2007, 05:36 PM	#10
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	So I hear that one of the biggest issues is that the private telecom companies now will get money for the time and resources that they contribute to the effort. A big plus since they are a huge contributor to Democratic political election campaigns. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

08-06-2007, 07:35 PM	#12
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	There is actually a huge outcry in the netroots and, actually, mainstream left-wing movement against the tiny handful of democrats that caved to the executive branch yet again. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

08-06-2007, 08:44 AM	#2
yesman065 Banned - Self Imposed Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,847	"Congressional Democrats won a few concessions in negotiations earlier in the week. New wiretaps must be approved by the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, not just the attorney general." The new law also will expire in six months unless Congress renews it." This seems like a fair compromise - lets see where this goes and take it from there. I think that 6 months is too short a time period to really tell though.

08-06-2007, 05:59 PM	#11
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	They want Congress themselves to watch over the program, not someone like Gonzalez. How fitting that they probably passed it during late night/early morning, like a stealth law.

08-06-2007, 07:49 PM	#13
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	"In the final vote, 41 Democrats joined all but 2 Republicans in backing the measure; 181 Democrats opposed it." The dems could have stopped the vote through any number of measures. They let it go. Same goes for the Senate. So the actual number of people who were elected to make change really supported the issue after all. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

08-06-2007, 08:47 PM	#14
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Makes me want to start a company that makes it impossible for them to track or tap calls. This is sick.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)