world

Senate bows to Bush and approves surveillance bill

28 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

28 Comments
Login to comment

I'm sorry to hear that Barack Obama voted for this. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

was that before or after he opposed it? or will oppose it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sorry to hear that Barack Obama voted for this. < :-)" Maybe he knows something you don't.

Besides, why are only Americans privileged with such liberties. Its time we get with the rest of the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I guess I could always tell you how I agree with Barack Obama. But I disagree with him on this. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just remember IDOT the americans are listening to you phone call, even to a friend. So watch out what you say, big brother is listening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You might as well get used to it--electronic information will be monitored from this point out, period, whether it is legal or not to do so. We need to get used to the idea. For one, monitoring is too easy to do. For two, it is impossible for a government to supervise the flow of information to prevent the monitoring of information. For three, the maxim of "information is power" will, by its very weight, trump the idea that privacy is a social ideal or civil liberty.

Did anyone else happen to monitor the ping times between the US and Europe during the weeks after the tall buildings fell? Or did you happen to do a trace-route and see where the packets were routed through? I did, and it was very clear what was happening. BTW, the ping times grew significantly, and haven't diminished since, and the trace routes no longer tell you where the packet is being monitored (but it did for a while...).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good. Terrorists are most displeased.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So far, Al Qaeda has killed fewer Americans than the number who die in one month from automobile accidents. Nevertheless, it has managed to scare the majority of Americans, and their so-called representatives in the House and Senate, so much that they are willing to give up the freedoms that our forefathers fought and died for in the Revolutionary War and again in World War II. Amazing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I understand what they are trying to do, but I can't say I agree with it. I've already accepted the idea that "they" are listening and watching. They might as well just go full out big brother and put cameras in everyones homes and cars. that way we can all be sure we're all on our best behavior. Doesn't really matter. As long as I don't do anything illegal there isn't anything they can do about what I think or say. A little ticked that the Senate bowed on this issue. Why did I even vote to put the Dems in the seats if this is how they're going to act?

By the way, I hope "they" are reading this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

911 was the best present the right wing community could ever have prayed for. It frightened Americans into a long dark age of willingness to go along with whatever the government imposed in the interest of saftey and security.

A responsible government would have stood by our standards of human rights and civil liberties as a defense of what our country stood for. Instead a band of opportunistic petti-fascists have leveraged this tragedy to invade our privacy, tap our commuications and more all in the name of security.

I have just one question. Who is protecting us from our own government and their assault of out constitutional liberties?

We had better start fighting back before Orwell's predictions become even more true than they are already fighteningly so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

p.s. Sarge. Do be sure to check the closet for terrorists before going to bed at night. They are everywhere you know.

Does anyone really believe this any more? This piece of legislation shows that the only terrorists we really need to be deeply fearful of are the ones rendering our constitution obsolete with their Patriot Acts and Monitoring policies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did anyone else happen to monitor the ping times between the US and Europe during the weeks after the tall buildings fell? ... BTW, the ping times grew significantly, and haven't diminished since, and the trace routes no longer tell you where the packet is being monitored

I assume that many peering points on the Internet existed in datacenters in the buildings. Therefore, it could be expected that latency would increase if those links went down, and eventually replaced by different routes.

You might as well get used to it--electronic information will be monitored from this point out, period, whether it is legal or not to do so. We need to get used to the idea.

Gee, you mean like the secret police (Stasi, SS, etc) do in fascist societies?

For one, monitoring is too easy to do.

http://www.pgp.com/

http://www.zfoneproject.com/

For two, it is impossible for a government to supervise the flow of information to prevent the monitoring of information.

?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have just one question. Who is protecting us from our own government and their assault of out constitutional liberties? We had better start fighting back before Orwell's predictions become even more true than they are already fighteningly so."

One of the reasons why all should not give up their own arms.

However, you may disagree, but I see more of Orwell's predictions coming more from the left than I do the right. And I ain't even right wing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Does anyone have any data relative to other countries who basically do this but could careless if it against the people's desires?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dem majority bows to Bush? But isn't Bush a lame duck? I'm sure that is what I have been reading for the last 2 years or so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Unbelievable! No wonder the approval rating for these clown is about 10%.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Though I harp on this somewhat, it may be irrelevant today as it was during the Red Scare:

US Bill of Rights

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Since it occurred before, they really should quit teaching it in public schools and/or to amend it to allow unwarranted searches and seizures.**

0 ( +0 / -0 )

well, I don't condone this really, but think about it. Eves-dropping happens all the time. Kids do it to their parents, and friends overhear friends conversations. So you say screw obama or screw bush, i'm gonna vanquish america. whether they hear it or not, you still have the freedom to say it. again, talking about the patriots as they play their sport. say you don't like the way so-and-so played, and bob overhears you at the bar. big deal. now if they start to barge into your homes with search warrents when you say screw america, then they're taking away the freedom to express or say what you think. that's where you need to be worrying about. while terrorism is huge, i'm certain the real reason for this bill deals with wanting to catch or overhear secrets on organizations, crime deals, what you and your wife did last night.....the list goes on ^_^. I say give 'em something to hear, if they're willing to spend our tax dollars and listen =)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Obama ended up voting for the final bill..."

Obama is looking downright McSame.

He's pro-gun, he's pro-FISA, he's opposed to an immediate pullout from Iraq...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtm66Z3lebc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tkoind - "The only terrorists we really need to be deeply fearful of are the ones rendering our constitution obsolete with their Patriot Act ad Monitoring policies"

The thousands of people who lost their loved ones in the 9/11 attacks and in battles against terrorists around the world would disagree with you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, the new surveillance bill has nothing to do with stopping terrorists, its about killing the 40 lawsuits filed against the phone companies for breaking the law. As you well know, there was more than enough information to have stopped 911; the problem was not with data gathering but with data correlation. And the old FISA court system was working fine. The problem was that the law was broken, smashed, and to avoid getting sued into bankruptcy the phone companies used their cash and lobby power to pass this bill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

actually the ping times changed, and some relays changed their port exposure to the Internet. there is more and more less and less 'presence' of certain relays as they become hardened against port attacks by not showing up on pings.

often a traceroute only show relays that respond, and in toughened intranets the path stops at the secured firewall.

and this has accelerated after 911.

IMHO the reason why servers are being toughened like that is not really to be immune from cyberterrorists, but to not show up on Big Brother's radar.

it's assumed that they exchange more encrypted traffic via the secured relay.

Big Brother can only analyze the plaintext traffic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have just one question. Who is protecting us from our own government and their assault of out constitutional liberties?

Gosh, if only there were some kind of court which could review the actions of the government to decide if they're constitutional or not... Eh, oh well. Until we do finally develop some kind of oversight on the Executive Branch I guess we'll just have to live in a constant state of fear.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The government will continue to do what they want to do. This surveillance bill actually means very little.

If they really wanted to protect us with this surveillance stuff, the bush administration would have warned people of the high possibility that terrorist were planning to use planes as weapons. But the george bush administration kept their mouths shut.

This bill is to protect their asses and the telecommunications companies for past practices that were illegal when done. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I am confident that history will not judge this Senate kindly if it endorses this tragic retreat from the principles that have governed government conduct in this sensitive area for 30 years"

You tell 'em, Russ.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Each branch of the US government is supposed watch the other two branches to ensure that all action is constitutional. The problem is, there are people in all three branches who share the same interests.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, the problem is that people aren't watching the government enough. Instead they have people following them like rock stars.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So Bush's ONLY 'accomplishment' in his entire term in office was to pass a bill to spy on his own citizens. Mission accomplished, and way to go!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites