End of the 4th Ammendment – CISPA

[admin]

Look at what Obama and the Republicans are about to do to you. They are going to repeal the 4th ammendment without an ammendment to the constitution.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml

“Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a “cybersecurity crime”. Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government’s power.”

How could anybody vote for Obama or the republicans when they are stealing your liberties?

[Anonymous]

dup

[Anonymous]

So did Obama sign the bill?

Or are you just making stuff up again?

[JPJones]

[quote=pri_dk]So did Obama sign the bill?

Or are you just making stuff up again?[/quote]

He’s just making stuff up again.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120425/12445718657/obama-administration-threatens-to-veto-cispa.shtml

[markmax33]

[quote=JPJones][quote=pri_dk]So did Obama sign the bill?

Or are you just making stuff up again?[/quote]

He’s just making stuff up again.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120425/12445718657/obama-administration-threatens-to-veto-cispa.shtml%5B/quote%5D

Are you all seriously doubting he will sign this? He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.

[CA renter]

Who signed the Patriot Act?

IMHO, this was the beginning of the end as far as privacy rights are concerned. It never should have happened.

[SD Realtor]

I agree CAR.

We should blame all of this on BUSH!

[JPJones]

[quote=markmax33][quote=JPJones][quote=pri_dk]So did Obama sign the bill?

Or are you just making stuff up again?[/quote]

He’s just making stuff up again.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120425/12445718657/obama-administration-threatens-to-veto-cispa.shtml%5B/quote%5D

Are you all seriously doubting he will sign this? He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.[/quote]

That is a poor example considering the version of NDAA that Obama signed, which included several consessions added because of his initial veto threat, passed through both houses of congress veto-proof. Here are a couple of articles if you are interested in learning more:

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/confused-about-ndaa-and-detention-provision

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-faq-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/

The point is that even if the bill does get signed, it will likely not be in its current form.

EDIT: Also, Bush’s fault.

[Anonymous]

[quote=markmax33]He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.[/quote]

You don’t have a good track record here for honoring your wagers.

But you do realize that the NDAA is the bill that authorizes the entire defense budget?

Not so easy to just say “no” to that one.

CISPA is a little different, as it is not attached to any existing programs.

BTW, did Ron Paul vote to authorize the defense budget, or did he vote to let our troops in the field run out of ammo?

[JPJones]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=markmax33]He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.[/quote]

You don’t have a good track record here for honoring your wagers.

But you do realize that the NDAA is the bill that authorizes the entire defense budget?

Not so easy to just say “no” to that one.

CISPA is a little different, as it is not attached to any existing programs.

BTW, did Ron Paul vote to authorize the defense budget, or did he vote to let our troops in the field run out of ammo?[/quote]

Neither. Apparently, Ron Paul didn’t vote on the bill at all.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll932.xml

[markmax33]

[quote=JPJones][quote=pri_dk][quote=markmax33]He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.[/quote]

You don’t have a good track record here for honoring your wagers.

But you do realize that the NDAA is the bill that authorizes the entire defense budget?

Not so easy to just say “no” to that one.

CISPA is a little different, as it is not attached to any existing programs.

BTW, did Ron Paul vote to authorize the defense budget, or did he vote to let our troops in the field run out of ammo?[/quote]

Neither. Apparently, Ron Paul didn’t vote on the bill at all.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll932.xml%5B/quote%5D

No he was doing interviews for the campaign and actually talking about it in the media which was much more important:

12/14/11

[markmax33]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=markmax33]He said he didn’t support the NDAA which stripped your right to a trial and he signed that too, “against his best judgement”. He will sign this thing I’ll bet anything.[/quote]

You don’t have a good track record here for honoring your wagers.

But you do realize that the NDAA is the bill that authorizes the entire defense budget?

Not so easy to just say “no” to that one.

CISPA is a little different, as it is not attached to any existing programs.

BTW, did Ron Paul vote to authorize the defense budget, or did he vote to let our troops in the field run out of ammo?[/quote]

Ron Paul was running a presidential campaign and if his vote had mattered he would have been there. He stood up and berated Congress a million times on the provisions and his son stood up infront of Congress and had a historic speech.

Who cares what is attached to what bill. You take an outh of office to uphold the Constitution and you DO NOT VOTE FOR ANYTHING UNCONSTITUTIONAL. If there wasn’t an epidimic of ignoring the Constitution that thing would have never made it to Obama’s desk and we would be allowed a fair trial. Now we can go to jail in a foreign country without the right to a trial because of a suspicion. It is ridiculous anyone would sign that. How dare you defend anyone who signed that piece of legislation?

I’m calling it now – Obama signs it and claims he wishes he didn’t have to do it. “There’s too much important other stuff in there.” May, 29 2012 – Obama

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=CA renter]Who signed the Patriot Act?

IMHO, this was the beginning of the end as far as privacy rights are concerned. It never should have happened.[/quote]

CAR: I agree it should never have happened, but, sadly, our privacy rights and civil liberties have been under assault for decades now and BOTH parties are at fault.

You can go back to the “Red Scare” right after WWI, the “Nazi Scare” right before and during WWII, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and good, ole “Tailgunner” Joe McCarthy and his bullshit for a good look at your civil liberties being shredded for nearly a century.

This is a good example of the “boiling frog” theory at work. Its been a slow, steady erosion and we still haven’t awakened to the fact that the most precious right of all, individual liberty, is now fundamentally at risk.

Markmax: Its “amendment”, not “ammendment.”

[Anonymous]

[quote=markmax33]Ron Paul was running a presidential campaign and if his vote had mattered he would have been there. [/quote]

BREAKING NEWS:

Ron Paul refuses to provide funding to US combat forces.

US forces stationed in Afghanistan today faced a critical shortage of supplies due fact that congress has not yet passed a defense budget authorizing federal funds for ammunition and other protective equipment.

Ron Paul, who would not vote yes on the bill had this to say: “I believe in the Constitution, that’s why I think they should die defending it.” The congressman, who hasn’t spent much time on Capital Hill lately, continued, saying that his vote “didn’t matter anyway.” and “I haven’t accomplished anything as congressman, but make me president and I’ll get things done.”

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk] …on Capital Hill lately[/quote]

“Capital Hill”? Is that anywhere near Capitol Hill?

[Author]

Posts