spy1
Welcome to Amerika
Premium
join:2002-06-24
Charlotte, NC | reply to spy1
Re: FISA 'modernization" bill - head's up!
They're voting on it on C_SPAN right now, people. You missed the 90 minutes of debate, I guess.
That's a shame - it beat the hell out of "reality" tv. Pete |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | said by spy1  :They're voting on it on C_SPAN right now, people. You missed the 90 minutes of debate, I guess. That's a shame - it beat the hell out of "reality" tv. Pete The bill is passing. They already have enough votes to pass it even if every remaining vote is against it.
Edit: The bill just passed. But the authorization is only for 6 months. A permanent authorization will have to still be debated and passed to extend beyond 6 months.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing | Or beyond 6 months the lack of authorization will be ignored. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ | reply to spy1
The link to who voted how:
»clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll836.xml
41 Democrats voted for the bill. |
|
GercekSeytan
Rockin' with Raki
Premium
join:2001-10-19
Turkey
 ·TTNet
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by AmeritecTech :said by TKJunkMail :The FISA court ordered the US not to wiretap foreign conversations(foreigners on both ends) going thru US telecom switches w/o FISA approval. A really stupid decision because it would prevent the NSA from listening in on a large percentage of foreign conversations - which is their main mandate(spy on foreigners). False. As always, notice can be made to the FISA Court after the tap takes place. WRONG!!! The NSA listens in on millions of calls using computers. How do you expect them to get FISA approval(even after the fact) for all those calls. THINK!!! Easy. If you want to listen to foreigner to foreigner calls routed through the US, you apply to the FISA for blanket authority to listen calls yet to be placed that will be routed through the US.
I sure that folks didn't mean to imply that a warrant to listen to such a call should be obtained prior to the call being placed based on the evidence that eventually a call will be placed and routed concerning Op X. Why? Because if they did... Well, you get the idea.
Just being facetious. The argument is that calls should not be listened to unless there is a reason to believe that listening to a specific call will provide specific information between two already known individuals who will place a call in the future of which the time and date is also already known. Without that information, then the FISA would presumably have to grant some sort of blanket authorization which is a no-no. Well, maybe it isn't a no-no but rather what should be done since anything else... 
--
Yes, it is I, the resident crackpot and curmudgeon. |
|
spy1
Welcome to Amerika
Premium
join:2002-06-24
Charlotte, NC
1 edit | reply to fatness
Amazing how many "computer glitches" they had yesterday, isn't it?
»politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20···-tangle/
"August 3, 2007
House computer glitch adds to political tangle
WASHINGTON (CNN) – The House of Representatives slammed into its second dead-stop in a day, after 24 hours of wild political maneuvering was topped by a computer failure in the chamber’s voting system.
“It’s obvious we have a technical problem,” said Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland. A chamber full of impatient and skeptical members replied with catcalls and groans.
The problem appeared after Rep. Heather Wilson, R-New Mexico, moved to adjourn the House as a way to block a Democratic proposal on the nation’s surveillance law. But members quickly realized electronic monitors were not working. Members in the chamber couldn’t tell if their votes had been counted and representatives in their offices could not gauge how much time was left to cast their votes.
“We’re in a very awkward situation here,” said Rep. David Dreier, R-California, who is the top Republican on the Rules Committee. “The House may have just adjourned for all we know.”
After some 15 minutes of headscratching, the House recessed to allow engineers to fix the problem. Democrats promised a revote on adjournment.
The House reconvened after the computer glitch and revoted, after 4 p.m. on Friday, on Wilson’s motion to adjourn. The House took up the revised intelligence bill and will work next on a $250 million appropriation bill to help recovery from the Minneapolis bridge collapse.
All of this came less than a day after a controversial House vote led Republicans to stomp off the floor. Republicans claimed voting boards showed them winning a motion 215-213 but Rep. Michael McNulty, D-New York, announced the vote had failed.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi later said McNulty banged his gavel down early, after a few votes had been entered but not yet processed. She and other Democratic leaders insist the final tally was 212-216."
============================================
Gotta wonder how accurate (truthful) the "roll call" vote tally's were - especially given the fact that in the Senate, it barely made the required number of votes to pass.
But I digress. Pete |
|
whizkid3
Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY | reply to spy1
Well we all know that one can take the title of any Bush Administration bill, and by changing it to the opposite will describe more closely what the bill is for:
The "Protect America Act"
becomes:
The "Screw America Act" |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to spy1
said by spy1 :Gotta wonder how accurate (truthful) the "roll call" vote tally's were - especially given the fact that in the Senate, it barely made the required number of votes to pass. The vote in the Senate was 60 to 28 for passage. 60 votes were needed ONLY because some obstructionist Dems threatened a filibuster unless a 2/3rd majority approved it. But 60 Senators did vote yes, including many Democrats.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
whizkid3
Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY | Anyone have a link to the Senate vote? |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | said by whizkid3 :Anyone have a link to the Senate vote? I looked. They haven't posted it yet on the Senate web site. It is Senate Vote 309 in the current legislative session.
This will be the link when they finally post it:
»www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/r···te=00309
The only vote info is from news reports.
»www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_6543563
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to TKJunkMail
If it's honesty you're after, 181 Republicans voted for the bill according to your link.
But honesty is not your goal. This is a privacy issue for Americans, and you want to derail it into a partisan political issue.
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by fatness :If it's honesty you're after, 181 Republicans voted for the bill according to your link. But honesty is not your goal. This is a privacy issue for Americans, and you want to derail it into a partisan political issue. It was obvious to everyone(well almost everyone) that the Republicans voted for it since they introduced it. The point of mentioning the 41 Democrats voting for it was to show that the bill was needed and even 41 Bush hating Democrats realize the bill was needed.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
FiOS Dan
Premium
join:2001-07-06
Redondo Beach, CA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to fatness
said by fatness :This is a privacy issue for Americans... That's only partially correct. It really is a tradeoff issue, namely where do we want to set the balance between privacy and security. I don't like the idea of electronic surveillance but what I dislike even more is looking to the southwest horizon and seeing a mushroom cloud over the port of Los Angeles. We have been lulled into a false sense of security by the relative inactivity of the terrorists here in the U.S. but that could change overnight.
--
Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.
|
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to TKJunkMail
It's obvious to everyone that this is a national issue that transcends narrow political interests. Turning it into reasons why Whore Team A is better/worse than Whore Team B trivializes the issue. And that's what you've done so far.
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
1 edit | reply to FiOS Dan
said by FiOS Dan :We have been lulled into a false sense of security by the relative inactivity of the terrorists here in the U.S. but that could change overnight. We have been lulled into a false sense of fear in order to gain support for the over-reaching desire of the exective branch to distrust, compile information on, and track our citizens.
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
FiOS Dan
Premium
join:2001-07-06
Redondo Beach, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by fatness :We have been lulled into a false sense of fear... Been down to lower Manhattan lately to see that big hole in the ground?
--
Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.
|
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX | They hate us for our freedoms, so let's get rid of our freedoms. Let's do to ourselves what they are attempting to do to us. |
|
Thug21
Just Chillin'
Premium
join:2005-08-21
3 edits | reply to FiOS Dan
Instead of clearly identifying who the enemy is (who put that hole there!) we are told that "anyone could be one." That is a false and incorrect sense of fear that makes for a 1984 like society in which everyone needs to be watched. |
|
AmeritecTech
Change we can believe in, 1922
Premium
join:2002-09-06
Houston, TX
| reply to GercekSeytan
said by GercekSeytan :Easy. If you want to listen to foreigner to foreigner calls routed through the US, you apply to the FISA for blanket authority to listen calls yet to be placed that will be routed through the US. I sure that folks didn't mean to imply that a warrant to listen to such a call should be obtained prior to the call being placed based on the evidence that eventually a call will be placed and routed concerning Op X. Why? Because if they did... Well, you get the idea. No, I certainly did not mean that they should request a warrant before intercepting a call. Current FISA law says that you can first intercept the call with no authorization needed. After you intercept the calls, you contact FISA to let them know who you're tapping and in most cases they authorize it to continue. It never requires you to get authorization BEFORE a tap takes place, so you trying to imply that FISA requires that is pretty low.
Just being facetious. The argument is that calls should not be listened to unless there is a reason to believe that listening to a specific call will provide specific information between two already known individuals who will place a call in the future of which the time and date is also already known. Without that information, then the FISA would presumably have to grant some sort of blanket authorization which is a no-no. Damned dirty lies. The taps can take place before the FISA request is even submitted.
--
"Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone Not agreeing with them. It's The non-thinkers that ALWAYS come in legions."
-John Callari |
|
Kil DRM
@rr.com
| reply to AmeritecTech
said by AmeritecTech :They hate us for our freedoms, so let's get rid of our freedoms. They do not give a god damn about our freedoms, or how we choose to live. They hate us because we have our boot on their throat, because we support others who have had boots on their throats for years, and because we have our oil spickets stuck in their ass, draining the life blood from their civilization. That is why they hate us. That is why they attacked us. |
|
