Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: new bill/internet privacy  (Read 1301 times)

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 15609
  • Gender: Female
new bill/internet privacy
« on: November 20, 2012, 12:39:32 PM »
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

not a horribly long article ans worth a read.  
.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline buzzbee

  • Ken
  • Administrator
  • Galactic Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 5733
  • Gender: Male
    • N Central Pa Beekeepers Facebook Page
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2012, 06:20:59 PM »
Theres too much free speechin goin on out there!! We can't have people who disagree with the lefts agenda communicating with each other unsupervised now can we. If they don't go along with the 51 percent "mandate" then they must be extremists or racist,or sexist so they will need to get a lid on them.

Offline BlueBee

  • Galactic Bee
  • ******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Gender: Male
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2012, 07:00:54 PM »
This is the kind of bill I would have expected under the Bush/Cheney admin.  Stoke fear mongering in the population and then start peeling away our liberties.  Hopefully the first thing that is cut in the fiscal cliff talks is the funds for agencies like the TSA.  I’m hopeful, and confident, that Obama will veto this bill if it ever makes it to his desk.

Offline Vance G

  • Queen Bee
  • ****
  • Posts: 1155
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2012, 07:41:04 PM »
If this bill fails to pass congress, Bathhouse Barry will use executive order to implement it.  Or since the law doesn't apply to him, just keep on doing what he is doing. 

Offline sterling

  • Queen Bee
  • ****
  • Posts: 1133
  • Gender: Male
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2012, 08:23:39 PM »
This is the kind of bill I would have expected under the Bush/Cheney admin.  Stoke fear mongering in the population and then start peeling away our liberties.  Hopefully the first thing that is cut in the fiscal cliff talks is the funds for agencies like the TSA.  I’m hopeful, and confident, that Obama will veto this bill if it ever makes it to his desk.

That must be some good weed ya'll grow up there.

Offline BlueBee

  • Galactic Bee
  • ******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Gender: Male
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM »
 :-D  Still illegal in the State of Michigan  :-D

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 15609
  • Gender: Female
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2012, 09:08:59 PM »
Quote
This is the kind of bill I would have expected under the Bush/Cheney admin.

then you don't pay much attention.  the left is all about freedom when it comes to who you have sex with, but other than that, they are hot to control the rest of your life.


TSA was created by a bipartisan bill in congress.  if you remember, bush didn't want the homeland security dept, but congress did.  i would agree with you that it, and all of homeland security should go away.  it was a needless and expensive new layer of bureaucracy. of course, now TSA is going union.....

if you are really worried about the cost of things, the first thing that should go is obama care.  after that, we can look at other expensive bits of crap in government.
.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline luvin honey

  • Super Bee
  • *****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Gender: Female
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2012, 12:41:34 PM »
This is the kind of bill I would have expected under the Bush/Cheney admin.  Stoke fear mongering in the population and then start peeling away our liberties.
No kidding. I was terrified enough when privacy seemed to be headed out the window under Bush. This is crazy! I wholeheartedly disagree with the bill (although I haven't heard anything about it except this article) and hope someone out there is fighting heartily against it.
The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 15609
  • Gender: Female
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2012, 10:04:22 PM »
Quote
I was terrified enough when privacy seemed to be headed out the window under Bush

i found this amusing when the left was screaming about the patriot act.  pretty much all of that act was already available to law enforcement, particularly the DEA.  much of those earlier enactments had happened under clinton.  no outcry from the public.  the primary thing the patriot act did, was to update existing law and make the provisions more widely available to all law enforcement.  in addition, all that was in the patriot act was subject to challenge in court, and some has been challenged and changed. 

there is a legitimate argument to be made about the provisions being over reaching, but the hysteria over them is hard to take seriously since no one was upset when the original provision were enacted.  it is typical of the libs to scream that the right wants to take your freedom and starve your granny, but if you look at the times when liberties are most often lost, you'll find liberals in charge. when there is talk of restricting rights, you'll most often find that talk coming from the left.
while obama has done a lot of things that disturb me, the worst and maybe least talked about is the assassination of American citizens without due process. this kill list crosses a line into behavior that i never though i'd see in this country.  this is 3rd world dictator stuff.     

yes, some republicans do it to.  republican and conservative are not synonymous. 

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline carlfaba10t

  • House Bee
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Male
Re: new bill/internet privacy
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2012, 10:06:48 PM »
KATHYP; As a fellow Oregonian i agree with you on not needing any part of that bill. Rest assured it will never get to first base let alone to a vote. Want to wager? :-D
Carl-I have done so much with so little for so long i can now do something with nothing!

 

anything