Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants

StormChord · Nov 22, 2012

All they're gonna find is lots of college spam.

Alessandra Kelley · Nov 22, 2012

Celia Cyanide said:
What is the point of this?

Why would anybody want to read my emails? It's all spam anyway!

StormChord said:
All they're gonna find is lots of college spam.

I sometimes think the purpose of noxious intrusiveness like this is not actually to ferret out or discover spies, plots, or danger to the republic but rather to give officials the leeway, should they decide to target a specific individual, to dig and dig and dig and dig in secret until they turn up something incriminating.

In other words, the volume of spam may not be dismaying to them if their purpose is not actually to sift through all emails.

This sort of law makes little sense otherwise. It dangerously undermines the right to privacy but cannot possibly achieve the implied purpose of discoving danger. It does not make us safer. It can only be used to harrass and intimidate.

LOG · Nov 22, 2012

nighttimer said:
Here's the names of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Is your Congresscritter on the list?

Both of my senators are. -_-

Graz · Nov 22, 2012

Thank goodness the blue team is in charge.

William Haskins · Nov 22, 2012

Alessandra Kelley said:
Ah. My error.

I had assumed you started this thread in order to discuss an atrocious proposed bill, not to vilify the author of it. Indeed, the thread title and the information as presented seemed to support this interpretation.

Mind you, nothing in my post expressed any support whatsoever of Patrick Leahy. Nor would I do so. The bill is as craven a piece of dangerous power grabbing as I have seen. Mr. Leahy's judgement and character are clear, but I assumed that dwelling on that would be a distraction from the far more important matter of the bill itself.

Given that I thought the bill, not Mr. Leahy's character, was the topic of this thread, I assumed that my information that support for the bill had been withdrawn would save a lot of people from anxiety. I might have considered quoting from the article, but it seemed unnecessary given that a link was included and in light of the simple news that the bill was effectively dead.

I see nothing in my previous post in support of Patrick Leahy, nor any requirement that you defend his character.

vilifying leahy and protesting the legislation are not only not mutually exclusive, the are indeed complementary.

leahy sold this as precisely the opposite of what he was ultimately complicit in bringing up for a vote. and had it not been for a direct assault on his weasliness, he would have robbed americans of their liberties and never looked back.

Jean Marie · Nov 22, 2012

LOG said:
Both of my senators are. -_-

I've a Senator on there.

Thanks, NT for posting the list.

I'd read the bill and even though I've been sick since Sunday, was absolutely furious. Not surprised that Leahy wrote it, though. His basic principles are similar to those of his other Vermont counterpart, Bernie Sanders-the government has a basic right to know everything about us.

Tiny derail: I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the government having total knowledge of my so-called confidential medical files. So much for privacy in this country. It no longer exists.

I'll go back to using the Post Office and won't go to the doc unless I'm on my death bed, and by then it will be a moot point.

RichardGarfinkle · Nov 22, 2012

Jean Marie said:
I've a Senator on there.

Thanks, NT for posting the list.

I'd read the bill and even though I've been sick since Sunday, was absolutely furious. Not surprised that Leahy wrote it, though. His basic principles are similar to those of his other Vermont counterpart, Bernie Sanders-the government has a basic right to know everything about us.

This is a peculiar characterization of Bernie Sanders considering he voted against the Patriot Act for precisely the reason that it gives government too much power to spy on US citizens.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=3e778bac-9352-4ec1-accf-d93a98508648

Jean Marie · Nov 22, 2012

RichardGarfinkle said:
This is a peculiar characterization of Bernie Sanders considering he voted against the Patriot Act for precisely the reason that it gives government too much power to spy on US citizens.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=3e778bac-9352-4ec1-accf-d93a98508648

But he did vote for:

Voted YES on requiring FISA court warrant to monitor US-to-foreign calls. (Feb 2008)
and this:

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)

RichardGarfinkle · Nov 23, 2012

Jean Marie said:
But he did vote for:

Voted YES on requiring FISA court warrant to monitor US-to-foreign calls. (Feb 2008)
and this:

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)

The FISA bill he voted for is the one that increased judicial oversight on those calls. That reduces the government's right to monitor by demanding proper warrants be issued.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=ca1ad556-5081-4f5e-bb11-bef53a814e3f

I can't find a reference on the Apr 2006 Bill apart from a generic linkless listing at On The Issues. Do you have a link to the specific bill?

names · Nov 23, 2012

In my opinion warrantless emails can do harm to some people, but maybe the department such as the feds over see them. Are they accountable, I don't know, but hopefully when they do the search it is declassified somehow. It would cause too great a harm to some people with not very fishy offenses.

regdog · Nov 25, 2012

Leahy has backeddown and won't support his own bill.

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants

StormChord

Allegedly Gullible

Alessandra Kelley

Sophipygian

LOG

Lagrangian

Graz

William Haskins

poet

Jean Marie

calm waters ahead

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes

Jean Marie

calm waters ahead

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes

names

regdog

The Scavengers