Jump to content

So, eavesdropping on each American's web habits is how congress will create jobs?


thenakedarab

Recommended Posts

  • Members

{censored}ing lying scum. Yeah, blah blah blah deficit, blah blah blah economy, blah blah blah government out of your life *now quick while they're not looking let's start a bureaucratic witch hunt to snoop through all their communications so we can make it available and interject ourselves in their civil matters, so the government can waste time looking for petty {censored} to prosecute, and so we can use against them if they ever speak out*.

 

{censored}ing hypocrites. So this is their small inconsequential government for you.

 

http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/snooping_bill/?akid=827.49099.Lz5SYo&rd=1&t=1

 

I put this here in hopes you guys will sign this and let these ass hats know their days of rank unapologetic hypocrisy are numbered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
huh? investigating...



"A direct assault on Internet users" is what the ACLU is calling it. Yesterday a U.S. House committee approved HR 1981, a broad new Internet snooping bill. They want to force Internet service providers to keep track of and retain their customers' information -- including your name, address, phone number, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses.



:mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

id have to see the actual bill language.

when people show me these "sign this heres why" things, i like to see the actual language before i decide. tracking an IP doesnt piss me off. without having seen the bill itself, it seems the "they will track all data" thing is kind of a stretch :idk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have no problem with them busting the {censored} out of kiddie porn purveyors. My problem is with them forcing everyone's ISP to continually keep 18 mos of EVERYBODY'S web activity just so they can have access to it. If they suspect someone, get a {censored}ing warrant and have their activity recorded, but this is akin to the Patriot Act BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

i didnt see where they actually demanded ISPs to do that. i just saw where it said they wanted them to track certain info to prevent anonymity. not web histories or {censored} like that.

but your argument is valid if true. and i know most people like their web privacy. i dont do kiddie pr0ns, so im not worried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

i didnt see where they actually demanded ISPs to do that. i just saw where it said they wanted them to track certain info to prevent anonymity. not web histories or {censored} like that.


but your argument is valid if true. and i know most people like their web privacy. i dont do kiddie pr0ns, so im not worried.

 

 

 

Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, who led Democratic opposition to the bill said, "'It represents a data bank of every digital act by every American' that would 'let us find out where every single American visited Web sites."

 

 

 

"The bill is mislabeled," said Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the panel. "This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes."

 

 

That's not the ACLU, that's two members of Congress stating that the bill's actual impact would go far beyond what the language indicates.

 

Also, how is this reducing government regulations on businesses, when they're forcing businesses to maintain a database they otherwise would not have to? Whose cost will go up to pay for the maintenance? The customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This country is rapidly turning into an Orwell'ian nightmare.

I firmly believe alot of this is actually being put into place to ultimately limit free speech and exchange of ideas on a large, easy scale. They obviously can't, and won't ban any of that outright, but there doing everything they can to make damn sure it's inconvenient, and maybe even downright scary to do so. Only government and big corporations (one in the same these days) should be allowed to freely do so....in there idea of "freedom", that is.
I'm a little buzzed right now, so maybe the above isn't so eloquently or clearly stated, but methinks you all kinda get where i'm going with this.

Benjamin Franklin once said:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it might be used for other things like tracking purchases. I know the states use some surveys to track, study internet purchases of residents.

Feds could get an idea for their VAT or other consumer base tax. I talked to a bunch of people over the past year that suggest federal consumption tax is not far off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

again, id need to see the actual provisions of the bill in order to form a real, voting opinion. so many people dont. a lot of legislative opposition is pure partisan fearmongering on both sides. not saying this definitely is, but im not going to get warped about something that i havent read and truly understood.

that said, i certainly wouldnt {censored}ing vote FOR it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

again, id need to see the actual provisions of the bill in order to form a real, voting opinion. so many people dont. a lot of legislative opposition is pure partisan fearmongering on both sides. not saying this definitely is, but im not going to get warped about something that i havent read and truly understood.


that said,
i certainly wouldnt {censored}ing vote FOR it
.

 

 

Our representatives will do that for us. They make the laws, we provide their means to do this for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It depends what it's trying to accomplish. I'm sure the intentions are good, but as with all these things, the potential for misuse is rife.

 

Given the UK's record on keeping peoples' data safe, it's a big deal if some scammer in Nigeria suddenly has information on my web activity, IP addresses, credit card numbers and passports.

 

Just as an example, I had to allow my boss to scan my passport for a HR Check. The thin was he didn't delete it off his laptop once he had done it, despite me asking him several times to do so. His response was that he needed to keep it too! Lo and behold his laptop got nicked and on top of that he refused to allow the company to install PointSec as he didn't like having to tap his password in.

 

This led to a formal grievance as what's now happened is his stolen laptop has some very critical personal information of mine on it that is now in the hands of a criminal. I'm not happy about this at all as you can see. Of course, HR are taking his side totally and telling me that any information is totally unrecoverable and that PointSec had most certainly been installed - yet I know it wasn't installed as I and another person were the only ones who were doing it at our site and neither of us could get him to hand in his laptop to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have no problem with them busting the {censored} out of kiddie porn purveyors. My problem is with them forcing everyone's ISP to continually keep 18 mos of EVERYBODY'S web activity just so they can have access to it. If they suspect someone, get a {censored}ing warrant and have their activity recorded, but this is akin to the Patriot Act BS.

 

 

this !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Sayyyy... didn't Mr. Progressive Barack Obama extend the Patriot Act?
:o

What a hypocrite!
:D



Are you talking about Obama or me?

First, I wasn't an Obama supporter from the start, but once he was elected was willing to give him a fair shake. The reason I didn't give Bush the benefit of the doubt is because that election was an affront to the Democratic process.

My nickname for Barack is now "No Balls" Obama.

Anyways, I was against his extension of the Patriot Act.

Also, it's the House who's currently held hostage by Tea Party that put this one out. So, you can thank those small government personal liberty loving conservatives for this abomination which invades every American's privacy and forces undue expenses and oversight on an entire industry. Just like everything else passing through that room this could not have made it through to this stage without their tacit stamp of approval. How's that for hypocrisy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Are you talking about Obama or me?


First, I wasn't an Obama supporter from the start, but once he was elected was willing to give him a fair shake. The reason I didn't give Bush the benefit of the doubt is because that election was an affront to the Democratic process.


My nickname for Barack is now "No Balls" Obama.


Anyways, I was against his extension of the Patriot Act.


Also, it's the House who's currently held hostage by Tea Party that put this one out. So, you can thank those small government personal liberty loving conservatives for this abomination which invades every American's privacy and forces undue expenses and oversight on an entire industry. Just like everything else passing through that room this could not have made it through to this stage without their tacit stamp of approval. How's that for hypocrisy?

 

 

 

It's great for hypocrisy, much like the so-called "small government" conservatives bloating the government under Bush to previously unheard-of levels until the liberals one-upped them in a HUGE way under Barry. Why in-your-face extreme hypocrisy in Washington still surprises anyone is a complete {censored}ing joke to me at this point. Both sides of the aisle are chock-full of six-faced, seething, unrepentant hypocrites. I promise you I could trade blow-for-blow with you on colossal liberal hypocrisies without even breaking a sweat, but ultimately, what's the point? If you're voting for either one of them, you're actively CHOOSING to support and perpetuate it.

 

What's really funny (and sad) is when people willfully delude themselves that "their side" is any less guilty of it than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...