Well.. darn.
Fuck now they can see my por...I mean my privacy
Does that mean our families can see it one day?
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=WA <- here is a Link for Washington state residents to contact their government officials! Seriously, contact your local government about this! #freethepeople
Can anyone find a vote breakdown for this.
Edit- Think I found it. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_li...
Parallel Construction is my friend. Is he your friend? The Old Paray Constable! Do look him up some time.
Why don't we take the nosie pricks and point them at Konami? Maybe then can find out what Konami was hiding from us? I just maybe the only right time and right people to snoop in on.
Nah, fuck that. I'm fine with everything but local police. I don't interact with the FBI, so give them my fucking info. But I, admittedly, drive very poorly. Or rather very well, depending upon how you look at i-
Fuck it, I street race. And I talk about it on forums. I don't want local police to be able to access the IP addresses associated.
The govn. is too fucking obsessed with terrorism, and for a good reason, just not the one you may think. Terrorism creates fear; it's literally in the name. If you yell terrorism, people will collectively oppose it, and side with you. They may hate you and your ideals, but they don't care, because they're more afraid of an invisible threat.
I feel it is necessary to say this before I continue: No, I do not believe - rather, do not care if - Bush caused 9/11.
Anyway, it's the reason the conservative party still exists. Notice a commonality amongst all the conservative candidates? "Anti-terrorism, anti-terrorism, anti-terrorism!" Oh, and hating different minorities. That's a good one, too. Do people really not understand that the belief of terrorism, as it is implied, makes the US population putty in the government's hands? *Edit: apparently I didn't write this out enough, and rereading this I understand. I'm not saying liberals aren't abusing us with terrorism, I'm just saying that they're not using it as a campaign promise. There's no doubt in my mind they'll be just as involved in terrorism as conservatives. End edit*
Jesus fucking christ I give up. This'll go through, "because terrorists", then Trump gets elected, then I blow my brains out. You know that thing where people always say they're going to leave the country if xxxx gets elected? I think this time it's real with Trump.
You're an idiot. Both parties use terrorism as an excuse for their actions that are morally or constitutionally questionable to invade on our personal lives not just the conservatives, or do you ignore the pressure the liberals are doing with gun control laws lately?
Honestly you and your conservative counterparts make me wish for a true anarchy. For those that don't know, or use the news media's interpretation rather than the actual definition, being able to live in a society without a government controlling or assisting you. It just requires two things that most Americans, not to mention humanity in general, are incapable of doing: 1. Taking responsibility for themselves and their actions. 2. People respecting the lives and livelihood of others.
The only thing your comment got right is that Trump is a piece of shit who should have nothing to do with the government.
@jmb83 Sorry, I reread my comment and realized I left out something. I edited it to include it.
That said, anarchy simply cannot exist. People naturally look to others for leadership. Even if we were to become a true anarchist nation, slowly, but oh so surely, leaderships will rise. It'd make sense, because they'd be commonly representing groups of people, and many wouldn't realize that that's a democracy.
The only solution (in my oh-so-awesome-opinion, haha) is a mix of communism and democracy. And I mean true democracy (not America's "democracy") and true communism (not Russia's "communism"). Communism is, in excruciatingly dumbed down terms, "one for all", while democracy is about equal and fair representation in government. Government is necessary, if you ask me. As much as I hate to say it, it doesn't hurt to have an army, and with the size of the US a militia would not cut it. That said, I think the general system of our government is a good one, but it is poorly executed. Having multiple systems of executive, legislative, and judicial parties is, quite honestly, genius. It's something not seen anywhere else in the world, or at least to the same extent. And it clearly works at least a little bit.
All this said and done, there are parts of the job that we, as regular people, may just not understand about head of government. The gov has to make tough decisions it may not want to for the better good of the people. It's just a matter of when does our vote matter more than theirs.
I could be wrong but isn't there a thing where the president can stricke something from a bill if it's too overreaching or too ridiculous?
while yes that is true, the loophole with that is that our current pres. is a closeted communist f#ck, and would love nothing more that to sign this bill in its entirety into law, so that ways he's breaking less laws when hes spying on us.
almost all of the state governments have what you said (it's called a line-item veto for reference) but the federal government at the executive level doesn't have that capability. i believe reagan and clinton tried to get this enacted into law, but at this point no congress will ever agree to it because it'd hugely undermine their authority. executive line-item vetos could arguably be worse than political riders like this CISA attachment, because then they could take good bills and veto elements of them that they don't like, like say a bill that funds education and foreign aid; president vetos education or vice versa.
if you want to stop this kind of all but literal bullshit, ending political riders like this is what needs to be done. i don't know the specific legislation and acts that have allowed this or if it was allowed from the start (part of it has to do with the bill process from committees to subcommittees, the house and beyond) but just look up the term political rider and you can read up on it if you like
The reason why "If you don't have anything to hide" is a bullshit, is because you don't think you're doing anything wrong but the context of what you're doing could be misconstrued as illegal. If you play Counter Strike, Battlefield, Call of Duty, Rainbow 6, or any other war game where they have terrorists as the bad guys and you might play as them, or bomb planting, or whatever else might be associated with violence and moderately questionable situations to someone who doesn't know about it, you could be pinned as a potential criminal. The reason this is bad isn't because it can find the people who are doing wrong easier, it's bad because you might not consider what you're doing is wrong, but someone else does.
Just like pm your gta5 friend that you're just running over random people online out of boredom right?
Again with bills like this, is the American government allowed to gather information from non-nationals; you know, like the other 7 billion people in the world
While morally abhorrent, and a breach of basic liberty, practically this will likely make no difference. Mass surveillance doesn't work, you know the Garland shooting? it was announced on twitter a week before it happened. Mass surveillance simply is not effective, there's too much information to process manually and the algorithms they use to sift through it aren't effective at discerning legitimate security threats and random bullshit. The only real consequence of Mass surveilance is a breach of basic civil liberties, and they may occasionally harass an innocent person that made a joke on the internet or something like that.
Was that the collage one up north(GA perceptive), and wasn't that one on 4chan or 8chan?
maybe not in a criminal sense, but a civil perspective on this is that they're able to potentially pass information back and forth corporations (including multnationals) and the government. so this paves the way for say, blue cross/blue shield to read every bit of information you ever sent in private to other people about some back injury and then (off record of course) decide to find some technicality to raise your rates/cancel your plan or something to that effect. the example isn't the best, but that type of free access could really shit on consumer confidentality
Well shit, my class just read 1984 and this shit's sounding familiar. When do I get a telescreen?
Join the conversation! Log in to post a comment.
