Posted on 04/18/2013 12:34:57 PM PDT by illiac
The controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) just passed the U.S. House, and will now head to the upper Senate chamber for further deliberation.
Rinse and repeat. This isn't the first time this has happened, but it still poses a major threat to Fourth Amendment rights, according to civil liberties campaigners.
The bill was passed 288-127 in favor of the bill after two days of debate and discussion on the House floor. Only 18 members of the House abstained from the vote.
CISPA will allow private sector firms to search personal and sensitive user data of ordinary U.S. residents to identify "threat information," which can then be shared with other opt-in firms and the U.S. government — without the need for a court-ordered warrant.
(Excerpt) Read more at zdnet.com ...
This is bad; very bad.
Ping!
Bad news.
I hate to say it, but the 4th and 5th amendments died 100 years ago when the IRS was created and given the right to 1) demand that we submit tax returns laying out every detail of our lives, 2) require that we swear to the truth of said returns under penalties of perjury, and 3) submit to random audits of all our records to see whether we had committed the crime of perjury, without any evidence that we may have done so.
I think that people who actually didn’t understand computer technology took too much for granted when they started using Internet to communicate. After all, sending unencrypted electronic messages to people is arguably no different from sending post cards in the mail.
Citizens need to get up to speed on technology and demand laws that protect their Internet privacy. States could make laws requiring electronic messagaging be encrypted for example.
Our body of law is structured like a pyramid. One tiny four sided cap stone the size of a sugar cube at the top written in a simpler age, and millions of blocks below, some weighing as much as a tank, exist only to circumvent, nullify, or otherwise subvert that tiny tip.
These companies that "opt-in" should have to inform their consumers who they are sharing your information. And if so, minimize your electronic traffic accordingly.
ANYONE using the word “encrypted” will be soon considered mentally dangerous to society.
Them Republicans...they sure do love the freedom...or is it just possess an appetite for bribes...
You ain't kidding there. I've been told, multiple times, by lawyers that in order to challenge a plainly contraconstitutional statute I have to break the statute.
So, right off the bat you're put at a disadvantage: the position of the accused. But that's not all, if you willfully break the statute, with an intent to challenge it, then you are implicitly acknowledging the legitimacy of said statute.
Recently, poison pills were put into one of the anti-Second-Amendment “background check” bills by some lawyers very experienced in fighting for the constitutional rights of all—poison pills that would have led to troubling many people with legal resources to fight back and put down those anti-Second-Amendment laws through appeals and supreme court decisions. The background check bill was voted down because of the constituency that would also have been unintentionally affected.
So far, most bills that become bad laws are strategically written to initially prosecute those without resources for challenging those bad laws. Appeals cost big bucks. Supreme court cases require that those with a lot of money and a lot of influence be prosecuted. Otherwise, no supreme court cases.
Our Constitution has been consumed from downscale folks, up, and under the “get tough on crime” approach. The more influential folks could stop those attacks against your rights, but they are most often behind such laws (fear of others, including fear of the upper middle class). Several very influential people have called for more regulation of the Internet and more surveillance and taxes against most other users (the rest of us). It’s a class movement that’s been going on for decades in several ways.
It should be in every site's Privacy and Data Sharing Policy. If the site claims they do not share any user data without specific authorization or through a court order warrant, then they better not share with government agencies.
If they analyze user data for compliance with their Usage policy, that's perfectly within their right. When user data leaves their servers, it better be covered by policy.
I'm assuming that surfing FR is one of those triggers.
That's why I don't worry about stuff on FB, Tweater, etc. The fact that I'm here on FR gives Big Sis 100% confirmation I'm an anti-govt subversive and must be rounded up when the order is given.
Would not be surprised....
This is exactly how our democracy slowly dies while clueless bought and paid for partisans who claim to be patriots and Repubs willingly sponsor it.
The only thing Hollywood ever gave the USA besides porn, CISPA, Communism and the loss of morals, the Immigration Act of 1965 (more Russians), drug cartel Russian Mafia, and gun grabbers like Mayor Bloomberg and Sen Feinstein and now the Boston Marathon bombers.
Just once we need to see the terrorist perps like OBL, etc. face a public trial where they are kept alive, and we could understand what actually motivates them.
Crony globalist corporate capitalists wanting a perpetual continuation of their ongoing welfare handouts from taxpayers under order by bought and paid for lobbyists and politicians will search the internet looking for critical posts, and then report them to those who wish to remove the people’s right to complain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.