US Senate passes spy bill
p2pnet news view Politics | Freedom:- Should telecommunications companies which help the US government spy on certain phones and computers without their owners’ permission or knowledge, and without warrants, be protected from civil lawsuits?
Yes, says the Senate overwhelmingly.
It, “easily approved” legislation to, “overhaul government eavesdropping rules in terrorism and espionage cases and effectively granted immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in a secret domestic spying program, ending a contentious debate that has raged for more than two years,” says the San Francisco Chronicle.
Barack Obama, “voted for the measure after previously voting for an amendment that would have eliminated the retroactive immunity for the telecom firms,” says the Chicago Tribune, going on:
“The amendment and two other similar measures failed.
“Obama, who earlier this year vowed to filibuster the legislation over the immunity issue, has been sharply criticized in recent days by some supporters for changing his mind on the issue.”
The new FISA bill, “clarifies the scope of government intelligence activities, depending on the type and origin of the communication, and provides greater latitude to use technology to track foreign terrorism suspects overseas,” says the Chronicle, adding:
“The new version continues to require warrants to target Americans in the United States, but no permission is needed to track foreign citizens who are located abroad – regardless of whether the surveillance passes through U.S-based communication networks.
But, “If the overseas target is a U.S. citizen, a warrant would be required – regardless of where and how the spying takes place.”
President George W. Bush, “directed telecom companies to tap certain phone and computer lines following the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, without the permission of a secret court created to approve domestic wiretaps for intelligence gathering,” says the Tribune.
“Under the bill, the government will be able to conduct emergency wiretapping for a week, but then it must get the FISA court to approve any extension of the eavesdropping.”
.
.Stumble It!
San Francisco Chronicle – Senate easily passes wiretap bill, July 10, 2008
Chicago Tribune – Senate passes spy law overhaul, July 10, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
July 11th, 2008 at 4:47 am
Obama has betrayed his supporters by reneging on his campaign promise, a promise he has often repeated over the past several months. This is no trivial matter. This so-called “candidate for change” is looking more and more like a typical promise-breaking self-serving politician.
July 11th, 2008 at 7:11 am
> This so-called âcandidate for changeâ is looking more and more like a typical promise-breaking self-serving politician.
And you’re surprised?
July 11th, 2008 at 9:14 am
There wouldn’t be any type of legal action we can take is there? I mean, I’ve heard rumors that Denmark wants to sue Sweden over their new wiretapping law.. does the US goverment have a right to listen in on Canadian communications?
July 11th, 2008 at 9:19 am
There are still two promising candidates: Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich. But the crowd will vote for Obama…
July 12th, 2008 at 10:31 am
” There are still two promising candidates: Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich. But the crowd will vote for Obama⦠”
Yup, I am still voting for obama.
I read his stances.
Compared them to McCain etc …
Normally I vote third party, Always have, since I was old enough to vote.
Still voting FOR him, not against the lesser of two evils.
Vote for who your conscience tells you, but I guarantee, calling people sheep or hinting
slyly that it’s the uninformed ‘crowd’ that are the only ones voting for him generally
will strengthen the resolve of Mr. Obama’s supporters, and make you look like sour grapes.
Citing REAL ISSUES that you’re candidate backs will do more this campaign than negativity.
I also guarantee that if your candidate of choice had a solid chance of beating the republicans
the media would find just as many supposed flip flops and negative items. ( and it already has
with both Paul and Kucinich, no need to cite, a Google search will easily draw those out ).
It’s all about who you choose to believe.
Based on what I see, my vote is clear, as is my conscience.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Personally. I don’t see the big problem here.
A politician cites a stand .. but after evaluating all of the ramifications and
paying attention to advisors and constituents, ends up voting his conscience.
Is that worse than the republican way of .. ‘ I am right no matter how wrong I am ‘ ?
Has there never been any stance that you have taken, that you later found out you
might have been wrong, and had to change your mind.
Perhaps Obama had to weigh a lesser of two evils option himself ?
We don’t necessarily know for sure, but following blindly the talking points
of corporate ( read republican ) controlled media isn’t necessarily going to
reveal what really happened.
No I am not pleased about the way this went, but I also am still supporting
Obama.
July 12th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Eh, not too happy with Obama doing that, but oh well, at least it is only for a span of one week. Obama will always be a better choice than McCain.