Silkroad Online Forums

I really hate me some govt. >_>

Please, everyone who lives in the US, go to this site and send your support to your congressmen. It only takes secs out of your time, more if you read about the issue. This is very important, please do what little you can.
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?JS ... ion&id=363

Read it. Did it.

This is ridiculous.

Thanks man, who's next?

I'm still a little uninformed about the issue. I read up on what I could and i'm still a little hazey, mind explaining the issue a little? I have a general understanding, I'd just like to hear more explained about the issue.

i will actually agree with you on this one (first time for everything...right?)




basically, the drunk driving cokehead (gwb) has been listening in on our phone calls for quite some time now, which is highly illegal. because of this many telecom companies have very large lawsuits pending against them in court right now. what many do not know, is that the telecom industry is the 'largest' lobbier in washington right now (bigger than oil and power). the cokehead doesn't want washingtons money going into the hands of some people that found out he is a dirty voyeur, so this would make the bill retroactive and all of those nasty lawsuits would be null and void...

his excuse for this...terrorism...people are talking about terror.
he said that the software they use only taps international calls right now, but he is full of shit. the guy that created the software retired recently from at&t and he stated that "no software can listen in to select calls...you are either listening to calls or you're not!!!"


i see gwb in 2 years driving around in a crown vic with spotlights on the sides that he bought at police auction, chugging on a bottle of jack and listening to a police scanner...that would be awesome!!!


@nuclear-left you a nice post in ron paul wow march!



woot - post # 500 - holla atcha boy!!!

Pretty good explanation. Forgot about your response, will reply soon.

why hasn't he been assassinated yet

I wonder almost everyday.

Read up on it a little more. Did it. And agreed, it's ridiculous.

lol, i guess I just want to break it down a little more?

Telcom companies keep records of everything you do for 7 years. Not the content of your phone calls but who you called and what you downloaded, any traffic over there networks. They have to keep the records for audit purposes.

After 911 the government (FBI) started requesting these documents, which is legal in some cases but instead of sending over specific phone numbers or customers they wanted on a court order, they just requested dumps of these databases. Some telcoms gave over the info and some did not.

The ones that did now find that what they did was against the law and ppl are suing them. They are pressing hard for the government to grant them amnisty since it was the government that was asking for the records in the first place.

IDK how I stand on this. These big companies had to know that what they were doing was not on the up and up (they have 100's of attorneys that review there requests before they ever make and decisions) but at the same time I am sure they thought if they denied the government they would lose contracts and have a big legal battle ahead.

I blame the government not the companies. Just get ride of the government leaders that OK'd this and I don't see the telcoms making this mistake twice.

Badass Bitchslap of the Year

Congressman Silvestre Reyes, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, sent a letter to President Bush regarding the ongoing battle over warrantless wiretapping.

Text of the letter follows below.
#

President George W. Bush

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The Preamble to our Constitution states that one of our highest duties as public officials is to "provide for the common defence." As an elected Member of Congress, a senior Member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I work everyday to ensure that our defense and intelligence capabilities remain strong in the face of serious threats to our national security.

Because I care so deeply about protecting our country, I take strong offense to your suggestion in recent days that the country will be vulnerable to terrorist attack unless Congress immediately enacts legislation giving you broader powers to conduct warrantless surveillance of Americans' communications and provides legal immunity for telecommunications companies that participated in the Administration's warrantless surveillance program.

Today, the National Security Agency (NSA) has authority to conduct surveillance in at least three different ways, all of which provide strong capability to monitor the communications of possible terrorists.

First, NSA can use its authority under Executive Order 12333 to conduct surveillance abroad of any known or suspected terrorist. There is no requirement for a warrant. There is no requirement for probable cause. Most of NSA's collection occurs under this authority.

Second, NSA can use its authority under the Protect America Act, enacted last August, to conduct surveillance here in the U.S of any foreign target. This authority does not "expire" on Saturday, as you have stated. Under the PAA, orders authorizing surveillance may last for one year – until at least August 2008. These orders may cover every terrorist group without limitation. If a new member of the group is identified, or if a new phone number or email address is identified, the NSA may add it to the existing orders, and surveillance can begin immediately. We will not "go dark."

Third, in the remote possibility that a new terrorist organization emerges that we have never previously identified, the NSA could use existing authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to monitor those communications. Since its establishment nearly 30 years ago, the FISA Court has approved nearly every application for a warrant from the Department of Justice. In an emergency, NSA or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) may begin surveillance immediately, and a FISA Court order does not have to be obtained for three days. The former head of FISA operations for the Department of Justice has testified publicly that emergency authorization may be granted in a matter of minutes.

As you know, the 1978 FISA law, which has been modernized and updated numerous times since 9/11, was instrumental in disrupting the terrorist plot in Germany last summer. Those who say that FISA is outdated do not understand the strength of this important tool.

If our nation is left vulnerable in the coming months, it will not be because we don't have enough domestic spying powers. It will be because your Administration has not done enough to defeat terrorist organizations – including al Qaeda -- that have gained strength since 9/11. We do not have nearly enough linguists to translate the reams of information we currently collect. We do not have enough intelligence officers who can penetrate the hardest targets, such as al Qaeda. We have surged so many intelligence resources into Iraq that we have taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a result, you have allowed al Qaeda to reconstitute itself on your watch.

You have also suggested that Congress must grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies. As someone who has been briefed on our most sensitive intelligence programs, I can see no argument why the future security of our country depends on whether past actions of telecommunications companies are immunized.

The issue of telecom liability should be carefully considered based on a full review of the documents that your Administration withheld from Congress for eight months. However, it is an insult to the intelligence of the American people to say that we will be vulnerable unless we grant immunity for actions that happened years ago.

Congress has not been sitting on its hands. Last November, the House passed responsible legislation to authorize the NSA to conduct surveillance of foreign terrorists and to provide clarity and legal protection to our private sector partners who assist in that surveillance.

The proper course is now to conference the House bill with the Senate bill that was passed on Tuesday. There are significant differences between these two bills and a conference, in regular order, is the appropriate mechanism to resolve the differences between these two bills. I urge you, Mr. President, to put partisanship aside and allow Republicans in Congress to arrive at a compromise that will protect America and protect our Constitution.

I, for one, do not intend to back down – not to the terrorists and not to anyone, including a President, who wants Americans to cower in fear.

We are a strong nation. We cannot allow ourselves to be scared into suspending the Constitution. If we do that, we might as well call the terrorists and tell them that they have won.

Sincerely,

Silvestre Reyes
Member of Congress
Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

I hope he smartens up and reads that letter until he gets it through his thick skull.