Slashdot Mirror


Lawmakers Threaten Legal Basis of NSA Surveillance

Nerval's Lobster writes "The author of the Patriot Act has warned that the legal justification for the NSA's wholesale domestic surveillance program will disappear next summer if the White House doesn't restrict the way the NSA uses its power. Section 215 of the Patriot Act will expire during the summer of 2015 and will not be renewed unless the White House changes the shocking scale of the surveillance programs for which the National Security Administration uses the authorization, according to James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), an original author of the Patriot Act and its two reauthorizations, stated Washington insider-news source The Hill. 'Unless Section 215 gets fixed, you, Mr. Cole, and the intelligence community will get absolutely nothing, because I am confident there are not the votes in this Congress to reauthorize it,' Sensenbrenner warned Deputy Attorney General James Cole during the Feb. 4 hearing. Provisions of Section 215, which allows the NSA to collect metadata about phone calls made within the U.S., give the government a 'very useful tool' to track connections among Americans that might be relevant to counterterrorism investigations, Cole told the House Judiciary Committee. The scale of the surveillance and lengths to which the NSA has pushed its limits was a "shock" according to Sensenbrenner, who also wrote the USA Freedom Act, a bill to restrict the scope of both Section 215 and the NSA programs, which has attracted 130 co-sponsors. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has sponsored a similar bill in the Senate."

52 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Fuck the beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "MOVIN’ ON UP" my ass

    1. Re:Fuck the beta by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      http://slashdot.org/recent Vote up the Fuck Beta stories

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    2. Re:Fuck the beta by chebucto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Beta must die

      --
      The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
    3. Re:Fuck the beta by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I did before I came here, every single one of the "beta sucks" stories, just posted a "beta sucks" /. journal, and sent them an email informing them that when classic is gone, so will I be.

      I suspect all that will be left after classic is gone is APK, ethanol-fueled, the goatse guy, the GNAA guy, and that guy who wants you to clean his PC, Oh, and don't forget Bert, and the other two trolls Bilbo met.

    4. Re:Fuck the beta by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you took their survey you'll see they know most long-time /. users are outraged. The first question was something like, "Did you know, you can find the classic slashdot layout at a link at the bottom of the page" Answer: No. Next question, "did you find it?". Answer: No (it's buried in a text box). Next question, "Do you have any suggestions for improving the usability of the beta" Answer: Go back to classic Slashdot by default. Etc., etc., They know the beta's shit and don't care because they are going to use the site to phish irregular users into their "Business Intelligence" BS. They don't care to keep us here, they just want the name for the geek-chique with the managers that may think they're hip because they've heard of /. but never actually visited. I hope Taco made a mint on this and the other "editors" as well because they sold out hard -- I knew something was seriously wrong when he jumped ship after so many previous acquisitions....

      --
      This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
  2. Beta kills children by Laxori666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yesterday, I had a child. My dear son. Today I found him dead. He left a suicide note: "The only reason for my death is Slashdot Beta."

    Also I had a daughter a few days ago. But then I also found her dead. This time she had been murdered. The autopsy came back: She had been mauled by Slashdot Beta.

    This must end!! Think of the children! Kill the Beta!

    1. Re:Beta kills children by richlv · · Score: 3, Insightful

      well, slashdot... this is now up to the "funny" level - i mean, 90% of comments being about suckiness of beta :)

      get a geek to tell designers and coders how it should be. and give him/her the right to kill... ok, throw out of the building anybody suggesting stuff like the "beta".

      --
      Rich
    2. Re:Beta kills children by Laxori666 · · Score: 3

      Hello sir,

      Thank you for your concerns! I am not sure if you read my post. My dear son - and also my daughter - they both died! The Slashdot Beta was clearly at fault! It was confirmed scientifically by autopsy and also by investigation of the suicide note my dear son left.

      Please, I want no other children to get hurt by the Beta. If even this has small chance of working - it will be worth it.

      Thank you, I hope you understand my urgent pleas!

  3. Re:first by buswolley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Screw Beta Slashdot. Stupid dumb asses.

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  4. And this is why by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And this is why it can be smart to put time limits on bills, even if you think they are a good idea at the time. In that sense, the original authors of the Patriot Act were smart.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:And this is why by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And this is why it can be smart to put time limits on bills, even if you think they are a good idea at the time. In that sense, the original authors of the Patriot Act were smart.

      This will be something like the third re-authorization. (It expired piecemeal, making it easier to re-authorize it piecemeal).

      We not only need sunset into bills, we need to require an ever increasing majority to re-authorize these laws.
      (As well as (nearly) unanimous consent to lower those requirements.)

      You can bet that at the time grows near, there will be an "incident" that just "happens" to come along which will have the usual useful idiots demanding more protection, and tighter scrutiny. The drumbeat of fear will be revved up again. Someone will put forth minor meaningless tweaks and tell us the problem is solved. Opponents will be vilified and demonized in the press, mistresses will surface. You name it. Its not like we haven't seen this before.

      And we need to enact penalties for judges that fail to uphold their oath of office.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:And this is why by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's only useful in a specific case, though, where one piece of legislation is the sole authorization for a government action. That's pretty rare (to the point where I doubt this is even such a case).

      For everything else, having an expiration date means that the actual state of the law would change even more than it does now, so everybody has to spend more money and work even harder just to make sure that they're still in compliance with the newly-revised rules that are subtly different that the previous rules, because the politicians wanted to look like they were actively improving things.

      Similarly, the increased volatility of the law means that legal precedent is also more volatile, so the cost of a court case gets worse as there's more room to argue about how a rule's expiration affects previous judgments. While a criminal case is waiting for the court to settle, the legality of the alleged crime could even change, especially if it's politically beneficial for the legislators to override the judicial branch.

      Mandatory expiration dates for legislation fall into the large category of "ideas that cause more problems than they solve".

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:And this is why by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Mandatory expiration dates for legislation fall into the large category of "ideas that cause more problems than they solve".

      By raw numbers, perhaps. But the problems that they solve are so large and pervasive that they're worth considering. The sheer bulk of existing legal codes, dating back to the Constitution itself, makes sensible analysis of existing law infeasible for even a reasonable legal researcher.

  5. Re:Empty threat by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Republican bloc is unlikely to do anything that would curb military or intelligence related activities.

    Unless there's a Democrat running those intelligence related activities. Then there's actually a good chance.

    Reminds me of that time when Slashdot hired a gang of meth-addled rhesus monkeys to redesign their site.

  6. One can only hope by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Section 215 of the Patriot Act will expire during the summer of 2015 and will not be renewed

    Its time to put this experiment to bed. Like prohibition, which lasted 13 years, the Patriot act (now 13 years old), and damage it has caused needs to be rolled back. Not just Section 215, but other major portions of the act as well.

    We are not safer now. We are simply less free now. It has not prevented terrorist attacks, either here or abroad. Boarder security continues to be a utter joke, and secrecy provisions are the antithesis of our supposed freedoms.

    Its probably time to start yanking your congressman's chain. Its time to point out that the simple fact we are not asleep any more is basically all that is needed, and all that was ever needed. Its time to point out that 13 years of lies and secrecy is enough. Its time for them to stop carrying the governments message to their constituents, and start carrying their constituents message to the government.

    Do I expect this to be successful? No. Not as long as a single one of those congressmen were in office for the initial passing, or the prior re-authorizations. They are too heavily invested in the act, and the administration has too much control over them.

    Time to clean house. Stop fearing your district's loss of seniority by electing new people. Vote them all out. If we do it piece meal, career bureaucrats and career politicians will just co-opt the new members. Remove the leverage.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    1. Re:One can only hope by Princeofcups · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stop fearing your district's loss of seniority by electing new people. Vote them all out. If we do it piece meal, career bureaucrats and career politicians will just co-opt the new members. Remove the leverage.

      All that will do is make the next batch of puppets cheaper to own. Until corporations are muzzled, nothing will change.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  7. Re:Empty threat by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Republican bloc is unlikely to do anything that would curb military or intelligence related activities.

    You haven't been paying attention. The Republicans are up in arms over this, with the RNC calling the NSAs activities straight up unconstitutional and calling for their end with no mention of terrorism nor other weasel wording.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  8. Confessions Of an Ex-SLASHDOT BETA user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Day 1: It wouldn't stop, the redirecting. At first I thought it was malware. Had my first drink in a long time.

    Day 2: Barely had the strength to carry on as the BETA REDIRECTIONS continue.. trying not to talk to hallucinations at the bar and in the bathroom which laugh at me about these redirections.

    Day 3: Discovered the BETA redirections were random, and while at first they looked somewhat usable, when I looked at me and my monitor screen in the mirror, a horrible woman with flesh hanging off of her body looked back, trying to lead me into a dance as the word BETA appeared across her rancid breasts.

    Day 4: These BETA corridors go on FOREVER! On the plus side, I've taken up disassembling vehicles to corner this BETA beast and sacrifice myself rather than lead others to discovering it. I ate some red snow.

    Day 5: Finding it harder to concentrate. I've ate some more of the red snow. The taste is starting to grow on me.

    Day 6: This typewriter is the only entertainment I have, apart from throwing things at the walls, trying to get some response from the BETA which is now taking over my mind.

    Day 7: Hahahahahha! Would you believe it? I'M STILL BEING REDIRECTED TO SLASHDOT BETA PAGES! AHAHhahahaah! Type, type, ding, ding! Wooo!

    Day 8: The hallucinations are actually real! Would you believe it? They have offered to help me if I agree to work for them. I'm thinking about patenting this delicious red snow, the taste is unreal!

    Day 9: Having black out sessions where I cannot remember large passings of time. Found some makeup, thought I'd paint a joker smile on my face to amuse the people only I can see!

    Day 10: Productive today, part of what I wrote for my new screenplay:

    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
    I cannot opt out of Slas

    (drops of blood on paper)

  9. Re:So what if Congress doesn't reauthorize it? by hermitdev · · Score: 4, Informative

    The executive branch is accountable to the legislative. The whole checks and balances thing. If Mr. President does decide to continue this surveillance on executive order, it could very well get him impeached (repubs are looking for a reason, and this is would be a damn good reason).

  10. MOD UP! by Anubis350 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm willing to burn my not-inconsiderable karma on this, the beta really destroys the flow of what I actually come here for - the discussion! If it becomes mandatory it'll kill a site that has been my favorite place on the web for a long, long time

    --
    "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    1. Re:MOD UP! by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Exactly. ,p>Who gives a damn about karma if no one is here to enjoy it, Slashdot?

      Listen to your users.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    2. Re:MOD UP! by LookIntoTheFuture · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Dear Slashdot,

      It's never too late to do the right thing. Please reconsider killing classic. It's instantly recognizable as Slashdot. A "trademark" of Slashdot if you will. It is a big reason why people come here to comment and lurk. It is loved. FFS, beta is the New Coke!

      --
      Brave Sir Robin ran away. ("No!") Bravely ran away away. ("I didn't!")
    3. Re:MOD UP! by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dear God this thread! DICE is killing a beloved brand if they go to this horrible new format. WE DO NOT WANT AND WILL NOT USE IT!!!

      --
      This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
  11. Re:Pardon me by hermitdev · · Score: 2

    which court is going to say no to that?

    Hopefully the Supreme. It is their job, after all, as dictated by the Constitution (for whatever that's worth, these days).

  12. Re:first by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has anyone tried to email the editors directly to see if the can talk some since into their DICE pointy haired boss's or maybe we could find the email of the DICE PHB responsible and we could slashdot his inbox...

    --
    ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
  13. Really about NSA surveillance? by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is this REALLY about the NSA surveillance? Or is it about leverage for Congress critters, particularly Republicans, on the Executive branch?

    "You want your PATRIOT Act renewed? You need to cut back on your surveillance. And my surveillance, we mean repeal Obamacare (or whatever the bill(s) du jour are)."

    Besides, whether or not the NSA surveillance is authorized, do you think the NSA gives a fuck. They are going to do it anyways. They'll just have to be sneakier.

  14. Re:first by buswolley · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd like to participate in this article. Seems interesting. Instead Im wasting my time trying to make Dice realize that they are messing up

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  15. Re:So what if Congress doesn't reauthorize it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    That's it? Impeachment is the check that provides the balance? It's not effective if Congress isn't willing to use it. To impeach the first black would be racist!

  16. Re:Empty threat by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    >James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.)

    A laughably empty threat. The Republican bloc is unlikely to do anything that would curb military or intelligence related activities.

    The two prior extensions were pushed through by Democrats. After 8 years, its time to stop blaming Republicans.

    On Saturday, February 27, 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law legislation that would temporarily extend for one year three controversial provisions of the Patriot Act that had been set to expire:
    Authorize court-approved roving wiretaps that permit surveillance on multiple phones.
    Allow court-approved seizure of records and property in anti-terrorism operations.
    Permit surveillance against a so-called lone wolf, a non-U.S. citizen engaged in terrorism who may not be part of a recognized terrorist group.

    Its useful divisive idiots like you that keep trying to make this a partisan issue rather than getting you own party to actually READ the constitution.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  17. Re:James Sensenbrenner Jr. by icebike · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What about all the other Democrats that pushed through the last reauthorization?

    The scale of the surveillance and lengths to which the NSA has pushed its limits was a "shock" according to Sensenbrenner, who also wrote the USA Freedom Act, a bill to restrict the scope of both Section 215 and the NSA programs, which has attracted 130 co-sponsors.

    The author of the Patriot act has seen the light, and yet you do nothing but call him names?

    What has YOUR guy been doing all this time? Oh yeah, reauthorizing it year after year.

    How can you be so ignorant of the truth, yet so quick to post insults?

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  18. Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by sandbagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actor Maximilian Schell died last week. He played the defence lawyer in Judgement at Nuremberg. It's a film about the trial of judges who were around before Hitler came to power and stayed on rather than resign. It's a great, great, film. Here's a bit of Spenser Tracey's verdict at the end:

    'There are those in our own country, too...who today speak of the protection of country...of survival. A decision must be made in the life of every nation...at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy...to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. The answer to that is: Survival as what? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult.'

    The trouble is, there is no practical existential threat from Al Qaeda. There is no unified command structure amongst the Muslim nations - many of which have the same ethno-linguistic-political-economic divisions that have the western nations bickering all of the time. They have no army. No navy. No air force. They are not a fundamental threat to the west and the overreach of this sector of government needs to be brought back into perspective.

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
    1. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by riverat1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The trouble is, there is no practical existential threat from Al Qaeda.

      This can't be reiterated enough. The response to 9/11 was completely out of proportion to the actual threat posed by the perpetrators. GWB said they hate us for our freedom so what do we do? We turn around and reduce our freedom. What kind of sense does that make?

    2. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by gIobaljustin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This can't be reiterated enough.

      It can be. We mustn't make this issue about the efficacy of the programs, but about freedom. Mentioning that the programs are ineffective is fine, but we must make it clear that they would be unacceptable even if they worked.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    3. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It makes sense if you realize Al Qaeda was never the real enemy. It was just a very convenient excuse for the government to grab more power. And it worked. The majority of people are sheep and took it hook line and sinker. It's all straight from Orwell's 1984. Give them a great war to distract them from their current troubles and the failure of the government to do anything about it so the politicians can keep stuffing their pockets and their friends pockets.

    4. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by LDAPMAN · · Score: 2

      There was no "existential threat when the Nazis invaded Poland or when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. In the long term jihadist islam may be more of a threat than either of those.

    5. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by LDAPMAN · · Score: 2

      And no I'm not defending the NSA. I think they have gone way to far. However, I do believe that radical islam is a threat that must be exterminated just as surely as Naziism and the radical Shinto warrior sect that controlled Japan.

    6. Re:Anyone remember Judgement at Nuremberg? by terryducks · · Score: 2

      radical islam is a threat that must be exterminated

      Wrong choice of words.

      Radical anything needs to be controlled and sidelined. Not exterminated. In many nations immigrants don't melt into the culture anymore, they're insular. The populus needs education. The "right to free speech" isn't to criticize your fellow man but to critiized and call out abuses w/in the governement. To say that the minority can't abuse everyone else; no beating your SO. Do want you want in the privacy of your home. but you can't dictate or pass laws what I do in public.

      The good of all society must be a consideration and not what you think it should be.

  19. Re:Empty threat by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

    Sadly, they're only up in arms about it because it's democrats doing it. The same would be true the other way around.

    No one actually seems to care about the freedom aspect of this whole situation.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  20. Protest Beta by LoRdTAW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Dice, I am protesting the beta site. I will not follow any links from a beta redirect and I will not participate in any meaningful discussion.

    Your new Slashdot design is hideous. The comment layout is an abomination which is /.'s strong point, its why we come here. This isn't twitter or Facebook, we come here to get away from that. Please abandon your attempts to cash in on this site, you will loose more members then you will ever hope to attract with your new and unimproved design.

    Fellow /.'ers, join me in this protest. Do not post a comment related to a beta redirect article or click any links. Instead, post a comment in protest of the beta design.

    1. Re:Protest Beta by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I concur: They should have simply put in the OMG Ponies! design and been done with it.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  21. Indeed by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There is no good side of the aisle any longer, no matter where on the political spectrum you find yourself.

    Admitting your side is wrong, too, is the first step.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  22. Re:That is the stupidest idea I've ever read on /. by mysidia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It may make sense to have an automatic expiration on bills like the PATRIOT ACT, but as a general rule for law that would result in complete chaos.

    Actually: I would favor a constitutional requirement, that every new tax, revenue bill, regulation, OR grant of rights to any government entity has to be written so that the bill must be re-authorized or automatically expire by the house a minimum of three times, no sooner than 2 years after the original bill was passed, no longer than 6 years, AND at least 3 of the required re-authorizations separated by a minimum of 14 months.

    That way, if the current session of congress does something stupid --- the NEXT congress has to continue to support it after the next two elections, OR the default is that the new experimental law goes away.

  23. Re:Empty threat by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

    The Republican bloc is unlikely to do anything that would curb military or intelligence related activities.

    Unless there's a Democrat running those intelligence related activities. Then there's actually a good chance.

    No. Unfettered spying ^B^B^B^B^B^B intelligence gathering is the most bipartisan issue there is. Repubs and Democrats have both controlled houses of Congress with the other party in the White House. Have they actually done anything, even to score political points? No. No, they haven't. Will they? No. No, they won't. And no, voting Ron Paul won't fix it either -- sorry guys. Basing the whole thing on the promise and integrity of one guy doesn't work if there's no one to hold him accountable. Until Congress is willing to do its job, this won't get fixed.

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  24. Re:So what if Congress doesn't reauthorize it? by colinrichardday · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And if Congress decides that the NSA gets a budget of $0?

  25. Re:Useful feedback? by glavenoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is literally *not one single thing* that works in any manner that can even begin to approach what is commonly referred to as "usability". That in and of itself is constructive criticism because it would be impossible to enumerate every problem with the new site.

    But to answer your question, here is the official thread with plenty of detailed criticisms and suggestions

    --
    I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
  26. Re:first by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The editors know... we made it clear in the beta announcement thread and at least one editor said he was going to bubble it to the top of the foodchain. This is a topdown order and going to straight-up KILL slashdot. I don't think DICE even cares, and apparently neither do the editors as their still drawing paychecks. This is some serious shit; I don't know how things went down but I'd like to think Taco had the integrity to leave when he knew which way the ship would be going -- maybe he had family concerns financially. But the others, I feel bad for them, but damn, goddamn indeed, they need to stage a revolt because the users of /. are about to if this shit is forced down our throats....

    --
    This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
  27. Re:So what if Congress doesn't reauthorize it? by meglon · · Score: 2
    They just don't have anyone with enough brains to understand THEY HAVE TO HAVE A REAL REASON. Their base is even worse, comprised of complete fucking idiots and think they can impeach someone just because they disagree with him.

    Article 2, Section 4:

    The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

    Even more on point, you may want to go back to the Constitution and reread it if you're going to be basing your argument off it:

    Article 1, Section 3:

    The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  28. Re:Useful feedback? by dryeo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Every time I've tried the beta and try to see the comments, I get

    Shazbot! We ran into some trouble getting the comments.
    Try again... na-nu, na-nu!

    signed another long time user who will be gone if the classic interface goes away.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  29. testing beta comments by KingOfBLASH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    dude beta sucks big giant hairy goat balls

  30. Re:That is the stupidest idea I've ever read on /. by tragedy · · Score: 2

    It may make sense to have an automatic expiration on bills like the PATRIOT ACT, but as a general rule for law that would result in complete chaos. Good God, we would never get anything done if we had to rehash out **EVERYTHING** every 5, 10 or 20 years.

    I think that would be a great idea for exactly that reason. It would create a limit on how big the active body of law could get. That would be a good thing. You could create a system where laws could get a longer term if, for example, they were put to a public vote.

  31. Re:So what if Congress doesn't reauthorize it? by sjames · · Score: 2

    Violating the oath to defend the Constitution would fall under high crimes and misdemeanors.

  32. Re:Empty threat by Rockoon · · Score: 2

    The Republicans are the ones who passed the Patriot Act in the first place.

    Don't be an ignorant fuck.

    H.R. 3162 aka "THE PATRIOT ACT" passed the House in 2001 with 357 Yay votes and only 66 Nay votes. 145 of those Yay votes (40%) were Democrats. Only 15% of the House voted against it.

    Then it passed the Senate 98 Yay to 1 Nay. The only Senator to vote against it was Feingold from Wisconsin.. yes, a Democrat.

    Somehow I can amazingly find information on the internet such as which Representatives and Senators voted for which bills. Good thing indeed. It allows me to not exist in a state of ignorant fuckness.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."