Slashdot Mirror
Republicans Block Latest Attempt At Curbing NSA Power
Robotron23 writes: The latest attempt at NSA reform has been prevented from passage in the Senate by a margin of 58 to 42. Introduced as a means to stop the NSA collecting bulk phone and e-mail records on a daily basis, the USA Freedom Act has been considered a practical route to curtailment of perceived overreach by security services, 18 months since Edward Snowden went public. Opponents to the bill said it was needless, as Wall Street Journal raised the possibility of terrorists such as ISIS running amok on U.S. soil. Supporting the bill meanwhile were the technology giants Google and Microsoft. Prior to this vote, the bill had already been stripped of privacy protections in aid of gaining White House support. A provision to extend the controversial USA Patriot Act to 2017 was also appended by the House of Representatives.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=2&vote=00282
As you can see, it was pretty much along party lines.
Ignore those who say they used to be our ally in Syria and we were sending them weapons and aid.
Who said that? One of the reasons we were reluctant to send aid to the so-called moderates was because we were afraid it would fall into the hands of groups like ISIS. In retrospect that was probably a mistake; of course one could go further back and say that it was a mistake to help destabilize Assad in the first place. Devil you know and all that. Did you happen to catch Assad's interview with Charlie Rose? He called this happening; he may be a scumbag but he knew his country better than we ever did. Realpolitik might have been the best play, though it's a bit late for that at this stage.
Incidentally, they're not just our enemy; they're enemies of all of civilization. You're willing to sit on the sidelines while ISIS engages in a campaign of genocide and ethnic/religious cleansing? Go watch this, assuming you have the stomach to get through it. They're barbarians and they need to be terminated with extreme prejudice.
If you can't get behind the moral imperative to intervene, well, they've killed multiple American citizens and that's all the casus belli we need.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
A couple more Republican's voted against it than Democrats.
"insightful"?
If you look at the data (scroll down to "grouped by vote position", all but three Republicans voted against it, and all but one democrats in favour of it. So, a lot more than "a couple".
One Democrat and almost every Republican is not "bipartisan effort against liberty".
I read the internet for the articles.
Excuse me, but where did I advocate for terminating all Sunnis? I advocating for terminating ISIS. There is a difference you know.
Obligatory Godwin time: Not all Germans were members of the SS.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
FYI, because this bill failed, the NSA's authorization to bulk monitor phone calls warrantlessly is now set to expire next year, whereas this bill would have extended it with some minor limitations. Some Republicans who were in favor of the original bill voted against the final version because it didn't do enough, and they would prefer the expiration to take effect instead.
The problem here is that you just no true Scotsmanned away over half the people with your ideological alignment.
Besides which, the data on libertarian voting isn't very ambiguous. Self identified libertarians vote for republican candidates at about the same rate as self identifed republicans. 75% vs 80%.
The closest thing to a libertarian in the Senate is Rand Paul. He voted against the bill. He used the chicken shit excuse that "It didn't go far enough", as if a fantasy bill that went even farther was a realistic alternative.
He used the chicken shit excuse that "It didn't go far enough", as if a fantasy bill that went even farther was a realistic alternative.
According to your link:
Paul said he voted against the bill because it would have extended the Patriot Act provision that allows the NSA to search Americans' phone records. He has consistently opposed the Patriot Act, passed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
It curtailed some domestic spying, but extended it in other areas, and also extended the PATRIOT Act. My guess is you would have criticized him if he voted in favor of it as well.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Ahem.... There were TWO bills, ONE of which was introduced by Jim Sensenbrenner, a republican in the House. I don't know how it started, and Sensenbrenner is the guy that helped WRITE the Patriot Act, who later said "oops". He gets credit for that in my book. Anyway, the HOUSE (R controlled) version went through committees and THAT version extended the Patriot act and didn't go far enough.
The OTHER bill was introduced by Patrick Leahy, a Dem in the Senate. THAT version was stronger, and THAT version unequivocally was BLOCKED by Republicans in the Sentate.
If you'd care to look for yourself... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
So, it seems you don't know what you're talking about....