CISPA - Destroying your rights

[bedub1]

I can't believe there isn't a thread about this yet. The House of Reps should all be executed, every last one of them. They have an 8% approval rating. I hope some terrorist crashes an airplane into it and kills them all. They are guilty of treason and deserve to die.

http://www.businessinsider.com/cispa-is ... use-2012-4

EDIT: Actually I'd prefer they were all arrest, tried, and executed from treason. We should do this the legal way and let the terrorists do it.

[BigBallinStalin]

I don't like my rights, and the people need to be safer. The legislators are wise, and the bureaucrats are fully in tune with the Public Good and the Public Will; therefore, there are no problems here.

Please move along to the next topic. You are safe. You are protected. Do not fear.


OP might find this book satisfying:
Throw Them All Out by Peter Schweizer.

One of the biggest scandals in American politics is waiting to explode: the full story of the inside game in Washington shows how the permanent political class enriches itself at the expense of the rest of us. Insider trading is illegal on Wall Street, yet it is routine among members of Congress. Normal individuals cannot get in on IPOs at the asking price, but politicians do so routinely. The Obama administration has been able to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to its supporters, ensuring yet more campaign donations. An entire class of investors now makes all of its profits based on influence and access in Washington. Peter Schweizer has doggedly researched through mountains of financial records, tracking complicated deals and stock trades back to the timing of briefings, votes on bills, and every other point of leverage for politicians in Washington. The result is a manifesto for revolution: the Permanent Political Class must go.

The author names names and lists what they've done, and how they did it. It's very interesting. After watching his segment on C-SPAN BookTV, I learned that he's been prohibited from attending any government-held committees/conferences on reforming the legislature branch in regard to this very issue which he's describing. Political self-interest wins again.

[xeno]

I can't believe there isn't a thread about this yet.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=169841

[bedub1]

I can't believe there isn't a thread about this yet.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 8&t=169841

Thankyou! They should merge my thread into your thread. I can't believe nobody else seems to care.

[natty dread]

I posted about this a month ago but no one seemed to care...

too late to cry when the milk is spilled or something

[saxitoxin]

I can't believe there isn't a thread about this yet. The House of Reps should all be executed, every last one of them.

I don't understand people who cry over this but at the same time say ...



... I don't think they know where taxes end up (i.e. the House of Representatives).

A better, albeit less catchy, slogan would be "Tax the Rich in a Hypothetical Scenario in Which all Offices of State were Held by People whose Values and Beliefs Align Perfectly With Our Own and in Which This State-of-Affairs Would Never Change."

[pmchugh]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

[Army of GOD]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

[pmchugh]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

I agree with you. I am of course not a cunt american but I doubt I would vote either if I was.

[BigBallinStalin]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

A politician's platform is a package deal.

Even though these voters may dislike CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada, they may value the other promises which will offset the perceived costs of the CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada legislation. Therefore, they'll vote either Republican or Democrat. I think it mainly depends on how much you perceive either party will tax or subsidize you, and how much you value the "power" of your one vote.

What about the other parties? The Libertarian Party and others have been thoroughly demonized, thus completely misunderstood by the general public; therefore, a vote on these parties is perceived as a vote "thrown away."

[Symmetry]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

A politician's platform is a package deal.

Even though these voters may dislike CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada, they may value the other promises which will offset the perceived costs of the CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada legislation. Therefore, they'll vote either Republican or Democrat. I think it mainly depends on how much you perceive either party will tax or subsidize you, and how much you value the "power" of your one vote.

What about the other parties? The Libertarian Party and others have been thoroughly demonized, thus completely misunderstood by the general public; therefore, a vote on these parties is perceived as a vote "thrown away."

That's long been my issue with libertarianism in the US, especially as encapsulated by Ron Paul. The guy and the party position have a load of grassroots support, but it's all about the presidency or high level federal positions. If he had leveraged a fraction of his support and money into building a proper organisation over all these years- starting at very local levels, rather than burning out time and time again, slowly being co-opted into the Republican party, so that libertarianism is practically indistinguishable from Republican party rhetoric, he might have gotten somewhere.

Libertarians weren't demonised, they were bought.

[saxitoxin]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

A politician's platform is a package deal.

Even though these voters may dislike CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada, they may value the other promises which will offset the perceived costs of the CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada legislation. Therefore, they'll vote either Republican or Democrat. I think it mainly depends on how much you perceive either party will tax or subsidize you, and how much you value the "power" of your one vote.

What about the other parties? The Libertarian Party and others have been thoroughly demonized, thus completely misunderstood by the general public; therefore, a vote on these parties is perceived as a vote "thrown away."

That's long been my issue with libertarianism in the US, especially as encapsulated by Ron Paul. The guy and the party position have a load of grassroots support, but it's all about the presidency or high level federal positions. If he had leveraged a fraction of his support and money into building a proper organisation over all these years- starting at very local levels, rather than burning out time and time again, slowly being co-opted into the Republican party, so that libertarianism is practically indistinguishable from Republican party rhetoric, he might have gotten somewhere.

Libertarians weren't demonised, they were bought.

That's a pretty good point.

Ross Perot ran in 1996 just to meet the 5% federal funding threshold which entitled the Reform Party to $10 million in 2000. They then turned around and blew all $10 million running Pat Buchanan in a long-shot presidential campaign, then promptly folded. Had they taken that $10 million and dropped $500,000 in each of 20 congressional campaigns and ignored the presidency they might have picked-up 6 or 7 seats in the House.

That said, as Scott pointed out, the Ronulans last week took control of the Iowa Central Committee, which is something no one has ever done before. Iowa may be fairly irrelevant but to have outsiders control even one state Republican party is pretty dramatic. A similar "putsch" appears to be underway in Washington state.

[Symmetry]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

A politician's platform is a package deal.

Even though these voters may dislike CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada, they may value the other promises which will offset the perceived costs of the CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada legislation. Therefore, they'll vote either Republican or Democrat. I think it mainly depends on how much you perceive either party will tax or subsidize you, and how much you value the "power" of your one vote.

What about the other parties? The Libertarian Party and others have been thoroughly demonized, thus completely misunderstood by the general public; therefore, a vote on these parties is perceived as a vote "thrown away."

That's long been my issue with libertarianism in the US, especially as encapsulated by Ron Paul. The guy and the party position have a load of grassroots support, but it's all about the presidency or high level federal positions. If he had leveraged a fraction of his support and money into building a proper organisation over all these years- starting at very local levels, rather than burning out time and time again, slowly being co-opted into the Republican party, so that libertarianism is practically indistinguishable from Republican party rhetoric, he might have gotten somewhere.

Libertarians weren't demonised, they were bought.

That's a pretty good point.

Ross Perot ran in 1996 just to meet the 5% federal funding threshold which entitled the Reform Party to $10 million in 2000. They then turned around and blew all $10 million running Pat Buchanan in a long-shot presidential campaign, then promptly folded. Had they taken that $10 million and dropped $500,000 in each of 20 congressional campaigns and ignored the presidency they might have picked-up 6 or 7 seats in the House.

That said, as Scott pointed out, the Ronulans last week took control of the Iowa Central Committee, which is something no one has ever done before. Iowa may be fairly irrelevant but to have outsiders control even one state Republican party is pretty dramatic. A similar "putsch" appears to be underway in Washington state.

Hmm, should I be worried that you're agreeing with me?

[saxitoxin]

Hmm, should I be worried that you're agreeing with me?

#1 - We agree tons.

#2 - I only contingently agreed with you (pending the outcome of state party shake-ups).

[BigBallinStalin]

CISPA, NDNA, the "Trespass bill", SOPA, PIPA and the patriot act extension. That Obama sure is a liberal.

I don't understand people who complain about this shit yet continue to vote Democrat or Republican (like I said in the other thread).

A politician's platform is a package deal.

Even though these voters may dislike CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada, they may value the other promises which will offset the perceived costs of the CISPA, NDAA, yada yada yada legislation. Therefore, they'll vote either Republican or Democrat. I think it mainly depends on how much you perceive either party will tax or subsidize you, and how much you value the "power" of your one vote.

What about the other parties? The Libertarian Party and others have been thoroughly demonized, thus completely misunderstood by the general public; therefore, a vote on these parties is perceived as a vote "thrown away."

That's long been my issue with libertarianism in the US, especially as encapsulated by Ron Paul. The guy and the party position have a load of grassroots support, but it's all about the presidency or high level federal positions. If he had leveraged a fraction of his support and money into building a proper organisation over all these years- starting at very local levels, rather than burning out time and time again, slowly being co-opted into the Republican party, so that libertarianism is practically indistinguishable from Republican party rhetoric, he might have gotten somewhere.

Libertarians weren't demonised, they were bought.

Another problem is that some politicians for Congress who run as Libertarian or espouse Libertarian ideas do not understand Liberterianism.


Regarding "practically indistinguishable" and the merging of Libertarian-esque candidates into the Republican Party, that's basically how the rules of the game work because they can gain much more votes with the Republican label. I wouldn't call this "being bought." It's just playing the game as is set by decades/centuries of legislation. Running without that label pretty much puts the candidate in the dark, which would make marketing much more difficult.

Maybe over time as more Libertarian-minded candidates join the Republican party--maybe even Democrat parties, this will fragment these parties. I'm not sure. (EDIT: seems like saxitoxin's link hints at this as well. Maybe I wrote that link? Maybe saxitoxin is my multi?)

[TheRedSnifit]

Only an idiot who can't be bothered to read the bill would think that CISPA is an infringement upon our rights.

[BigBallinStalin]

Only an idiot who can't be bothered to read the bill would think that CISPA is an infringement upon our rights.

How would CISPA not infringe upon our rights?

And, it's not simply about rights. It's about government responsibility and about holding them accountable by civil society. Since CISPA diminishes an effective response from civil society, then how can people hold the government and corporations responsible for abusing its newly granted power from CISPA?

[saxitoxin]

While everyone's made good points about CISPA, it bears noting that - in most countries in the world - legislation like this already exists.

While CISPA would allow the U.S. government to request data sharing from internet providers, in the UK, GCHQ will soon be installing hardware directly into internet providers systems to allow them real-time monitoring of all email, internet chats and Skype calls.

As Natty aptly pointed out elsewhere, due to the U.S.' puppetmaster status over all the world's little countries this effectively puts people in the little countries under double-surveillance - once by their local, native government and once by the U.S.

So, while CISPA would put Americans under the same kind of surveillance Britons or Australians currently endure, for Britons and Australians it would effectively double their level of surveillance. Rather than protesting over legislation they have no ability to effect - as they have no voting rights in the U.S. - a more effective solution would be to extricate themselves from institutions of U.S. puppet control like NATO/EU.

[saxitoxin]

While everyone's made good points about CISPA, it bears noting that - in most countries in the world - legislation like this already exists.

While CISPA would allow the U.S. government to request data sharing from internet providers, in the UK, GCHQ will soon be installing hardware directly into internet providers systems to allow them real-time monitoring of all email, internet chats and Skype calls.

As Natty aptly pointed out elsewhere, due to the U.S.' puppetmaster status over all the world's little countries this effectively puts people in the little countries under double-surveillance - once by their local, native government and once by the U.S.

So, while CISPA would put Americans under the same kind of surveillance Britons or Australians currently endure, for Britons and Australians it would effectively double their level of surveillance. Rather than protesting over legislation they have no ability to effect - as they have no voting rights in the U.S. - a more effective solution would be to extricate themselves from institutions of U.S. puppet control like NATO/EU.

Of course, since all the politicians in the little countries are on the payroll of the U.S. (see: Carl Bildt, Sweden; Julia Gillard, Australia, etc.) people would have to replace their governments through methods other than electoral politics. This route would portend an interruption in all the treats and sweets their governments give them so it's unlikely this will happen. The average Briton is more interested in getting their free milk vouchers than in having private Skype calls.

[Symmetry]

How many US politicians are on the payroll of Australian tycoon Rupert Murdoch? With Fox News, the US Republican party is firmly under an Ozzie thumb.

[BigBallinStalin]

If only there was someone with a nice hat, elegant smile, and trim suits to inspire confidence in the masses and lead them to utopia.

[saxitoxin]

How many US politicians are on the payroll of Australian tycoon Rupert Murdoch? With Fox News, the US Republican party is firmly under an Ozzie thumb.

Murdoch renounced his Australian citizenship several decades ago and lives in New York. He's as much an Australian as Arnold Schwarzennegger is an Austrian.

Chase Carey - President of Newscorp - of which Murdoch is a minority shareholder, is an American who belongs to the same fraternity as Gen. Tommy Franks and most of the U.S.' other senior military leadership of the last decade.

[Symmetry]

How many US politicians are on the payroll of Australian tycoon Rupert Murdoch? With Fox News, the US Republican party is firmly under an Ozzie thumb.

Murdoch renounced his Australian citizenship several decades ago and lives in New York. He's as much an Australian as Arnold Schwarzennegger is an Austrian.

Chase Carey - President of Newscorp - of which Murdoch is a minority shareholder, is an American who belongs to the same fraternity as Gen. Tommy Franks and most of the U.S.' other senior military leadership of the last decade.

A stirring defence.

[saxitoxin]

How many US politicians are on the payroll of Australian tycoon Rupert Murdoch? With Fox News, the US Republican party is firmly under an Ozzie thumb.

Murdoch renounced his Australian citizenship several decades ago and lives in New York. He's as much an Australian as Arnold Schwarzennegger is an Austrian.

Chase Carey - President of Newscorp - of which Murdoch is a minority shareholder, is an American who belongs to the same fraternity as Gen. Tommy Franks and most of the U.S.' other senior military leadership of the last decade.

A stirring defence.

It's not a defense, it's a recitation of facts. You're free to dispute the validity of any of them. I don't anticipate such an objection will be coming anytime soon, however.

[BigBallinStalin]

While everyone's made good points about CISPA, it bears noting that - in most countries in the world - legislation like this already exists.

While CISPA would allow the U.S. government to request data sharing from internet providers, in the UK, GCHQ will soon be installing hardware directly into internet providers systems to allow them real-time monitoring of all email, internet chats and Skype calls.

As Natty aptly pointed out elsewhere, due to the U.S.' puppetmaster status over all the world's little countries this effectively puts people in the little countries under double-surveillance - once by their local, native government and once by the U.S.

So, while CISPA would put Americans under the same kind of surveillance Britons or Australians currently endure, for Britons and Australians it would effectively double their level of surveillance. Rather than protesting over legislation they have no ability to effect - as they have no voting rights in the U.S. - a more effective solution would be to extricate themselves from institutions of U.S. puppet control like NATO/EU.

Of course, since all the politicians in the little countries are on the payroll of the U.S. (see: Carl Bildt, Sweden; Julia Gillard, Australia, etc.) people would have to replace their governments through methods other than electoral politics. This route would portend an interruption in all the treats and sweets their governments give them so it's unlikely this will happen. The average Briton is more interested in getting their free milk vouchers than in having private Skype calls.

The NSA already data mines almost all electronic international traffic. They coordinate with telecommunication businesses (like AT&T) in order to decrease their workload by having them reroute information to NSA servers. Fun stuff!

See: James Bamford's Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency