Congress Voting On Amendment to Defund NSA Domestic Spying Tomorrow 276
New submitter Jah-Wren Ryel writes "It's been just over a month since the NSA's dragnet surveillance program was leaked to the public. Tomorrow, Congress is voting on an amendment that would block funding for NSA programs that collect the call records of innocent Americans. A win tomorrow may start a chain reaction — but it won't happen unless we speak up. We have one day to convince Congress to act."
The EFF is urging U.S. citizens to call their representatives, noting that there is no time for email to be effective (find your representative). You can read the amendment on the EFF site, quoting the EFF: "Reps. Justin Amash, John Conyers, Jr., Thomas Massie, Mick Mulvaney, and Jared Polis are proposing an amendment that would curtail funding for the implementation of orders under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act unless the order is explicitly limited in scope. ... Even as the Amash/Conyers Amendment is gaining momentum, some are rallying around a decoy amendment that would do nothing to rein in domestic surveillance. That amendment, championed by Rep. Nugent, would not alter in any way the government's use of Section 215 to obtain bulk communications records on millions of Americans. EFF is urging Representatives to oppose the Nugent Amendment."
I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
You should still call. Express your disapproval if necessary. Silence will be interpreted as agreement.
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Disapproval will be interpreted as disapproval. It may be short sighted, ill considered, but still just disapproval.
Re: (Score:3)
Consider that if you call, the NSA will know you called. One more metadata tag in some disk drive in Utah.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, shouldn't we mandate Congress have 800 numbers?
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Most orgs that have 800#s have ANI. Look it up-- like caller-id but more choice.
Your cellphone put you in the conference room. You can be tracked easily to very confined geometry.
So it was you. You don't even have to confess, we hacked the VoIP PBX long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
However, I said 'directly', which isn't claiming they can't figure it out, just that it isn't straightforward from the meta-data.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what hadoop is for.
Re: (Score:3)
what? trample them with an elephant??
btw, even if they pass a new law or amendment, it won't do what we want it to do.
there is an outcry from the people (to some degree) but those in power know they want to keep this golden goose.
so, they'll make it seem like they've 'changed' but, in fact, it will be a facade. I would bet my entire savings account that this won't change the underlying behavior of the spy system. some veneer will be created to placate the masses, but business will continue as usual, just
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Last year I would have said you're tinfoil hat material.
Fifteen years ago, you (and 95% of my fellow techies) would've said I was tinfoil hat material. (I may be a visionary but I'm fucking tired of being right.)
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fifteen years ago, you (and 95% of my fellow techies) would've said I was tinfoil hat material. (I may be a visionary but I'm fucking tired of being right.)
There isn't much point fighting the natural cycle. Government gains too much power, becomes oppressive... people revolt... form new government... repeat.
I thought you could break the cycle but people literally have an animal instinct to be told what to do. When I was younger I thought people were naive, but even as I got older I heard educated adults say: "I'm not doing anything wrong so I have nothing to hide". Actual educated adults that should know better.
I was born and lived during a time of freedom so I can be thankful for being at the right part of the cycle AND that is all. If young people don't pick up the fight that is literally their loss. In fact, I'm of the opinion now that we may as well accelerate the process. Let's just take away people freedom so people finally get the point. We can try to hold on to dwindling freedom or we can aim for a revolution and a new start.
Re: (Score:3)
If young people don't pick up the fight that is literally their loss.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." - Ronald Reagan.
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
They would just write an amendment to it that exempts them from being monitored. Just like the Do Not Call lists, Social Security, laws against insider trading, etc, etc...
Re: (Score:2)
Disapproval will be interpreted as treason.
Since the representative is supposed to represent the views of his constituency, technically the congressman disagreeing with you should be considered treason.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's the standard form letter that you get in ANY state (except for maybe 2 or 3 swing states, where the outcome of any election isn't already predetermined).
Re:I would, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Now you at least know how non-us-citizens feel when they talk to you guys, basically, "who cares if the NSA taps the whole world, as long as they don't tap us-citizens, suck it"...
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Since the NSA is in the spying business (signals analysis and such, not sneaking around spying), the fact that they spy is of no interest to me at all. It's their job.
That said, we have this Constitution thing for a reason, and the NSA violating the Constitution IS if interest to me.
In other words, the NSA spying on foreigners is their job. The NSA spying on ME needs a warrant and/or court order, which they don't have (don't get me started on Secret Courts..).
If you're a foreigner being spied on by the NSA, take it up with your own government. If YOUR government won't protect you from OUR government, consider getting a new government.
Divide and conquer (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're a foreigner being spied on by the NSA, take it up with your own government. If YOUR government won't protect you from OUR government, consider getting a new government.
And that, girls and boys, is the reason why very small groups of people (aka governments) owns vast groups of people (aka citizens). Being selfish and ignorant makes you stupid, weak and easy to break into submission.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, as far as senators go, Moran didn't go raving about terrorists and security. [ksn.com] That statement sounds like as of the 4th of july, he hadn't decided which way his voters were leaning.
Your other senator, Pat Roberts, doesn't appear to have ma
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I would, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
My congressman and I are pretty much in agreement on everything. Can I call your congressman?
Re:I would, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
There's no guarantee that contacting your congressman will make any difference in all of this, but doing nothing diminishes your chances of affecting any kind of change to nil. Guaranteed that there is a significant part of your population that is going to be spending their evening comatose in front of the TV or watching Youtube, oblivious to or uncaring of this NSA scandal brewing around them. It's a foregone conclusion that they won't be calling their congressman. As someone aware of what is going on, who is not hopelessly entranced by "So you think you can dance" or some other such crap, and who has the power and capacity to maybe do something about it (you have a phone, don't you?), don't you think you have a duty to act on behalf of your country?
As a Canadian, I can't do much about this particular initiative, but I have on a small number of occasions participated in blocking certain bills that I felt strongly against (new Canadian copyright reform bills), and I did this simply by contacting my MP and various ministers. Did my individual acts, when considered on their own, make a difference? Hell no. But when considered together with similar acts by thousands of other Canadians, it had a very strong impact, and was enough to stop a couple of unfavourable bills in their tracks (at least for a while). If copyright reform can elicit that kind of effort from me, why doesn't the loss and corruption of one of your fundamental "rights" elicit the same kind of effort in you? What is it going to take?
Re: (Score:2)
You think being in the State of Kansas makes you ineffective in government, try being a voter in Lawrence. Might as well not vote for anything outside the city elections.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650 [amazon.com]
You should read it.
No, really.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think we have minions. :)
Nothing to see here (Score:5, Insightful)
Treadstone? You're worried... It's all but decommissioned at this point. All right. What's next? Okay. This is... Black Briar. Black Briar is a joint DOD communications program that we really feel has good traction. It's got legs. It'll run and run.
Re: (Score:2)
I can neither confirm no deny that.
The Greatest Lying Mouth of All Time(tm) (Score:5, Insightful)
Because nothing says reassuring like a vote from congress.
Domestic spying isn't going to end folks. It's here to stay, you're all being profiled now and you don't care enough to do anything about it. The day a new iPhone or Galaxy Nexus comes out you'll all still buy it, even though you've just helped enable domestic spying through your purchase. The day the PS4 with its microphone-enabled controllers and the XBone with its Kinect 2 you'll all rush out and buy it anyway. Hell, Android phones came with CarrierIQ PREINSTALLED, remember that? A keylogger, preinstalled on your phone. They aren't even trying to hide it any more, your phone is a mouthpiece and eyepiece of the State now whether you like it or not.
All I've seen on Slashdot and Reddit about this whole debacle is nothing but a bunch of whining and slacktivism, the most amusing of which was a meme post on Reddit whining on about the lack of "complaints" regarding the NSA lately. Complaints. That's all you have after every right and freedom your own ancestors fought to achieve, complaints? How can you honestly still sing "the land of the free" with a straight face when the anthem plays? The United States of America is the shining example of totalitarianism in the world today.
Let that sink in for a moment and then lament everything that you've lost, because none of you care enough to take it back.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You are truly an idiot if you believe such a common alias could be easily tied to the person you're replying to. Be honest, how many normal "spacepimp" profiles did you go through on Google before you found the incriminating furry one you could attempt to use to devalue his post?
Re:The Greatest Lying Mouth of All Time(tm) (Score:5, Interesting)
The United States of America is the shining example of totalitarianism in the world today.
We have a major problem with the constitution being seen as completely irrelevant (see Obama's decision that he can unilaterally override legislation with Obamacare / immigration; the idea that the fed has the constitutional right to mandate healthcare; the idea that state governments have the right to prohibit firearm posession; etc ad nauseam).
That said, I have a strong feeling you've never been to a totalitarian government, and have no idea what youre talking about. All governments tend towards totalitarianism, but we're pretty far from it. Part of the issue with "nothing but complaints" is that people get this ridiculous idea that "we've lost, we have no freedoms, and we're already a dictatorship". Guess what, no we're not, we still have a large number of rights, and battles over a lot of them are STILL being fought.
So next time the discussion over gun control or the first amendment or the 4th amendment comes up, rather than saying "think of the children" and conceding, and rather than saying "we've lost' and giving up, try actually standing up for the principle and letting it affect how you vote. I have a strong feeling that this defeatism is a lot of the reason so many people dont vote, and you really should not be complaining about slacktivism on the one hand and encouraging apathy on the other.
Re:The Greatest Lying Mouth of All Time(tm) (Score:5, Insightful)
We have a lot of rights, but they've been largely neutered. e.g., what good is the right to free speech, if your speech can never affect public policy? What good is the right to a trial by jury, if you have to risk the rest of your life in order to exercise it? Really now, what are these "large number of rights" that we still have?
Re: (Score:3)
Don't worry, buddy, the Third Amendment is rock solid. Halliburton would never let the government quarter soldiers in our homes instead of contracting with them to build more barracks.
Re: (Score:2)
The right to consume?
Seriously, I'm pretty sure this is the one right that even our current administration would not dare to mess with.
Re: (Score:2)
The idiot redneck tea partiers still have the right to own firearms.
What's wrong with people succeeding at keeping rights they feel are important?
Funny how the "dumb" people still have the right they think is important, but the "smart" people seem to have lost all the ones they think is more important.
Funny how the "dumb" people succeed where the "smart" people don't.
Easier way to find your representative's info. (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.defundthensa.com/ [defundthensa.com]
Site created by the newly initiated http://taskforce.is/ [taskforce.is]
Spying on Americans is OK with me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Then maybe he thinks those countries should knock it off too?
Re: (Score:2)
Priceless. And this is why things will continue as they have been.
Three Cheers for Amash (Score:5, Informative)
Justin Amash [twitter.com] is just the kind of Representative that could really make this system work, if there were 430 more like him. He posts all of his votes online and explains his rationale, which is almost always concerned foremost with the legality of the proposed legislation.
For that reason, most of his amendments fail and he's usually on the losing side of popular votes. I'll be delighted if his amendment succeeds and is not subsequently removed in conference or by another amendment, but if I were a betting man, I would not bet on his effort tomorrow having any actual impact on the funding.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would assume that is Constitutional legality.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't much care about the Constitution. Much of it provides too much freedom to the government. Much of it doesn't guarantee the freedoms people need, and provides them freedoms that are actively harmful. Much of it provides freedoms in the wrong way (patent and copyright law--no bounds, no rules, you have the freedom to lobby for eternal copyright and sue the shit out of old ladies). Much of it proscribes mechanisms that have already been subverted, such that the voice and the will and the freedom of
Re: (Score:2)
I have to disagree with you a bit. The US Constitution is government 2.x. It is production code that has had some patches applied.
Government 1.0 didn't work out so well and had to be scrapped: See Articles of Confederation [wikipedia.org]
A further rewrite instead of patching would be risky. There is no guarantee that a rewrite would be better, and a considerable chance it would be far worse given the feckless politicians now available to perform a rewrite.
I think the current US Constitution could be compared to Algol:
Re: (Score:3)
Basically you nailed it. The powers established were not as clear as some people like to believe--not just things like the second amendment argument over the use of a comma where a semicolon belongs or the definition of 'people', but the general duties of government itself. Somehow the Constitution lays out that judges can be legally obligated to prevent jury nullification, that prosecution (state lawyers!) can create a jury of your peers by throwing out anyone that seems capable of critical thought, and
Next best thing... (Score:2)
If you're keeping score, congress just told me to RTFA! This has to be a good thing right?!
Will it mater? (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point I'm not sure you can actually yank funds from the NSA. Their budget is secret, and they have as secret court system who's records are secret that they could use to overrule pretty much any funding provision.
The NSA has positioned itself completely out of congressional and executive oversight. It's pretty clear that they lie to both branches and get away with it, simply because they have the ability censor and withhold any documents that could prove that they're up to no good.
People get on the Govt's case (specifically the case of presidents and politicians they don't like) for supporting NSA actions.. I don't think it's quite that simple. Congress and the President get advice and information from the NSA and they depend on it for making policy decisions. The problem is the NSA could be feeding congress and the president bullshit, and we've got no way to prove that information right or wrong.
There's no accountability (God, I hate that overused word but it's appropriate in this context) and there is no oversight. There is simply no way to prove that there is or is no conflict of interest, and thus we cannot trust the NSA. (Even if it turns out all of their actions are completely justified!)
Re: (Score:3)
I dont believe the FISA court has jurisdiction over the congressional budget. If congress defunds them, theyre defunded.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point I'm not sure you can actually yank funds from the NSA. Their budget is secret, and they have as secret court system who's records are secret that they could use to overrule pretty much any funding provision.
The NSA has positioned itself completely out of congressional and executive oversight. [snip]
Wait, isn't the NSA (and other three-letter alphabet soup of organizations) part of the executive branch anyway? Doesn't the POTUS have a say as to what's going on?
Perhaps the problem isn't that they're out of oversight - it's that they've completely corrupted it - spying on some companies (foriegn and domestic) to help their competitors who play ball - doing the same for Congress critters, and I bet they're not above threatening the POTUS himself if the soft-intimidation doesn't work (remember the outing
Re:Will it mater? (Score:4, Interesting)
Totally not monitoring those calls. (Score:2, Funny)
We totally aren't tracking who calls their congressman to express support for the bill. Pinkie swear.
Stupid (Score:2)
This is stupid ... at this rate only the pirates will have guns (big data analytics).
People should be advocating better oversight and more direct accountability instead of tearing down the walls of Rome.
No, somehow - I smell bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll believe it when the NSA is actually defunded.
The more cynical side of me says this is bullshit politics as usual.
Here's what's really going to happen: the congressman is going to go to the NSA leadership, and say "look, I have hundreds and thousands of constituents who want to shut you down, but if you let me spy on my political opponents, and listen in on their calls, and help me sabotage them, then I can justify and risk continuance of your funding"
The more we petition them, the more they will be able to use shutting them down as a threat to get more political power that is turned against us. I predict it will be a cold day in hell before political leaders in DC give up that kind of power to spy on and blackmail people.
Re: (Score:3)
Political kabuki theatre aside, I don't think congressmen are in position to negotiate any deal with NSA. My suspicion is that NSA tightly holds most, if not all congressmen by the balls. With amounts of data they've collected, they can blackmail just about any politician into submission. Congress will propably vote exactly what NSA wants. Face it, folks. There is no functioning democracy in the US - just as one ex-Presidedent told us. Security aparatchics have all the power - just like in old communist cou
Re: (Score:2)
My suspicion is that NSA tightly holds most, if not all congressmen by the balls.
Case in point: Anthony Weiner and the famous picture of his junk. 3 interesting points about that: (1) When the scandal first broke, Weiner claimed that his phone was hacked. (2) Jon Stewart, who knew Weiner when they were younger, thought that the pictures didn't match Weiner's weiner. (3) The photos in question don't show his face or any other identifying characteristics.
I'm not a political supporter of Weiner, but it sure looks like he was set up by somebody.
Re:No, somehow - I smell bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
why defund the NSA, the NSA actually has a legimate mission which of course has nothing to do with spying on U.S. citizens. The job it is supposed to be doing is securing the communications of the U.S. government
Re: (Score:2)
why defund the NSA, the NSA actually has a legimate mission which of course has nothing to do with spying on U.S. citizens. The job it is supposed to be doing is securing the communications of the U.S. government
There are two types of people in this world. Those who RTFA'd and those who did not.
Re: (Score:2)
just as there are two types of people, those who read the comment to which I was replying, and those like you who do not and spout irrelevant viewpoints
Re: (Score:2)
why defund the NSA, the NSA actually has a legimate mission which of course has nothing to do with spying on U.S. citizens. The job it is supposed to be doing is securing the communications of the U.S. government
And if you take all the government employees, contractors and the like, and go 3 hops, you pretty much have the whole of the USA.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/07/18/2023207/nsa-admits-searching-3-hops-from-suspects [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Read the bill amendment, which is quite short.. It's worded to limit FISA information collection specifically, things like phone numbers called, incoming call numbers, among others.
It would be attached to a DOD appropriations bill (HR 2397).
I called my representative's office. You should too.
I don't care if they tracked my call (which was routed through the central office then to my reps office). Keep their lines ringing off the hook people!
Re: (Score:2)
Because they're almost useless. I highly doubt we actually need many of these warmongering organizations, or at the very least, they don't need nearly as much money as they're getting now.
Re: (Score:2)
why defund the NSA, the NSA actually has a legimate mission
The ammendment is about defunding the part that spies on americans, not the entire organization. It is an achievable and reasonable goal.
Congress remembers Putin ex-head of KGB (Score:2, Redundant)
And that happened for a reason. Homeland security and the NSA may not run the country today, but I wouldn't count on tomorrow. The actual staff at the NSA tend to be decent and patriotic. The guys at the top.... are like guys at the top anywhere.
In soviet America, Homeland secures you.
It's a simple freaking call (Score:3)
Pretend you're making a crank call but instead of the usual 12-year old stint, just say "I'm calling to voice my support for the Amash amendment. I want the funding stripped from the NSA and given to NASA instead". It will take all of 10 minutes and even if your rep is a douche, at least you don't have to be.
McClintock (R-CA) (Score:2)
My congressman is McClintock who is a libertarian type in a very conservative (mostly ignorant, rural) area of California.
I agree with him on just about nothing except this one issue.
I call him (always get some office drone who doesn't know anything) often about lots of stuff even though I know he will ignore me.
I called him about this issue (where I know he is against NSA spying) and the office drone as usual said he didn't know how McClintock would vote.
We'll see if he buckles under to the Republican lead
Then we know (Score:2)
That system is so screwed up, it's unbelievable!!!
good luck (Score:2)
If only there was... (Score:5, Funny)
It's about control. (Score:2)
Aaron Swartz when talking about the defeat of SOPA clearly pointed out that Congress is about control. They will not give up invading people's rights. Somehow we do not living exactly in a representative democracy. Unless we are totally paranoid self hating prison guards, this is not a government for an by the people.
Just called (Score:2)
Got my reps office (Wm. Lacy Clay, 1st District, MO) and asked that he vote for the defunding of domestic surveillance tomorrow.
We shall see how it goes.
+1 (Score:2)
You never know what you can be done till you try. (Score:4, Interesting)
So, today, I called Representative Bishop and urged him to support the Amash amendment.
Who knows? If a Utah Senator can acknowledge there is a problem, maybe there is some hope.
I made my letter available at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bd9crUNvPF71alxCVKcUmVarn80aJQJmZe4FLyzKWXU [google.com] Feel free to mine it for suggestions for your own action.
Re: (Score:3)
"He said he would try to address the problem." TRY. He didn't say he will do it. :/
it was those criminals in congress (Score:3)
Laughable (Score:3)
Let me get this straight.
The same people who have destroyed the republic that once existed under the Constitution and Bill of Rights are going to defund drones?
If you believe that they actually do, I have some swamp land in Florida that is really beach front property you should buy.
No way in hell they are going to do that, even if the press says they do, they won't secretly.
The cache of industrial and financial information the NSA/CIA and its crony congressman get ALONE is far to valuable to just shut off.
-Hack
Re:Not an amendment - (Score:5, Informative)
> The OP could be much clearer.
Or you could be smart enough to realize that the word amendment isn't defined as "Modifies the US Constitution"
Re:Not an amendment - (Score:5, Insightful)
The other thing that could be clearer is that this has exactly zero chance of having any success.
Congress defunding something merely results in the administration transferring discretionary funds to the program so that nothing is changed, other than the Forest service doesn't get new ranger trucks this year, or the Coast Guard runs obsolete cutters for another year past their life expectancy (which expired 25 years ago).
The money thusly transferred will be totally lost in the morass of government accounting and end up being more secret than the secret budget of the NSA.
Until Congress gets the balls to outlaw this program with criminal penalties, simply taking away funds away is a pointless gesture, like sending a kid to his room with no desert, but sneaking a double helping of cake and cookies into his later.
Re: (Score:2)
...nothing is changed, other than the Forest service doesn't get new ranger trucks this year, or the Coast Guard runs obsolete cutters for another year past their life expectancy (which expired 25 years ago).
How is that ineffective? The more the government shits on people, the more it contributes to public dissent, the more public dissent and malcontent the closer people come to snapping.
It really saddened me when the government stepped in with TARP money. Sure they stopped a major financial crisis, but I wanted to see some CEOs being drawn and quartered as a deterrent for future CEOs.
Re:Not an amendment - (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, defunding this program has an enormous impact on pending court cases. One cannot argue that Congress has authorized this program if Congress has voted to deny it funding. As such, the executive branch would then be running an unauthorized program against the express will of the legislature. At that point, the primary argument against court challenges - that this is legal because it has Congress' stamp of approval - is moot and the court challenges actually have a better chance of having the program declared illegal.
At that point, if the executive branch continues running it, they risk massive backlash and someone (not someone -too- high up of course) will probably go to prison.
Re: (Score:3)
Its a lot different.
You can hid the cost of massive data gathering because its almost all automated, already in place, and all you have to do is
pay the power bill for the taps already in place at Verizon and other providers. Its just money and not that much of it.
Its not ships and planes and armies carrying on bombing campaigns.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I was afraid somebody did vote for Ted.
Luckily it's somebody else.
Unfortunately, it seems he is nearly as crazy.
I've wondered this for some time now - what, precisely, makes Ted Nugent so "crazy?" Because he's a firm defender of the 2nd Amendment? Or perhaps because he's concerned about illegal government activities such as domestic spying and summary executions without due process?
Oh, I see - he's supported Republicans in the past. So, not so much "crazy," as "doesn't agree with my opinion 100%..."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Because he says insane things like that the president can suck his machine gun, or that if Obama gets reelected he'll be in prison or dead.
What, precisely, is insane about that? Not being arch, I genuinely want to know if there's any valid reason why a man voicing his opinion would be considered an insane act.
Granted, those aren't the most intellectually sound statements ever, but I've heard worse; my current favorite is, "We must sacrifice our freedoms to protect our freedoms." No, seriously, someone said that to me as recently as today. Really.
I get the feeling that "crazy" in this debate can be translated to "holds an opinion I strongly dis
Re: (Score:3)
"We must sacrifice our freedoms to protect our freedoms" is a dumb statement, but not a crazy one. It makes a point, and it allows for rebuttal and debate. "Obama can go suck on my machine gun" is a crazy statement. Rather than put forward any argument, it's a personal threat against the man he disagrees with.
Take a counterpoint: Charlton Heston was a firm defender of the 2nd Amendment. He spoke loudly and openly for his Constitutional rights. But he did not (afaik, at least) spew vitriol, personal att
Re: (Score:2)
"We must sacrifice our freedoms to protect our freedoms" is a dumb statement, but not a crazy one. It makes a point, and it allows for rebuttal and debate.
I challenge you to try and debate that point with the people who make it. At the end of the conversation, at least one of you will be crazy.
"Obama can go suck on my machine gun" is a crazy statement. Rather than put forward any argument, it's a personal threat against the man he disagrees with.
So, if I said "Antipater can take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut," you'd consider that a crazy statement and threat? Because that's pretty much what Nugent did, albeit with slightly more violent rhetoric.
Take a counterpoint: Charlton Heston was a firm defender of the 2nd Amendment. He spoke loudly and openly for his Constitutional rights. But he did not (afaik, at least) spew vitriol, personal attacks, or threats.
Ironic to say the least, as Heston's famous "you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands" statement could actually be construed as a direct threat
Re: (Score:3)
So, if I said "Antipater can take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut," you'd consider that a crazy statement and threat?
Um. if you told me to jump into a rolling doughnut, I might think you're crazy for different reasons.
As for "cold dead hands" vs. "suck on my machine gun", I find your interpretation as odd as you find mine. "Cold, dead hands" is a generalized statement of what lengths Heston was willing to go to to defend his guns. "Suck on my machine gun" is a specific threat, especially given the context of a concert in which he would shoot arrows at pictures of liberal candidates. Heston also (again, afaik) never ca
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Or maybe because he crapped his pants to get out of going to war.
Real patriot there.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe because he crapped his pants to get out of going to war.
Real patriot there.
OK, so maybe not the most patriotic thing to do, but is it really crazy? I mean, have you any desire to enter a combat zone?
Dickhead is a label I don't necessarily disagree with, just can't understand where this "crazy" nonsense comes from (actually, I do - calling someone crazy marginalizes them, and makes it easier to ignore everything they have to say, regardless of how sane it may be).
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of reasons, but one thing he did recently was kill 450 hogs from a helicopter, using a machine gun. The feral hogs are a menace, and there is nothing wrong with hunting, but it is a bit disturbing when somebody revels in mass slaughter, and kills hundreds of animals for personal pleasure and the joy of killing. Killing for pleasure isn't the sign of a healthy mental state.
Re: (Score:2)
"None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to execute a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order pursuant to Section 501 of FISA 1978 which does not contain the following sentence: 'This order limits the collection of any tangible things (including [metadata]) that may be authorized to be collected pursuant to this Order to those tangible things that pertain to a person who is the subject of an investigation described in Section 501 of FISA 1978'."
In other words: Section 501 orders must
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Tangible+property
Interesting point. No definition of either "tangible" or "intangible" I can find mentions phone records. However, as the amendment itself specifically mentions phone numbers as included, I think it'd be decently tough to work around.