cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/15271710

Not a good result. The good amendment to add a warrant requirement failed on a tie vote; bad amendments to expand the scope of warrantless wiretapping passed. Next step: a Senate vote.

  • @Rapidcreek
    link
    -58 months ago

    What if they never wrote “bin Laden Determined to Strike US” because they didn’t know? Would you still think they were doing their jobs as you sipped your morning coffee atop the WTC?

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The Patriot Act* didn’t exist before 9/11. Your argument is invalid.

      Also, the NSA can get the FBI to get a warrant for the person in the US. We already have mechanisms for monitoring communications in the US.

      * It’s actually called the USA PATRIOT Act, which is an acronym for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.” I prefer the acronym U SAP AT RIOT/

        • @Ensign_Crab
          link
          English
          08 months ago

          Section 702 has only existed since 2008.

    • @Ensign_Crab
      link
      English
      18 months ago

      What if they never wrote “bin Laden Determined to Strike US” because they didn’t know?

      They got that information before section 702 was a thing. You’re supporting GWB’s wiretapping policy.

      • @Rapidcreek
        link
        -38 months ago

        That’s actually not true, but I expect that you only posted so you could downvote further.

        • @Ensign_Crab
          link
          English
          28 months ago

          The memo gwb ignored before 9/11 was before section 702 existed. 702 didn’t go into effect until 2008.

          If you don’t want me to downvote you, don’t lie in support of a gwb policy.

          • @Rapidcreek
            link
            -2
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            That’s it isn’t it. You don’t understand the program, and the result is its bad.

            Section 702 is only the current iteration of a legal problem that has been brought to congress by FISA users since its inception. It really has nothing to do with the Patriot Act, and more to do with the inability of Congress.

            • @Ensign_Crab
              link
              English
              08 months ago

              You don’t understand the program

              I understand that whenever a centrist is dead wrong about something, they pull this gaslighting horseshit.

              • @Rapidcreek
                link
                -18 months ago

                HILARIOUS

                You centrist! You’re gaslighting me with facts!

                • @Ensign_Crab
                  link
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  You pretended that a policy that didn’t exist before 2008 provided the intel Bush ignored before 9/11.

                  You don’t understand how linear time works, and have presented no facts.

                  • @Rapidcreek
                    link
                    -28 months ago

                    You don’t understand how FISA was implemented. You’d rather be consumed by things you don’t know about than become aware of things that are totally out of hand.

                    For instance, up the string I said that the courts have ruled that mobile location tracking wasn’t an issue where a warrant was needed. Not only that, but you don’t know mobile location tracking is commercially available. Anyone can buy the data, and that’s wrong. Senator Ron Wydon has been working on this for years. Instead of being worried about all the rights you have that are not being taken away, worry about the those that are.