What is Digg?82 Comments
- Mittop, on 10/12/2007, -2/+119There isn't enough room in the intro paragraph for me to express my disgust with this. This bill would mean that AT&T and the rest would be free of any liability from assisting the government ILLEGALLY! ARG! THis would also bring to an end any EFF lawsuits (like the one against AT&T). Tell your congressperson about this and demand they block or remove this language.
- Taphoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+55
Time to call your Senator and make sure he or she knows this is complete and utter BS. And that they'd better vote against it.... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+54Just when you think President Traitor can't screw America any more, he digs in and suprises us all.
- mikes1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+47"No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
Bush has never read the Constitution, and neither has his Attorney "the Geneva Convention is obsolete and quaint" General.
Of course, most of Congress and the Supremes haven't either. - AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -2/+37Impeach Bush / Cheney '07 has my vote.
- acdcfanbill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30Nothing says guilty like trying to cover your tracks and those of your conspirators.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30Bush calls himself conservative, but all he has succeeded in doing is making the government bigger and more powerful. Hypocrite. Liar. Tyrant.
- AndreMA, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26One group of criminals trying to protect another. Who says there's no honor among thieves?
- simplynix, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Ah yes. Quite the move on Bush' part. He's basically asking who wants telecom money for their next campaign.
- scuvball, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24... The telephone companies were really dumb to help with the wiretaps WITHOUT immunity. I wonder what their lawyers were doing at the time?
- zweben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20He'll keep doing it until he's dragged out of office.
- theNazz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20President Bush is a slimy piece of *****.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19"Time to take an out of country vacation till Bush is gone."
And you think things will be better when you get back?? No future government will ever reverse these liberty destroying things as it given them (no matter what political persuasion) more power over the people, which is exactly what every government secretly wants! - theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18One phone company did the right thing. Qwest's lawyers advised them that total phone surveillance of the US population was illegal. So their CEO refused to cooperate.
Then Bush's executive branch stopped awarding them federal government contracts.
But they recently won a huge multi-billion dollar contract again:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/032907-networx-qwest-wins.html
Makes you wonder. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Each president recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." - severud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16So then they did break the law, eh? I wonder who made them do such a thing....
- theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Although "ex post facto" means "after the fact," an "ex post facto law" only makes something illegal after the fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto
Congress can legalize anything they want. For instance, Tom DeLay's Republicans immunized the gun industry from class action lawsuits, despite their knowingly irresponsible sales tactics which made it easy for felons and underage gangbangers to buy weapons.
So unfortunately, if this law passes, it could save AT&T billions. - sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"As long as you're not a terrorist and obey the laws, this shouldn't be a problem for anyone."
Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have NEVER been given a power that they haven't abused repeatedly. Hell, neither has President Bush. ;-) Power corrupts.
It's not just the terrorists that have to worry about this one. It's also pot smokers, people having gay or adulterous relationships (both of which are illegal in various states), etc. I've never completely understood all the privacy nuts out there, as I don't have anything to hide and I have kids that could be protected by certain invasions of privacy. The only real argument that makes sense is that powers like this end up being abused (repeatedly). Regardless, it seems that approximately 50% of the people in the US don't want the government knowing what they're up to, even if they're just lighting one up every now and then. - RobotChicken1, on 03/07/2008, -3/+14And just remember, if we call our congressmen, they WILL listen. We can't let this ***** go on any longer. This needs to be stopped. I honestly don't see how Bush is still in office. I literally cannot wrap my head around that notion. It absolutely boggles the mind that we are letting this ***** take a huge dump on every single right we have as Americans. Just ***** astounding.
- d00ley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I guarantee they were give some major incentives. Either for the companies or for the individuals that made the call.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I can't help but be surprised at just how further down he manages to drag the country. It's not surprising in the sense that he has been doing it since the eve of his presidency, but it just seems like there has to be a floor somewhere. I mean, at some point you just wonder how much lower we could possibly go, and yet the next day he's there ***** us over again and there's nothing we can do about it. We're operating like a god damn dictatorship.
Does he have a guilty conscience or is he too stupid to possess one? I often wonder. - sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Phone company exec: My lord, is that legal?
Emperor Bush: I will make it legal! - unknown04guy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Americans' rights are being thrown out one at a time...
- kaelyiesta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8stop digging jgzman down without evidence to prove otherwise. If you don't like his point tough, I bet he doesn't like it either. Stop digging down the truth just because it sucks. Prove it wrong, don't hide your heads in the sand.
- Prismatic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I hope you're joking
- theodicey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Who needs a conscience when you have a blanket pardon from Jesus Christ?
And if he had one, he'd be the only Bush with one. Sociopathy is partly genetic. Just read about his mother, and Nazi collaborator grandfather. - upeneff, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Time to take an out of country vacation till Bush is gone.
- Azerael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Every system with a position of power becomes corrupt at some point, and it's revolution that sends them back to square one.
No congressman is going to give you your liberties back willingly. All your protesting and lobbying ever achieves is the stalling of the inevitable. The only viable option is to stick lead between their eyes and tear your constitutional rights them from their cold, dead hands; before it's too late. - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Lets hope they actually through the bill before deciding on it. That would be a change from the republican congress..
- sponeil, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Actually, the phone company is bound by law to refuse. Google has refused to give up search records without a warrant. I'm not saying we should be particularly rough on them, as I imagine pressure was applied (which may have been in the form of promises or threats). I'd recommend a slap on the wrist, along with a threat of much worse for future violations. The Bush administration and FBI administrators should be bitch-slapped out of office.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9"It absolutely boggles the mind that we are letting this ***** take a huge dump on every single right we have as Americans. Just ***** astounding."
Because he was voted in by the American people to do so. - zeromancer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6it's not ***** about it being between left and right. you people are so worried about being liberal or conservative. but the truth is, none of it matters. we live in the most twisted and corrupt country in the world. Examples: our ridiculous drug policy, our fear of sex and nudity, our corporation owned government, our traitorous dictator, or our apathetic citizens. As long as something doesn't specifically happen to you, it doesn't matter. Until you're illegally wiretapped, placed on a suspect list for terrorism, or something like that, it's easier to look the other way. You all think a new president is going to help? I think a revolution is the only thing that will change this country. It was revolution that made this country great and it is revolution that will make it great again. Gravel and Obama and Paul can't save you now.
This country needs help. OUR help. - laserblazer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Why even have laws? This creep is trying to invoke The Divine Right of Presidents.
Nobility is in the heart, not the blood. - kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Hey, I battled terrorism by voting for Bush, can I videotape my neighbor changing now? No? Why not? It's only fair.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+52008 will be the first time I can vote. And hell no, I would not have voted Bush.
- Mittop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"I could CARE LESS if the phone companies share data with the government to try to stop another terrorist 9/11 massacre. The people whining about this will be the first one complaining about how not enough was done to protect us from the next terrorist attack."
You should care. You should care very much. The only rights you have are the rights you try and protect. You might feel it is ok for the government to monitor your conversations now, but what about a few years from now. As an example, you might say "Go ahead, I don't talk about bombs on the phone". Well, in a few years, what if talking about sex or religion or something else become a "security risk"? You will have established no protection for yourself to from your right to speak about and reflect upon ideas that might be important to you, and scary to your new ant overlords. :) - UncleBadTouch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Good luck getting this ***** through the house and the senate Mr. Bush.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/4934/safenq8.jpg
- jgzman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I hate to point it out, but that means they can't retroactively make something illegal. They can certainly make something legal retroactively, or offer immunity retroactively, since a (presumably) one-shot immunity deal isn't exactly a law. (depending on how it's worked out, of course)
If I am wrong, please provide links, because I would like to know better. - fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's a running theme with these people, saying is doing. He says he's conservative so he must be.
- smackywentz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Benedict Arnold
- tomis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Hey, if they want to give the rest of us "retroactive immunity" for any crimes we may have committed, or may commit in future, then I'm all for it. If not, then I say it's time to hang us some traitors.
- Thex1138, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3So now we know that the telcom companies have been doing illegal activities for the administration, now they want protection...disgraceful
- Mittop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Respectfully, I think you are wrong.
1) Phone companies acting to wiretap citizens without court order are in clear violation of the law. Even if GB asked real nice, following an illegal order places your company in violation of the law and creates a liability. Even if you agree that wiretapping in these instances is appropriate, a system of legal protections exist (things like FISA, etc) to allow the government to quickly and easily do wiretaps and protect the company from liability.
2) Because the violation of the law has been committed, a precedent of liability must be maintained in order to protect from future intrusions. It is much like pursuing Viacomm for sending inaccurate (and illegal) DMCA take down notices to YouTube. If you don't quickly "punish" that company, than the abuses will become more widespread and egregious. - Ratteler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue."
"Do you really wanna get him? You see what I'm saying is, what are you prepared to do?" -Malone, "Untouchables".
What are YOU prepared to do? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3 This is the type of stuff I used to hear about happening in the USSR as a kid and everyone would shudder and think how lucky we were to live in freedom.
Oh well. - lazlonger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yeah so enlightened. try suing the government and see how far you get. this IS an attempt at and end run around justice, a defacto END to further law suits and pursuits of the RIGHTS of the people. and your hyperbole is so TEDIOUS. and yes, I am YELLING at you, cyber jack.
by the way, thanks for signing up yesterday. you're free to go now. - ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Not no, but hell no. What is the official wording Congress uses when they tell the POTUS to go ***** himself?
- Nodaki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Treaon:
1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.
Certainly sounds like this administration since 2001. Cowards in the Congress, bring this administration to trial. - wiremonkeymommy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3IMPEACH, NOW
/it's that simple -
Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 