RIP 4th Amendment

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

z987k

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
3,513
Reaction score
37
Location
Anchorage
Today was a sad day. The Senate voted 69-23 to pass the new FISA bill.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6304
Also, I'll give them this, they couldn't have made it much harder to read through it, everything references everything else. You basically have to print it and highlight things that correlate to each other.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
 
The federal government's new motto is:

"Feds: Singlehandedly Burning the Constitution to Bring You The Illusion of Safety!"

You wanna know why we haven't been attacked again since 9/11? Because Al Qaida can't stop laughing at what a great job they've done eradicating all those freedoms that they supposedly hate.

I guess, if the trrrrists really do 'hate our freedoms', like Bush said, then this is a good thing...it's one less thing for them to hate, right? :rolleyes: The terrorists really are winning. Their aim wasn't just to blow up a bunch of people, it was to ruin our country. And they're doing a spectacular job, with the help of our elected *****ebags.
 
Wait till Amadinnerjacket sets off their EMP over the states. Ya'll are gonna want hand cranks on your Barley Crushers then.
 
coupla quality contenders right there.

Yes, Obama is drifting ever-closer to *****edom with this one.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Ben Franklin
 
I guess, if the trrrrists really do 'hate our freedoms', like Bush said, then this is a good thing...it's one less thing for them to hate, right? :rolleyes: The terrorists really are winning. Their aim wasn't just to blow up a bunch of people, it was to ruin our country. And they're doing a spectacular job, with the help of our elected *****ebags.

I was talking to a non-practicing Muslim from Turkey last night. He was saying that the older generations laugh about how America's economy has been going down the toilet since 09/11/01. One way or another, we're losing for sure...
 
Yes, Obama is drifting ever-closer to *****edom with this one.

Yes, *****edom. Obama now says it will take 24 months before he'll pull troops out of Iraq too. So much for his immediate retreat plan. Oops, I mean redeployment.

The guy is a typical politician and will lie at the drop of a hat for political expediency. It will become more and more apparent as we draw closer to November. Hopefully his halo will fade by then.
 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Ben Franklin

Funny you mention Ben, I'm reading his biography by Isaacson. This country is steadily heading in the opposite direction from what he had in mind...:(
 
Funny you mention Ben, I'm reading his biography by Isaacson. This country is steadily heading in the opposite direction from what he had in mind...:(

I am still working on McCullough's bio on Adams. I want to get to that Franklin bio. I don't think many of the founding father's would be very pleased with where we are headed, 'cept maybe Hamilton, but he was a jerk anyway.
 
I am still working on McCullough's bio on Adams. I want to get to that Franklin bio. I don't think many of the founding father's would be very pleased with where we are headed, 'cept maybe Hamilton, but he was a jerk anyway.

This Franklin bio is excellent. I like Isaacson's style though, including his bio of Einstein...
 
Unfortunately that is our system.. you just end up voting for the lesser of the two evils.

nah I'll find a third candidate(better than not voting right?). But I cannot in good conscience vote for McCain or Obama. This is a principle I stand very very firmly on. He lost my vote today.
 
nah I'll find a third candidate(better than not voting right?). But I cannot in good conscience vote for McCain or Obama. This is a principle I stand very very firmly on. He lost my vote today.

+1...I feel the same was pretty much. I feel like I'm wasting my vote, but I don't want either of them...
 
It would be great if a 3rd party candidate would emerge and we elected him while at the same time tossing every incumbent congrASSman out on their ears.
 
it almost seems that in the primary you vote for who you actually like then in the main election you vote against the guy you like the least.
 
Hmm, anyone got any links written in plain English that explain how the new FISA is going to affect me, how it is going to affect my freedoms or day to day activities? Looks like the FISA has been around in one form or another since 1978, and it's meant to stop the bad guys. I'm thinking that they aren't really monitoring every single phone call and every single e-mail, like the movies make it seem. I'd imagine they are looking for certain things, from certain countries, and certain people.

I did hear that they do suspect homebrewing sites as a source of major terrorist message traffic.
 
Hmm, anyone got any links written in plain English that explain how the new FISA is going to affect me, how it is going to affect my freedoms or day to day activities? Looks like the FISA has been around in one form or another since 1978, and it's meant to stop the bad guys. I'm thinking that they aren't really monitoring every single phone call and every single e-mail, like the movies make it seem. I'd imagine they are looking for certain things, from certain countries, and certain people.

I did hear that they do suspect homebrewing sites as a source of major terrorist message traffic.

actually when cheny/bush called up AT&T they pretty much said, just record everything. That's why some heads should be rolling... so to speak.

and as far as a plain English version, I'll look for one. I know it took me about two hours to wrap my head around what it's actually saying in there. Not the most plain test bill you've ever seen.

And as far as effecting you, even if it doesn't directly do so (I have nothing to hide). Well you just lost one of your freedoms under the bill of rights, there's an effect.

This is where that 3rd check and balance needs to come to the rescue (USSC).
 
I have a different view on the "removal" of our freedoms that so many people are scared of. I do fully agree that the government is going too far in some areas, but I wonder what the other options are. Do we totally avoid any form of phone monitoring, e-mail monitoring, etc... when we know that those methods can be used for terrorists to communicate? Do I really need to be concerned that someone might be monitoring my phone calls, when I have nothing to hide?

I understand both sides of the argument, and am not sure what the solution is. I'm not as much of a Bush supporter as I used to be, but I still do not think he is as bad as he is made out to be. (He is unpopular, but he is doing the same stuff that American presidents have been doing for the last 200+ years). I think there are dishonest republicans and I think there are dishonest democrats.

Life in the US might not be what it used to be, but I still feel thankful that I live in a great country where I can enjoy doing what I like to do.
 
Life in the US might not be what it used to be, but I still feel thankful that I live in a great country where I can enjoy doing what I like to do.

+1...it could be a lot worse, but one of the things we are allowed to do is complain...
 
Hmm, anyone got any links written in plain English that explain how the new FISA is going to affect me, how it is going to affect my freedoms or day to day activities?
I did hear that they do suspect homebrewing sites as a source of major terrorist message traffic.

My understanding is that with technology they will use key words like bomb, nuclear, chemical warfare, allah to decide who is a terrorist threat to base eavesdropping on. And now that this has been stated on HBT we will all become suspect due to the key word use and all who read this page. Welcome to Amerika.
 
Is the technology really that good that it can monitor everything, everywhere? Since the law is approved, then the new technology should be operational, I'll let you know if men in black suits come knocking in the next few weeks.

When I brew, I worship the beer gods, but not the beer ALLAH.
Some of my fermenters remind me of those pictures of NUCLEAR reactors.
I started kegging, so now I don't worry about bottle BOMBS.
My biggest fear is that TERRORISTS might attack and invade my homebrew supply.
 
+1...it could be a lot worse, but one of the things we are allowed to do is complain...

But for how long... ;)

Seriously though - even small things create precident and trends toward the erosions of larger and larger liberties. First, eliminate the right to peacefully assemble, then wiretaps without warrants and illegal search, seizure and arrests based on how low you wear your pants. Tomorrow... who knows.
 
exactly. Give an inch and they take a mile. I know it's easy to say well it doesn't matter/effect me or whatever, but that is exactly what lead to this in the first place.
 
But for how long... ;)

Seriously though - even small things create precident and trends toward the erosions of larger and larger liberties. First, eliminate the right to peacefully assemble, then wiretaps without warrants and illegal search, seizure and arrests based on how low you wear your pants. Tomorrow... who knows.


+1.....Its a slippery slope we're heading down. Pretty soon we'll all have chip implants so Big Brother can keep an eye on our every move. Will we be safer? Maybe. Will we have lost our freedoms? Most definitely.
 
As long as we have the 2nd Amendment.

I don't care how many guns one has - they have more. :D

The 1st, 4th and 5th are very important. Without them even though you might have the right to have guns, they can search, seize and imprison you and take the guns.
 
I have a different view on the "removal" of our freedoms that so many people are scared of. I do fully agree that the government is going too far in some areas, but I wonder what the other options are. Do we totally avoid any form of phone monitoring, e-mail monitoring, etc... when we know that those methods can be used for terrorists to communicate? Do I really need to be concerned that someone might be monitoring my phone calls, when I have nothing to hide?

The gov't has been monitoring electronic communication within and outside our borders for years, and presumably catching bad guys with the information they get. But in order to tap a U.S. citizen's phone they had to show a FISA court (overseen by the judicial branch) that they have probable cause. In other words, they had to do exactly what every other cop in this country has to do to violate your privacy. It was even easier for the feds than your average cop. They could tap the phone and then get the warrant, all they have to do is show probable cause afterward. My understanding is that the "just cause" they had to show was incredibly lax -- I don't think there has been a single case where FISA denied the warrant. The telecoms ignored all of this legal stuff (the rights of U.S. citizens) and just gave the administration access to US citizens conversations.

Now, thanks to Bush, and Obama the gov't does not need probable cause to tap your phone. The gov't doesn't have to get the permission of the courts or even tell anyone they tapped a phone, and the telecom companies who aided and abetted the taps are given retroactive immunity from being sued because they clearly broke the law. The gov't just has to think you might be a terrorist (not that they have to prove it to anyone). I don't trust the gov't ability to spot a terrorist given they can't tell sky marshalls from hijackers:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/29/air-marshals-names-tagged-on-no-fly-list/

This crap may make somebody out there feel safer, but not me.
 
yea the general idea of supporting freedoms like the ones supposedly protected by the bill of rights is that you dont support laws that curtail freedoms now, even if you dont feel it affects you. because when you set the precedent that this is acceptable, just becuase it works in your favor now, a year from now with someone else in power that same lack of checks and balances that you supported before can now be used against you.
I think the original Idea of the constitution was to create a legal document that protects against the stupidity and arrogance of future generations no matter who is in charge.
 
way to solve this is like other countries. have a national vote of confidence on the whole gov and then kick them all out. i seriously sometimes think this country is not going to last much longer. was going to vote for obama now i dont know. maybe i will just migrate to mexico
 
I have a different view on the "removal" of our freedoms that so many people are scared of. I do fully agree that the government is going too far in some areas, but I wonder what the other options are. Do we totally avoid any form of phone monitoring, e-mail monitoring, etc... when we know that those methods can be used for terrorists to communicate? Do I really need to be concerned that someone might be monitoring my phone calls, when I have nothing to hide?

I understand both sides of the argument, and am not sure what the solution is. I'm not as much of a Bush supporter as I used to be, but I still do not think he is as bad as he is made out to be. (He is unpopular, but he is doing the same stuff that American presidents have been doing for the last 200+ years). I think there are dishonest republicans and I think there are dishonest democrats.

Life in the US might not be what it used to be, but I still feel thankful that I live in a great country where I can enjoy doing what I like to do.


This is a quote from http://www.fredoneverything.net

'Mail arrives, telling me that by going to Mexico I have sold out, fled, abandoned the United States. I’m a coward, some of my correspondents say, and a traitor, just like Lord Haw Haw, Kim Philby, Jane Fonda. I’m probably a devotee of Quisling. (I'll have the grace to avoid saying that I have never Quizzled, Kippled, or Joppled.)

(OK, OK, I’m sorry.)

Anyway, they’re upset, which is irrational. They think that just because I went to Mexico, I left the US. They don’t understand. I didn’t leave the United States. It left me. It was a bait-and-switch operation. I signed on to one country, and they slipped another in under me. I want my money back.

In the country where I grew up, if you found a naked intruder in your daughter’s bedroom with a Bowie knife and a hard-on, you shot him and arranged to have the rugs cleaned. The sheriff wasn’t greatly interested and the country prosecutor didn’t see anything to prosecute. The scum floating on the gene pool wasn’t a protected species. It wasn’t the driving engine of the culture. It was just scum.

Today you would be charged with the use of excessive force. The cadaver’s family would sue. They would end up with your house unless they just ran you broke with legal bills. The outcome would depend on the racial make-up of you, the intruder, and the jury. Your daughter would be married with grandchildren before the courts reached any conclusion.

Think I’m exaggerating? When I used to have the police beat for the Washington Times in the Yankee capital, the cops told me, dead serious, that if I ever shot an intruder, I should shoot him again to make sure: You can’t afford to have two stories, they said, especially if he’s black which, in Washington, was a foregone conclusion. They’ll hang you, said the cops.

In the country I grew up in, you got on an airplane by walking up these funny little steps with wheels on them. Then you sat down. That’s all you did. I know, I know: You don’t believe this. It’s true. You just walked on. Further, the stewardesses were not merely civil but—so help me—friendly. Flying was actually enjoyable. The seats were big enough that you didn’t sit with your knees beside your ears and your feet in your pockets.

Now, getting aboard is like going into max security at some ghastly penitentiary. I once flew a bit around the old Soviet Union, as distinct from the new one, on a junket. Security was less oppressive, though the food was marginally worse unless you liked green chicken. The service was just as sullen.

Maybe that’s what I miss most about the Old Country. People were courteous. They could afford to be because everyone else was too. It’s hard to be pleasant when the odds are even that the next person you deal with will be an ill-mannered lout who knows he can get away with it.

I think people were courteous also because they lived in an agreeable country and were pretty happy with things. The new country seems angry—quietly so, not sure what to do about it, but looking for someone to hit.

Yet further still, in the old country they didn’t have these funny little Japanese cars with itsy-bitsy four-bangers. Nope. They had great virile monsters thirty feet long with eight huge cylinders like buckets. A dog could have slept in them. Sure, those rocket-barges were probably ridiculous and left a trail of parts that fell off because quality control wasn’t that great, but they were real cars. They embodied a spirit I liked. Today cars seem to be designed with transvestites in mind.

The Old Country the music was vibrant, vigorous, much of it springing from the great black bluesmen of Mississippi and then Chicago, some of it from the mountains and the jazz dens of the big cities. In the music of the new country, the whites whine and the blacks grunt angrily. From Tampa Red to rap is a long way down.

In the country I signed on to, things worked on the principle of individual responsibility. If you robbed a bank, which people generally didn’t, everyone figured you did it because you decided to, and you went to jail and everyone was satisfied, except you, which was the idea. Most people knew how to behave, and did. It saved a lot on police departments and you could walk around at night.

In the new country of course everything is somebody else’s fault, unless you are a white male, in which case everything is your fault. Never mind that if it weren’t for white males everybody else would be living on low-hanging fruit and saying “ugga-wugga” because they couldn’t figure out how to make a hemi-head big-block to crash into things with. Or figure out how to make anything else.

In the old country, the government was pretty much benign or actually useful. It built roads and largely left you alone. The public schools were not great but neither were they terrible. People ran their own lives. The federal government tended to be somewhere else, which was a splendid place for it, and you mostly didn’t notice.

In the country that is now where America used to be, the government is the cause of most major problems instead of a solution, however inefficient, to a fair number of them. The government keeps you from educating your children, holds standards down, prevents you from hiring the best people you can find to work in your business. It won’t allow local jurisdictions to control crime, prevents localities from enforcing such moral standards as they see fit, virtually illegalizes the religion, of most of the population, and generally won’t permit people to live as they like.

Now, I used to be fond of the United States. Granted, I wasn’t much of a patriot. The word nowadays seems to mean one who doesn’t so much love his country as to dislike other people’s. I figured live and let live. A lot of other countries struck me as fine places. But America was my favorite. It just suited me. I liked the people in their wild variety and the countryside and the music and the brash independence. It wasn’t perfect. Still, given the sorry baseline for comportment in human agglomerations, it was about as good as you could get.

I’m still fond of the United States. I just can’t find it.'
 
It would be great if a 3rd party candidate would emerge and we elected him while at the same time tossing every incumbent congrASSman out on their ears.

has happened before. guys name is great but was shot in a play by a guy named booth
 
Hillary voted nay .....

Obama voted yea .... I dont get it.

It's a calculated move to make him appear tough on terror, but I think he's calculating wrong. He's alienating the people who support him, in order to court the people who will NEVER support him. Same as he did with the "faith based initiatives." Bad moves IMO, both of them...of course I'm just a concerned citizen, not a scheming political spin doctor.

If Hillary were the nominee, I bet she'd be doing the same.
 
Back
Top