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@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    First of all, it’s a computer take and no hangups can be done. Nobody is listening real time.

    Secondly, what you miss could kill you. But, I guess you know better.

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m sure as I type this there are men beating their wives and children, maybe to death.

      Should the government put cameras in every house to prevent this?

      If not, why do you hate women and children and want them to die?

      • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 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@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 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@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 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@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

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

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 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@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 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@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You don’t understand the program

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