Senate vote allows FBI access to your browsing history without a warrant

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,321   +3,424
Your ignorance is breathtaking!! The Republicans control the Senate!!!
Do you wish to confirm that "More government control!" statement??

And if you think Republicans love your privacy, you haven't been paying attention, which doesn't surprise me.
It looks like a case of TL;DR and never read this paragraph in the article:
The addition to the Patriot act was drafted by Senate leader Mitch McConnell. Not only does it allow the collection of search and browsing data in section 215 of the law without probable cause, but that data is also likely to be stored and made available to multiple US agencies.
But alas, there are no qualms on his side when it comes to government control of women's reproductive organs.
 

OneSpeed

Posts: 392   +193
The CURRENT administration? Remind me which side of the political isle takes to social media screeching how people should lose their jobs for "voting for the wrong side" and perceived slights, labeling everything they dont like as racism, sexism, ece? Last time I checked Republicans were not trying to get people fired for wrong-think, they just make fun of them.

Every law is abused, but I'd be much more worried about the Democrats getting this power, the more extreme of their voter base has already showed they have no qualms of ruining others lives over political differences.
The only reason we are having this conversation right now is that the GOP controls the Executive and the Senate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charles Olson

OneSpeed

Posts: 392   +193
Every government in the world did not respond to the virus in the same manner. So, my argument isn't really flawed from that stand point. I didn't say it was the SAME virus. I said it was a mutation from the same FAMILY of viruses. There are a quadrillion x quadrillion different viruses on planet Earth. Your only afraid of 1 of those right now because people in high places have conditioned you to be. It's population control through fear. And it seems its working pretty good on most people.

The death rate is very similar, more or less, to previous year flu deaths. The governments response this year versus the past 20 years is very different. Why?
Answer: Incompetence.
 

ShagnWagn

Posts: 1,297   +1,081
Your ignorance is breathtaking!! The Republicans control the Senate!!!
Do you wish to confirm that "More government control!" statement??

And if you think Republicans love your privacy, you haven't been paying attention, which doesn't surprise me.
You are correct that reps control senate. I flipped them. I say one wrong thing and "ignorance is breathtaking"? I would hate to be anyone near you in real life. Yes, I do confirm more government control. Are you blind that politicians don't? Is this where I say 'your ignorance is breathtaking'?

Reps want privacy invasion. It's really sad the one thing I counted on the dems to do and several of them didn't even vote. Especially Burnsie? And that guy wanted to be president? Sounds like he wouldn't have done any work there either. These part time pansies get paid how much money and they don't even do their job?
 

Axil00

Posts: 29   +36
The only reason we are having this conversation right now is that the GOP controls the Executive and the Senate.
How do you figure?

It wasn't that long ago Democrats controlled both branches of the legislature and the presidency. How many laws encroaching on your privacy got rolled back?
 

Capaill

Posts: 1,200   +737
Reps want privacy invasion. It's really sad the one thing I counted on the dems to do and several of them didn't even vote. Especially Burnsie? And that guy wanted to be president? Sounds like he wouldn't have done any work there either. These part time pansies get paid how much money and they don't even do their job?
Yes, I'd believe that the Republicans would be in favour of continued privacy invasion as gathering and selling data on us makes their corporate friends even more rich.

Living on a different continent, I have a long-distance opinion of what Republicans and Democrats represent, so this is going to be extremely simplistic. In my eyes:

Republicans represent the people with money - corporations, oil, pharma, NRA, military - and also the people that want to hide their money from the taxman, eg. bankers, golfers, musical artists. They tend to have very unlikeable and sociably inept presidents but are the stronger party due to their financial backers.

Democrats represent the workers and the common people. They try to improve the quality of life for the majority of people, whether it's introducing universal healthcare or reducing gun violence. They tend to have very likeable presidents but they rarely bring in meaningful change as their opposition owns the Republicans. Any change that is brought in will get rolled back once the Reps are back in power.

What is the point of allowing one president (or more) to spend their terms bringing in changes only for the next president to spend his entire term rolling them back?

I think America would be better off with both parties in power but each responsible for different areas, and you vote in/out people based on their skillset and results. For example, the Reps would be in charge of collecting the money while the Dems would be in charge of spending it on social welfare, health, education and military, with a small independent and transparent ombudsman to ensure both parties are doing their jobs efficiently and not becoming corrupt, backed by a free press. It wouldn't benefit the Reps to lower taxes or allow people and companies to hide taxes, if they are responsible for collecting as much revenue as possible in order to allocate budgets to the Dems. And it wouldn't benefit the Dems to have inefficient spending, if they have limited control over the budgets given to them. You could then implement long-term plans beyond a party's current term, such as a 5 or 10 year plan, and you could avoid the see-saw of each party destroying the work that came before it and ultimately achieving nothing.

But that's a fantasy. I'll leave ye (for now) to your inter-party bickering.
 

ShagnWagn

Posts: 1,297   +1,081
Yes, I'd believe that the Republicans would be in favour of continued privacy invasion as gathering and selling data on us makes their corporate friends even more rich.

Living on a different continent, I have a long-distance opinion of what Republicans and Democrats represent, so this is going to be extremely simplistic. In my eyes:

Republicans represent the people with money - corporations, oil, pharma, NRA, military - and also the people that want to hide their money from the taxman, eg. bankers, golfers, musical artists. They tend to have very unlikeable and sociably inept presidents but are the stronger party due to their financial backers.

Democrats represent the workers and the common people. They try to improve the quality of life for the majority of people, whether it's introducing universal healthcare or reducing gun violence. They tend to have very likeable presidents but they rarely bring in meaningful change as their opposition owns the Republicans. Any change that is brought in will get rolled back once the Reps are back in power.

What is the point of allowing one president (or more) to spend their terms bringing in changes only for the next president to spend his entire term rolling them back?

I think America would be better off with both parties in power but each responsible for different areas, and you vote in/out people based on their skillset and results. For example, the Reps would be in charge of collecting the money while the Dems would be in charge of spending it on social welfare, health, education and military, with a small independent and transparent ombudsman to ensure both parties are doing their jobs efficiently and not becoming corrupt, backed by a free press. It wouldn't benefit the Reps to lower taxes or allow people and companies to hide taxes, if they are responsible for collecting as much revenue as possible in order to allocate budgets to the Dems. And it wouldn't benefit the Dems to have inefficient spending, if they have limited control over the budgets given to them. You could then implement long-term plans beyond a party's current term, such as a 5 or 10 year plan, and you could avoid the see-saw of each party destroying the work that came before it and ultimately achieving nothing.

But that's a fantasy. I'll leave ye (for now) to your inter-party bickering.
You are kinda there, but no doubt other countries don't see it from the inside. The parties used to work somewhat together. It's exponentially worse now because of the dems extreme hatred to one man's personality. They also find it extremely insulting that someone with no political experience is in the top solo seat. I find that hilarious, but all they focus on is their hate toward him. They reject every single republican law simply because of their hate, and will bring down the country for it no matter what. I don't like the guy either, but sheesh. Get a life and do your job. The dems are destroying their own party and the country with them.

I hate politics, but for simplicity: There is a sort of "checks and balances". Three arms - President, the Senate, and the House. Each has their equal voting leverage. The Senate is the one where if someone is voted in they never leave, which invites corruption. I find this very wrong. The other two have term limits.

Disclaimer: I don't align with either side. I like/dislike certain policies from each one. Others may disagree with what I have to say, but that is ok to have their own opinion.

The republicans believe in the individual and their rights/freedom. Yes, that means people can get extremely wealthy and others are taken advantage of, but that's from our economic free market which is geared toward the individual. Yes, it encourages greed, but also opportunity. It is why we have so many immigrants - the opportunity. The dems are very wealthy from it as well so don't let them fool you. They give businesses money (tax relief) rather than see them fail, which causes disparity. They are set in their ways.

The dems believe in the government making the decisions for your life "for the benefit of all". Of course, to do all this means they need an ever increasing government. They take away freedoms because they think they know what's "best" for you - so everyone is "equal". That nobody is better off than the other. The reality is the middle class gets a huge reduction in income to pay for all the people that don't want to work. They want more and more taxes to pay for a bigger and bigger government. What you need to ask yourself - do you think the government knows what's best for you and decides what you can and can't do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Capaill

SolarisGuru

Posts: 94   +128
I'm not sure how I feel about this, or if I truly care. Even though we all SHOULD care. I have no doubt they can access all this information and more with or without a warrant right now. I'm sure my information is all over government databases, along with everyone else's information. Everything we do online is probably recorded SOMEWHERE. I don't like it, but this will never change.

Even if a new law was passed to anonymize everything, they would still track us. It doesn't matter. If you don't want to be tracked I'm confident you would have to fall off the grid entirely. Disconnect your Internet, pay off all your loans/leases, get rid of your electronics, and then build a cabin out in the middle of the woods and live like it's the 1700's again. Even then, government satellites will probably still see your cabin and then they'll think "Well, I wonder what this guy is doing?" and if curiously peaks, they'd probably still find you without issue.

I have no doubt everything we do is tracked, VPN or not, Tor or not, DDG or not... I also think if you use some of these services you're probably painting a bigger target on your back. My point is, keep your nose clean and just live your life. Cause this **** isn't going anywhere. It's going to get worse.

Look up PSYOPS... look up subliminal advertising. There is probably a government computer somewhere that knows you have six children, four boys and two girls. Your wife's great grand parents came from Ireland and England. You have a white Husky as a family pet. Your patio is made red pavers. You drive 16.4 mins to work in the morning... 20.1 mins on the way home because you take the long way to avoid traffic... and listen to your favorite podcast. Your great great grandson will be gay because government algorithms detected it already! He'll marry a man named Chuck and they'll adopt three kids.

I'm just saying...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny101

Ean Mogg

Posts: 155   +72
Do the Senators know their not immune from the FBIs prying eyes,, now they've realised what they've done I bet there's a lot of deleting of hard drives lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny101

kmo911

Posts: 223   +27
Not on my shift no yeah dont. acid bottle to trow it in. READY WHAT if we stop using internet and reading books instead. emp fields everywhere to trow computer into. and those black holes too. newer give up newer surrender. whole hole filled with laptops ipads and then filled witc acid and no evindence will be there more . say no say no say no to that rule.
 
Let me see if I can put your numbers in perspective just a wee bit for all of us:
mortality rate
Swe - 2830 cases/1M pop, 349 deaths/1M pop = .000349 %
Nor - 1512 cases/1M pop, 143 deaths/1M pop = .000143 %
Fin - 1109 cases/1M pop, 52 deaths/1M pop = .000052 %

There, fixed. Yep, you are a truth teller sir. Get your electron scanning microscopes out people so you can actually see the difference between the two systems of lockdown. Sweden's death rate is just abysmal when compared to the other 2 nations that engaged in lockdown. And let's just forget about all the economic devastation, all the suicides, all the depression, all hunger, that lockdown has caused for other people. Because, well, those people don't really matter.
The numbers show that the countries with lockdown clearly have a much lower COVID-19 death rate
 

TheBigFatClown

Posts: 792   +302
The numbers show that the countries with lockdown clearly have a much lower COVID-19 death rate
Oh, I'm assuming your not even looking at the numbers that were just posted since they clearly show no significant difference in lockdown versus no lockdown. So, if you would like to post the numbers you're referring to or a link to where you're getting your information, feel free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danny101