CISPA permits police to do warrantless database searches

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
CISPA permits police to do warrantless database searches


A controversial data-sharing bill being debated today in the U.S. House of Representatives authorizes federal agencies to conduct warrantless searches of information they obtain from e-mail and Internet providers. Rep. Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat, proposed a one-sentence amendment (PDF) that would have required the National Security Agency, the FBI, Homeland Security, and other agencies to secure a "warrant obtained in accordance with the Fourth Amendment" before searching a database for evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Grayson complained this morning on Twitter that House Republicans "wouldn't even allow debate on requiring a warrant before a search." That's a reference to a vote this week by the House Rules committee that rejected a series of privacy-protective amendments, meaning they could not be proposed and debated during today's floor proceedings. Another amendment (PDF) that was rejected would have ensured that companies' privacy promises -- including their terms of use and privacy policies -- remained valid and legally enforceable in the future.


Obama has said he would veto CISPA but that remains to be seen. If the Republicans are all about Americans keeping their freedoms then why would they want our right to privacy taken away?

AT&T, Comcast, EMC, IBM, Intel, McAfee, Oracle, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon these are the companies that want to help take your right to privacy away.




posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
Obama has said he would veto CISPA


When was this? I hope he sticks to his words, I'll be very surprised (and impressed) if he does.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


The House already voted for it, but it will likely die in the Senate. If it doesn't, guess we'll see if Obama lives up to the promise.


The Obama administration renewed its threat to veto the House's flagship cybersecurity bill — a second rebuke in two years, once again made on the eve of the measure's arrival on the full chamber floor.


But then,


"Obama threatened to veto NDAA, too. How'd that turn out?" Kendall Clark, CEO of startup Clark Stardog.com, wrote on Twitter.


The only solace is also this:


The lack of enthusiasm in the Senate and objections by the White House mean that the legislation is in limbo despite an aggressive push by lobbyists representing nearly every corner of industry.


(as of today, 4/23)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by buster2010
Obama has said he would veto CISPA


When was this? I hope he sticks to his words, I'll be very surprised (and impressed) if he does.


Frankly, it scares the hell out of me when Obama says things like this. It means we're in for another sickening ride with a disappointing end. My main worry is that it means this legislation is not pleasing enough to his masters and needs fewer protections and tougher penalties....



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

If the Republicans are all about Americans keeping their freedoms then why would they want our right to privacy taken away?

AT&T, Comcast, EMC, IBM, Intel, McAfee, Oracle, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon these are the companies that want to help take your right to privacy away.



PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF LOL Republicans are about keeping our Freedom??? Where do you live? Republicans are about promoting and maintaining BIG BUSINESS like your last line silly! Democrats are about special interest groups and more government.

BOTH ARE ABOUT ELIMINATING FREEDOM!

2 Parties 1 Agenda!



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   
and the plot thickens here is the possible use for this, lets say you looking for a subject and you run a cross a Islam site your curious so you click on the link it brings up IEDs and WMD's , they see that you did this and more that once. Now the question is are you to be subject to anti terror laws or deemed a possible threat? could be for here is the point and it is related usnews.nbcnews.com... from the link

boston suspect we learned how to make bombs from inspire-magazine
now this could be a untruth just to impose more laws on the guilty till proven innocent, no i did make statement that way, in the way they FEDS LEO's look at us we are all guilty till proven Innocent or have you been asleep or keep your head stuck in the sand?





top topics
 
2

log in

join