Total surveillance of the people is what Congress ultimately wants, so it is no surprise that this is apparently a top legislative priority for them — even at a time when 1 out of every 2 recent college graduates face unemployment. Even at a time when our total public debt is above $15 trillion.
How bad is CISPA in its current form? Here’s some analysis from Techdirt: “Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that’s not even the worst part. [...] Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for ‘cybersecurity’ or ‘national security’ purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.”
Let me put this into perspective for you:
- If the government suspects you are a genuine “bad guy,” like a cyberterrorist, human trafficker, drug kingpin, etc… they can already seize all of this online activity information about you. It’s called obtaining a warrant. CISPA does away with that. It supercedes ALL existing federal privacy laws. As Techdirt’s Leigh Beadon put it, “Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government’s power.”
CISPA could allow any private company to share vast amounts of sensitive, private data about its customers with the government.
CISPA would override all other federal and state privacy laws, and allow a private company to share nearly anything—from the contents of private emails and Internet browsing history to medical, educational and financial records—as long as it “directly pertains to” a “cyber threat,” which is broadly defined.
CISPA does not require that data shared with the government be stripped of unnecessary personally-identifiable information. A private company may choose to anonymize the data it shares with the government. However, there is no requirement that it does so—even when personally-identifiable information is unnecessary for cybersecurity measures. For example, emails could be shared with the full names of their authors and recipients. A company could decide to leave the names of its customers in the data it shares with the government merely because it does not want to incur the expense of deleting them. This is contrary to the recommendations of the House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force and other bills to authorize information sharing, which require companies to make a reasonable effort to minimize the sharing of personally-identifiable information.
CISPA would allow the government to use collected private information for reasons other than cybersecurity. The government could use any information it receives for “any lawful purpose” besides “regulatory purposes,” so long as the same use can also be justified by cybersecurity or the protection of national security. This would provide no meaningful limit—a government official could easily create a connection to “national security” to justify nearly any type of investigation.
CISPA would give Internet Service Providers free rein to monitor the private communications and activities of users on their networks. ISPs would have wide latitude to do anything that can be construed as part of a “cybersecurity system,” regardless of any other privacy or telecommunications law.
CISPA would empower the military and the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect information about domestic Internet users. Other information sharing bills would direct private information from domestic sources to civilian agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security. CISPA contains no such limitation. Instead, the Department of Defense and the NSA could solicit and receive information directly from American companies, about users and systems inside the United States.
CISPA places too much faith in private companies, to safeguard their most sensitive customer data from government intrusion. While information sharing would be voluntary under CISPA, the government has a variety of ways to pressure private companies to share large volumes of customer information. With complete legal immunity, private companies have few clear incentives to resist such pressure. There is also no requirement that companies ever tell their customers what they have shared with the government, either before or after the fact. As informed consumers, Americans expect technology companies to have clear privacy policies, telling us exactly how and when the company will use and share our personal data, so that we can make informed choices about which companies have earned our trust and deserve our business.
Here’s their next move: The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, would obliterate any semblance of online privacy in the United States. It’s up for a vote later this month.
CISPA demolishes existing barriers between the government and the private sector — and between government agencies — that restrict data sharing without cause, effectively allowing information about Americans’ use of the Internet to slosh back and forth uninhibited.
The Center for Democracy and Technology says, “CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws.
Occupy Wall Street says we must do all we can to protect the internet. Stop CISPA now while you still can.
Of all this President’s many progressive achievements—the Lilly Ledbetter Act, Student Loan Reform, Health Care Reform, pulling out of Iraq—the one that isn’t mentioned enough in the feeds I follow is the the ending of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’
The DADT compromise enacted during the Clinton Administration made the closeting of gays and lesbians policy for the US military. It sent a message that homosexuals needed to lie or risk losing everything.
In one of the last acts of the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, this ridiculous policy was ended – and Occupy Wall Street is happy. And the President signed the bill into law. It was a long overdue yet historic achievement for decency and equality.
While Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum duke it out for delegates in high-profile primaries like Illinois and Pennsylvania, Ron Paul’s quiet pursuit of delegates appears to be paying off.
Early results from Missouri’s caucuses this weekend show that the long-shot presidential candidate is significantly outperforming his rivals in the race for delegates. Senior campaign advisers tell Business Insider that Paul appears to have picked up the majority of Missouri’s delegates, despite having lost the state’s nonbinding primary to Rick Santorum.
“We did do real well in Missouri,” Benton said. “Some county conventions are still going on, but we’ve got good turnout. Anecdotal evidence shows we won multiple caucuses, and it looks like we’re going to pick up the majority of delegates.”
Although the final delegate tally won’t be determined until the state party convention this spring, Occupy Wall Street says, Paul’s success in Missouri is a validation of his low-key caucus strategy. The Paul campaign has recently shifted its focus to winning unbound delegates in caucus states, where delegates are elected at state conventions rather than by the popular vote.
Occupy Wall Street. What other political movement in modern times has won the sympathy and/or support of the majority of the American public—in less than two months? How did this happen? I think it was a revolt that has been percolating across the country since Reagan fired the first air traffic controller. Then, on September 17, 2011, a group of (mostly) young adults decided to take direct action. And this action struck a raw nerve, sending a shock wave throughout the United States, because what these kids were doing was what tens of millions of people wished they could do. The people who have lost their jobs, their homes, their “American dream”—they cathartically cheered on this ragtag bunch who got right in the face of Wall Street and said, “We’re not leaving until you give us our country back!”
As we noted when one of the recent cybersecurity bills was introduced in the Senate, it was accompanied by a press release that explicitly stated that this bill wasn’t SOPA. While the entertainment industry keeps hoping that the anti-SOPA protests were a one-time experience, apparently the power of internet users is very much on the minds of nearly everyone on Capitol Hill who have turned the phrase “don’t get SOPA’d” into a new mantra.
This is excellent news in a number of ways. Congress should fear backlash from going against the will of the people, especially in mucking around with some of the key tools they use to communicate every day. The only issue I take with the article is that it rehashes the false dichotomy that SOPA was “Silicon Valley vs. Hollywood,” and quotes lots of people who continue to talk about how the way to avoid “getting SOPA’d” is to talk to the tech industry, but not to internet users themselves. Now, I think that talking to the tech industry is a good place to start, and it is an important stakeholder in understanding the internet, but what drove the SOPA protests was the users. Yes, tech companies helped get their users interested in the topic, but once the users on Tumblr, Reddit and Wikipedia took over, they were the ones driving the bus. The companies themselves took a backseat and, at times, were pressured into going along with what the users wanted, against their own concerns (for example, the date of the January 18th protests, which many “industry insiders” thought was too early, since the Senate wasn’t yet in session).
This is great news! Good job Occupy Wall Street and everyone that made the Government afraid of attempting to pass evil bills like SOPA.
In addition to asking about the Presidential race in Alabama and Mississippi we also touched on some other issues in those states:
-There’s considerable skepticism about Barack Obama’s religion with Republican voters in them. In Mississippi only 12% of voters think Obama’s a Christian to 52% who think he’s a Muslim and 36% who are not sure. In Alabama just 14% think Obama’s a Christian to 45% who think he’s a Muslim and 41% who aren’t sure.
EXCLUSIVE: 140 Companies Drop Advertising From Rush Limbaugh
ThinkProgress has obtained an internal memo from Premiere Radio Networks listing 96 national companies that have “specifically asked” their advertisments not be played during the Rush Limbaugh Show. Premiere is the distributor of Limbaugh’s program. The advertisers have also requested to be excluded from other right-wing hosts including Michael Savage, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. According to the memo obtained by Occupy Wall Street, the listed companies’ advertisements should be excluded from these programs because they have been “deemed to be offensive.”
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) appeared on Voice of Christian Youth America’s radio program Crosstalk with Vic Eliason yesterday to promote his new book The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future, where he repeated his frequent claim that human influenced climate change is impossible because “God’s still up there.” Inhofe cited Genesis 8:22 to claim that it is “outrageous” and arrogant for people to believe human beings are “able to change what He is doing in the climate.”
It begins. Anonymous considered terrorists now and laws pertaining to actual terrorists can now be applied to them. Occupy Wall Street cannot stress how bad this is. This is the beginning of the end to our “free” country as we know it.
From Wednesday’s Republican primary in Arizona it is clear that there is something going on with Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. It’s like they have formed some kind of alliance.
Is Ron Paul attacking Rick Santorum in an attempt to get his fickle supporters? Or has Mitt Romney promised something to Ron Paul? Would a Mitt Romney / Ron Paul ticket beat Obama in 2012? I think it could. I also think that’s the only possible thing that would even have a chance.
From Occupy Wall Street I guess we’ll have to wait and find out.
‘Occupy Wall Street’ announces convention in Philadelphia for July: The plan is to select a man and a woman from each of the 435 congressional voting districts to create and ratify a “redress of grievances,” emulating how the Declaration of Independence was formed in 1776 in Philadelphia.
“Occupy Wall Street” protesters will continue their evolution as a movement this summer, announcing through its working group a “general assembly” convention in Philadelphia for early July.
According the Associated Press, the 99 percent Declaration Working Group said that the convention would elect 876 delegates throughout 50 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories.
The plan is to select a man and a woman from each of the 435 congressional voting districts to create and ratify a “redress of grievances,” emulating how the Declaration of Independence was formed in 1776 in Philadelphia.
Occupy Wall Street does not like Rick Santorum. I mean, how could it? He hates black people, hates gay people, wants to force his religion down the throat of every American citizen. He wants all woman to stay at home like Leave it to Beaver. He wants to make birth control and blow jobs illegal. He wants to invade Iran and increase military spending. Rick Santorum thinks about gay sex more than gay people think about gay sex. He’s like a joke or caricature of a right wing extremist politician, except he’s actually winning.
Santorum and the people that support him are the same type of people that burned “witches” at the stake. They’re the same type of people that kept humanity in the dark and persecuted scientists for saying the Earth wasn’t the center of the universe.
If this guy wins he will take us all back to the 12th century.
Not only is Smith the one who introduced SOPA; he’s also the one who blocked the Frank-Ron Paul marijuana legalization bill from ever reaching the House floor.
His opponent, Sheriff Richard Mack, is by no means the kind of candidate that Occupy Wall Street would ever support. However, this is a very conservative Texas district, so it’s not like we have much choice. What’s important is that this will get Lamar Smith off the judiciary committee and demonstrate that we will not tolerate bills like SOPA. Plus, Mack does have a bit of a libertarian streak and opposes the War on Drugs.
His district is heavily gerrymandered, so it won’t be easy to get rid of him. We’re in for an uphill battle here.