Very cagy. Add an amendment stuffing in ‘protection of children.’ How can you vote against protecting children?

The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change to the definition of what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep. Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the government’s power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.

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.

Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a “cybersecurity crime”. Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all.

  1. NewfornatSux says:

    Sounds good to me. Let them be able to actually go after identity thieves, rather than have the credit card swallow the cost and spread it to all customers.

    • ugly, constipated, and mean says:

      Great idea. They’ll be able to fact check all your tax returns, too. Also, got anybody named “John Smith” in your address book? They’re investigating John Smith, and might need to ask you some questions. Does this trump the HIPPA act? Many people think it might. Your health insurance company will be very interested to find out that you get a newsletter from the Dill Dough Skydiving Club. Your homeowners carrier might like to know about your daughter coming to visit with her pit bulls, too.

      • jasontheodd says:

        Don’t knock the dildo skydiving club. And for the record “protecting children” has been described is several other laws as including prevention of any crime in the presence of a child. So now the gov. could use this bill to completely scour all record of anyone who could have conceivably come into contact with anyone under 18 years old to see if they were committing any crimes in a child’s presence. As a student of history I’d like to point out that despotic governments like to use vague wording to hide political arrests as real crimes. Food for thought while I descend from a half mile up with an odd smile on my face.

  2. msbpodcast says:

    Well, fuck it… That screwed the pooch…

    If its so easy for corporatists to get around the amendments to the constitution, when they don’t give a flying fuck about “the children” except as cannon fodder or sex-trade workers, I no longer have any attachment to the ‘States.

    I will be buying real estate in Québec when I make my annual trip later on in the summer and I may not come back.

    • Brian says:

      oh darn. buh-bye now.

      • msbpodcast says:

        Its because we dont have universality of hegemony.

        My real estate holdings in the ‘States will actually be worth roughly as much even if they pass laws saying that I have to wear my underwear on the outside of my clothes, or some other Woody Allen-esque nonsensical law which won’t affect me until the next time they pass something that will affect me and I might not be able to get away from the lot of you.

        If you really want to know, I am discomfited, yeah, that’s a good word, discomfited, by the thought of my health suddenly becoming an issue and having some Nazi INS agent coming to my door with a deportation order and seizing all of my property while putting me on an outward-bound train.

        With my Spanish last name, I can see them putting me on a Mexico-bound train while I protest and have my words fall on deaf ears as I tell them that I come from Canada.

  3. NewfornatSux says:

    Will you ever tell us about the 12400 billionaires? Who are these people? Where did you get this number?

    • msbpodcast says:

      They listed authoritatively on the (IRS, Revenue Canada, Inland Revenue <the list goes on>) tax rolls for each country.

      They’re on lists by Forbes magazine. (Those ghastly “Richest people in the World.”)

      They’re all findable on Google.

      They fill all those “Who’s Who in …” books (though to be fair, those are filled mostly 1%ers, the 12,400 work through those in the “Who’s Who.” [My mother was in “Who’s Who in Information Sciences“.])

      More to the point, they fill the peerage registries.

      Their names are out there. Just discretely.

      They’re talked about and around on some media documentaries.

      Do your own damn research.

  4. AdmFubar says:

    you vote against “protecting the children” by exposing it publicly for the lie that phrase is. oops!, but wait if you did that then the corporations that this law will protect against the public’s free speech rights, (and this bill is to limit free speech about corporation’s bad products) wont fund your next campaign for reelection! democracy in america (HA) is only for corporations and the elected yes men and women. all others get pissed on… as i recall that was called trickle down economics years ago.
    how is it to be trickled on?

  5. BigBoyBC says:

    These are the games that politicians play. Portray the primary legislation about something that no one would every vote against, like protecting children, affordable healthcare, what ever and attach all sorts of crap into it. If it passes, you get what you wanted and if it fails you can claim the opposition party was against children or healthcare, it’s a political win/win situation. Bad legislation is bad legislation no matter what the bill is about.

  6. t0llyb0ng says:

    As soon as your government thinks it’s more important than you are, you are screwed.  Jefferson tried to warn us about it but we stopped listening.  Blood of tyrants & patriots blah blah blah.

  7. NewfornatSux says:

    Redstate hated SOPA, and thinks this is a distraction from the internet kill switch in Lieberman Collins.

    • MRN says:

      The writer is presenting a facetious argument. It is similar to a thief on trial for theft asking to be let off since he knows of another thief that has stolen something else. The correct response should be to punish both thieves for theft.
      As previously said, CISPA is just plain bad legislation; easily turning the US of A into pre-unification East Germany (not surprising since the intelligence agencies took pointers from Markus “Mischa” Wolf the last time they invited him over).

  8. sargasso_c says:

    Legislation follows accepted practise. This has probably been happening for a long time already?

  9. BigBoyBC says:

    I was reading another report on this bill, it seems that Obama has threatened to veto the bill (I ain’t holding my breath) and is in favor of a Senate bill by Sen. Lieberman(D) and Sen. Collins(R) that would give the Dept of Homeland Security authority to set standards for cyber-security. Frankly, I don’t particularly trust the DoHS with that kind of authority, it would end up creating standards worse than SOPA and PIPA

  10. scandihoovian says:

    H.R. 1981 is coming your way soon too! Gotta make the ISPs track you for a year to ensure you aren’t diddling the kids.

    Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011

  11. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Seems to me any sane person will recognize that our cyber activities are or will soon enough be all collected, tabulated, stamped, and numbered. Its all public.

    Pro’s and Con’s to all we do.

    On its face, I don’t have a problem with it. You want to get cheaper insurance by claiming you don’t engage in any sports? Thats fine. If you also subscribe to Dill Dough Skydiving Club and the Ins Co wants to confirm whether or not you skydive, I have no problem with that.

    The issue for me though is that the Ins Co will drop you on any claim because of the Dill Dough and the burden will shift to Citizen X to prove this and that. THERE is the abuse I object to.

    Hard to find much of anything that is abused though. The slippery slope of steep angle.

    Hey, its just the RICH trying to make as much MONEY as possible…..damn the torpedoes.

  12. John S says:

    When will people learn the government is not their to support the people. Its their to support special interests with agendas who are telling Politicians too lazy to do any homework on the subject and just take in whatever the groups want. Tacking on some of their own frivolous additions that do nothing to help anything.

  13. What are these old men sitting in the house doing ?
    Are they senile or just stupid
    Putting in time
    They should be out fishing not in positions of power or alleged power
    Or perhaps they should be the bait at the end of the hook

  14. RS says:

    In the eyes of statists, all subjects are children.

    To be cared for, and disciplined by those few in the elite who know better than everyone else.


Bad Behavior has blocked 5238 access attempts in the last 7 days.