Here's where you should go.
Contact your senators now
. And then send a message to Obama.
Not too long ago, everyone agreed that the laws which limit the government's ability to eavesdrop on your cyber-communications should be more or less than same as the old laws about wiretapping landline telephones. The cops can't wiretap unless they first get a warrant.
Most people seem to have forgotten all about the need to get a warrant. I haven't.
CIPSA allows the government to scoop up your private communications. No warrant needed. All that is necessary is for some anonymous person, somewhere in the bowels of the intel community, to decide on his own
that your words concern cybersecurity (which can mean anything
-- even watching a DRM-protected movie clip on YouTube), "national security" (which can also mean anything
), pedophilia ("Think of the children! Why doesn't someone think of the children!"
), and "threats of bodily harm."
This decision to spy on you need not be explained to a court. You will never know who made that decision, or why. The people spying on you will remain nameless, faceless and unaccountable.
Look, I don't care if someone out there is discussing a plot to kill me
. The government has no right to eavesdrop on that conversation unless there's a warrant involved.
CISPA comes down to this: Uncle no longer wants to have to get a warrant. Uncle wants you to give up your right to demand a warrant.
It's not as though warrants are hard for cops and the FBI to get. They are handed out routinely. They can even be sought after the fact
But the "get a warrant" process does insure that, at some point, the eavesdropper is going to have to tell a court why there was good reason to spy on you. Someone has to come forward and say: "I am accountable."
The government no longer wants to be accountable.
If you stand for that crap, you're a sheep.
By the way: Here's Techdirt's response
to those who say that the amendments actually made CISPA "all better":
Basically, the amendment closes a loophole but opens a door. It takes away some of the language that allows overreach of the bill, but then explicitly endorses the exact things people were worried the government would do with that language—as in, start using the data to investigate and build cases against American citizens without regard for the laws that would normally protect their privacy.
Let me break it down for you further. Previously, the supporters of this bill claimed that it was simply a measure to plug a few holes in the security of our cyber-networks. Opponents countered that this is actually a bill allowing spies to eavesdrop on your words to build a criminal case against you -- just in case you should say something that pisses off Big Brother. The CIPSA amendments constitute an admission: Yeah, this is about building criminal cases
Of course, it's not as though everyone trusted what supporters were saying about the bill's purpose before. We all knew it would be used for these other things. But simply getting them to admit that is not really progress.