Back in 2014, civil liberties and privacy advocates were up in arms when the government tried to quietly push through the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, or CISA, a law which would allow federal agencies - including the NSA - to share cybersecurity, and really any information with private corporations "notwithstanding any other provision of law." The most vocal complaint involved CISA’s information-sharing channel, which was ostensibly created for responding quickly to hacks and breaches, and which provided a loophole in privacy laws that enabled intelligence and law enforcement surveillance without a warrant.
Ironically, in its earlier version, CISA had drawn the opposition of tech firms including Apple, Twitter, Reddit, as well as the Business Software Alliance, the Computer and Communications Industry Association and many others including countless politicians and, most amusingly, the White House itself.
In April, a coalition of 55 civil liberties groups and security experts signed onto an open letter opposing it. In July, the Department of Homeland Security itself warned that the bill could overwhelm the agency with data of “dubious value” at the same time as it “sweep[s] away privacy protections.” Most notably, the biggest aggregator of online private content, Facebook, vehemently opposed the legislation however a month ago it was "surprisingly" revealed that Zuckerberg had been quietly on the side of the NSA all along as we reported in "Facebook Caught Secretly Lobbying For Privacy-Destroying "Cyber-Sec...
Following the blitz response, the push to pass CISA was tabled following a White House threat to veto similar legislation. Then, quietly, CISA reemerged after the same White House mysteriously flip-flopped, expressed its support for precisely the same bill in August.
And then the masks fell off, when it became obvious that not only are corporations eager to pass CISA despite their previous outcry, but that they have both the White House and Congress in their pocket.
As Wired reminds us, when the Senate passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act by a vote of 74 to 21 in October, privacy advocates were again "aghast" that the key portions of the law were left intact which they said make it more amenable to surveillance than actual security, claiming that Congress has quietly stripped out "even more of its remaining privacy protections."
"They took a bad bill, and they made it worse," says Robyn Greene, policy counsel for the Open Technology Institute.
But while Congress was preparing a second assault on privacy, it needed a Trojan Horse with which to enact the proposed legislation into law without the public having the ability to reject it.
It found just that by attaching it to the Omnibus $1.1 trillion Spending Bill, which passed the House early this morning, passed the Senate moments ago and will be signed into law by the president in the coming hours.
This is how it happened, again courtesy of Wired:
In a late-night session of Congress, House Speaker Paul Ryan announced a new version of the “omnibus” bill, a massive piece of legislation that deals with much of the federal government’s funding. It now includes a version of CISA as well. Lumping CISA in with the omnibus bill further reduces any chance for debate over its surveillance-friendly provisions, or a White House veto. And the latest version actually chips away even further at the remaining personal information protections that privacy advocates had fought for in the version of the bill that passed the Senate.
It gets: it appears that while CISA was on hiatus, US lawmakers - working under the direction of corporations adnt the NSA - were seeking to weaponize the revised legislation, and as Wired says, the latest version of the bill appended to the omnibus legislation seems to exacerbate the problem of personal information protections.
Time to make a list of all representatives who voted yes and then we vote them out.
List of Republicans who voted Yea for the Omnibus spending bill which included CISA
He needs to see The Third Jihad on YouTube.
YOU are FULL OF SHIT, suckerberg, hope your new baby manages to KEEP HER HEAD when all these muzzles come to town!
He is a Rockefeller too.
YOu saved me from having to write some of the information above. I am sure some who read it will think you are looney and won't even consider it accurate. I can attest that most if not all you said is true and accurate.
People how do figure these snot nose brats come up from nowhere and own facebook and microsoft some of the biggest information gatherers out there. The Facebook was created by ex CIA meant to be a data base. I saw an interview with those CIA agents talking about it on TV......oh yeah...............and Gates; father was a member of the UN ..oh yeah......hmmm..doesn't anyone think for himself anymore? I'd like to see some people on the forum at least acknowledge that they read your post. Come on people are you out there? I know it's scary but you all have courage.
Must be true, 2 or 4 families own this country, run it into the ground, push the NWO. Why can't we fight these nerds? A shot between the eyes will cancel their plans.
I just read it, will keep the info, had no idea how close the knots are tied.
May God place Zuckerberg in the midst of his Moslem friends..............dead center.
Slap him? I would'nt need to. Didja ever happen to see the actual video of Daniel Pearlmans fate? I have it somewhere. A real eye opener. Zuckerberg should quit taking stupid pills.