The 217 Representatives Who Voted To Keep NSA Spying On All Your Data

from the what-4th-amendment? dept

We already talked about the Amash Amendment being voted down very narrowly (217 – 205). While it didn’t pass, this was still a huge victory, because a few weeks ago (hell, even last week) people predicted that this amendment had no chance at all and might not even be debated. To come within seven votes of passing shows you why the NSA, the White House and the Senate’s primary NSA enablers went absolutely ballistic in going all out against the amendment. Think about that: you had incredibly powerful interests working overtime against this amendment, and no special interests beyond basic common decency and grassroots support working for it… and the vote was still incredibly close.

The full roll call has now been released, and you’ll note that this is not a partisan issue. The vote didn’t fall along partisan lines at all. Rep. Mike Rogers (one of the strongest defenders of the program) called the vote “bipartisan” against Amash, but it was equally as bipartisan against the NSA. 94 Republicans and 111 Democrats voted to stop the NSA collecting every phone record on every phone call. 134 Republicans and 83 Democrats voted to let the NSA keep spying on you. I’m thankful that my own Representative, Jackie Speier voted for the Amash Amendment.

There are some strange bedfellows voting in favor of NSA spying: there’s Nancy Pelosi right alongside John Boehner. Rep. Issa, who’s been so good on tech issues, voted to let the NSA keep spying on all of you, whereas Rep. Gohmert, who’s been ridiculous on tech issues, voted to stop the spying. Oddly Reps. Jan Schakowsky and Chris Van Hollen, who have specifically complained about the Patriot Act, voted to let it move forward today. Van Hollen specifically spoke out against Section 215 a few years ago, noting that it was too broad, didn’t have safeguards and might be used against innocent Americans. Yet, he voted to allow that to continue today. Bizarre. This amendment would have stopped exactly what he complained about.

Either way, I figured folks would want to see the names of the 217 Congressional Representatives who gave a giant middle finger to the 4th Amendment and voted to let the NSA continue to spy on each and every American citizen. Direct from the roll call:

—- NOES    217 —

Aderholt
Alexander
Andrews
Bachmann
Barber
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Benishek
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boehner
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bucshon
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (CA)
Delaney
Denham
Dent
Diaz-Balart
Duckworth
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Esty
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallego
Garcia
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Grimm
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Hoyer
Hudson
Hunter
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Joyce
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
Latta
Levin
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Pompeo
Price (NC)
Quigley
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Schakowsky
Schneider
Schwartz
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Titus
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Wasserman Schultz
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Young (FL)
Young (IN)

As for those who voted to cut off the NSA’s ability to do bulk data collection on all your phone calls:

—- AYES    205 —

Amash
Amodei
Bachus
Barton
Bass
Becerra
Bentivolio
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Burgess
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cummings
Daines
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Eshoo
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Fudge
Gabbard
Garamendi
Gardner
Garrett
Gibson
Gohmert
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Grayson
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Hahn
Hall
Harris
Hastings (FL)
Holt
Honda
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Jones
Jordan
Keating
Kildee
Kingston
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Marchant
Massie
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Mica
Michaud
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mullin
Mulvaney
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Nugent
O’Rourke
Owens
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pearce
Perlmutter
Perry
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stockman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Tsongas
Vela
Velazquez
Walz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Welch
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)

Finally, we’ve those who didn’t vote:

—- NOT VOTING    12 —

Barletta
Beatty
Bustos
Campbell
Coble
Herrera Beutler
Horsford
McCarthy (NY)
Negrete McLeod
Pallone
Rokita
Schock

Filed Under: , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “The 217 Representatives Who Voted To Keep NSA Spying On All Your Data”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
89 Comments
john says:

Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 24th, 2013 @ 6:12pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

There are more traitors than 217…….
It starts with the Bohemian secret club…look it up….we have bigger problems yet to be discovered.

Then the Federal Reserve….how it came about and Wall Street and the Bankers.

Can anyone say legalized criminals??

Our beautiful country and what it always stood for…….we are hated more than ever because of our illegal bombings ….forced democracy….envolvement in other countries personal affairs.

We needed to stay in OUR borders and keep jobs here in America!
China is not even an ally, yet our citizens of America are sold out, now if that is not treasonous. Re- Corporate control of the laws that govern our land of “we the people” for whos interest?? Not ours!!

Secret dealings with countries that violate human rights. Our ancestors fought for this country “Our Country”…not for China or Bangladesh or Vietnam. Every piece of clothing, shoes, housewares, auto parts, steel ..you name it is from another country…… We want to know the names of Congress / Representatives that voted and allowed this and the names of the Corporate businesses….this is where the “Root” of the
American job loss is.
No jobs = no revenue=no growth=a nation of consumers that has come full circle. As Walmart drove down the streets of America and pointed to businesses as they passed by and said: they will be out of business, this one out of business and that one out of business as they were pointing to mom and pop stores owned by American families.
I am sorry for going off subject……it is just so much more and deeper problems we face as “American citizens” by secret agreements that hurt all of us as a country. It would be very interesting if there was a Snowden type whistle blower on these special interest groups………who knows….maybe it may come about from a person with a conscience.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re:

So what now? Are we going to get another opportunity or was this THE vote that made or break any chance of the NSA to finally be reigned in?

Yes, there will be more opportunities. Almost certainly. If this had flopped massively, then Congress probably wouldn’t take it up again, but with such a close vote… it’s going to come back, perhaps in an even better form.

[citation needed or GTFO] says:

Re: Re: Re:

Yes, there will be more opportunities. Almost certainly. If this had flopped massively, then Congress probably wouldn’t take it up again, but with such a close vote… it’s going to come back, perhaps in an even better form.

I would be inclined to agree, but since the Pompeo/Nugent amendment went through, wouldn’t the majority of Congress believe that the red herring amendment was all that was needed to stop the NSA and they no longer have to worry about the issue because that’s what the amendment promised?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Seeing as how the Nugent amendment went through BEFORE the Amash amendment was voted on – I think the fact that nearly half of congress also voted for amash’s amendment shows that they care.

Also, interesting to see Nugent voted Aye on Amash’s amendment as well…

I’m glad to see my rep (LaMalfa) voted Aye on both – that suggests he is interested in defunding NSA. I’ll have to send him a supportive email.

Binko Barnes (profile) says:

The simple truth is that every Congress-person who voted no has committed treason. The oath of office for Congress is to Defend the Constitution. Not defend the government, not defend the executive branch, not defend the military and most definitely not defend their campaign contributor’s interests.

I think a lot of these assholes will be very surprised to find that this is a very hot button issue for vast numbers of Americans. Hot enough to get a lot of them voted out of office next time around.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

While you are right the NSA just flagged you as a domestic terrorist.

People won’t give a shit about this come election time, they will be quite happy texting with their Obama phone while watching cable TV sitting in their government subsidized home eating steak they purchased with welfare benefits and remembering to not bite the hand that feeds them.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

techdirt now seems to have an https option. Maybe it was added because of what’s been going on with the NSA ๐Ÿ™‚ Now the NSA would have a tougher time tracing your comments back to you if https was used. Though they could still use timing factors I suppose. Or they could just flag you for simply visiting the website.

(In all seriousness I doubt the NSA is tracing his comment back to him even if they could.)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“happy texting with their Obama phone while watching cable TV sitting in their government subsidized home eating steak they purchased with welfare benefits and remembering to not bite the hand that feeds them.”

You forgot the part about regurgitating the stereotypical narrative of their selected party which is spoon fed to them via the idiot box which hypnotizes its viewers into zombie zealots.

Ben (profile) says:

Re: Treason?

The simple truth is that every Congress-person who voted no has committed treason.

Unfortunately, No. Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

And the action of voting No does not rise to that level (nor does Bradley Manning’s for that matter; or Mr Snowden). And since it isn’t treason, they are therefore protected by Article I, Section 6:

They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

But yes, their oath is to the Constitution; I wish they would pay attention to that a bit more.

Not an Electronic Rodent (profile) says:

Re: Re: Treason?

And the action of voting No does not rise to that level

I guess that depends how one defines “giving aid and comfort to enemies”… Doesn’t the oath include something about “enemies foreign and domestic“?

It could be argued that such a vast affront to the constitution makes the NSA a domestic enemy and as such the representatives are “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”…

The Real Michael says:

Re: Re: Re: Treason?

Yes, their primary duty is to uphold Constitutional law, something which 217 of them just violated. It is difficult to understand how these elected officials can undermine the high law of the land with a straight face. Our freedoms are being threatened — that alone should constitute treachery.

Not an Electronic Rodent (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Treason?

No, it really depends on how the Constitution defines those things.

Then presumably an enemy of the constitution would be an enemy as defined by the constitution?

That’s the point I was trying to make… Having watched many films I know the military oath swears to defend “the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic“, does not the congressional oath have a similar line?

As for the constitution defining those things, the US government seems to have a “secret interpretation” of that too – just ask Mr Snowden…

Ben (profile) says:

1 out of 3

Only one out of the three Bishops in congress voted Yea. Sigh. Now I have to go looking into changing my last name.

At least my rep (Tierney) voted Yea.

I wonder if the non-voters were abstentions or not present. With Markey now a Senator, Massachusetts is absent a representative for a while (I do wish the list had the state for each of the reps instead of just the duplicates — I’m somewhat embarrassed to say I don’t know the names of our entire [Massachusetts] delegation).

Jason says:

Thanks

Thanks for posting this. I was on my way to look for the list of votes after I read the news, but thought I’d check here first in case there were any helpful links. I’ve always found the search features for bills, votes, etc., to be exceptionally non-obvious. (Or maybe I just don’t think the way Congress thinks!) Having a list right here for me to browse was a big time saver, so thank you.

(And I’m even more pleased to say that my representative is listed in the “Ayes” table.)

anonymouse says:

Re: Thanks

I can happily say that this list and the explanation of who the real treasonous reps are has been spread far and wide, i have now seen this list four times on different sites without looking for it. Amazing, and i think those that voted no are going to regret there vote if they do not regret it already, what with the list being posted everywhere and everyone talking about it online.

richard bittner (user link) says:

PRISM

Any question regarding the domestic use of the PRISM was rendered moot upon it’s disclosure. Realistically, the utility that remains is to spy pn the American People. I am a live long Progressive who see 225 names that need to be removed from office for pissxxg in the face of the American. I’ll be moving to Pulosi’s district soon and will work to elect anyone who opposes her so long as they vow to destroy the domestic use of PRISM. To day is just the begin of the fight not the end. It’s the beginning of the END of 225 political careers

richard bittner (user link) says:

Re: PRISM

I only have an android phone and it is impossible to edit with these things. So please excuse the obvious errors in my post. This is a defining moment in American history, like the Civil war… either WE THE PEOPLE destroy PRISM or forfeit our Rights to the terrorists or we draw the line in the sand and fight these pseudo Americans. We defeated the most evil force ever to haunt the history books during WWII without resort to torture,secret courts or prisons. I have not forgotten 9/11 OR Richard M. Nixon, J. Edgar Hoover, henry kissenger and James Jesus Angleton. Apparently Mr Rogers knowledge of history only begins with 9/11. Godspeed to Edward Snowden. WE THE PEOPLE must UNITE and create a government that will allow Edward Snowden to return without any retribution.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: PRISM

Any question regarding the domestic use of the PRISM was rendered moot upon it’s disclosure. Realistically, the utility that remains is to spy pn the American People. I am a live long Progressive who see 225 names that need to be removed from office for pissxxg in the face of the American. I’ll be moving to Pulosi’s district soon and will work to elect anyone who opposes her so long as they vow to destroy the domestic use of PRISM. To day is just the begin of the fight not the end. It’s the beginning of the END of 225 political careers

Er… it’s worth pointing out that the above amendment had NOTHING to do with PRISM. This was about a different program, the Section 215 “business records” collection. The PRISM stuff is different, part of Section 702 of FISA and not nearly as bad as people have made it out to be (though it does have some problems).

It’s a little frustrating that people are lumping everything under PRISM when that’s not the really bad program

Anonymous Coward says:

congress is getting really good at these symbolic votes that have no real substance or meaning…

not that we should be surprised considering they willfully abdicated most of their power and responsibility to the executive branch, the federal reserve bank, the DHS, the UN and the banksters who pay for their seat at the table and promise them fat private paychecks once their time feeding at the public trough is up.

still though it would have been funny if somebody screwed up the voting assignments and this thing had actually passed by accident, just watching the shit storm that followed as they tried to figure out who screwed up and how to correct the “mistake” would have been worth the price of admission.

richard bittner (user link) says:

Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jul 24th, 2013 @ 7:21pm

Right on about these “close votes”. Be(a)ware of judas goats. I don’t give a damn where anyone’s at on the political spectrum, this is a vote where people reveal their true selves politcally..where’s Mr Smith goes to Washington….I’d a love to see a 72 hour plus filibuster.

Travicane says:

NH (my state) spit:

Against: Annie Kuster, who seems to always kowtow to the administration. Will likely get her more party money come the election, but will cost her with the NH voters (do not like toadies).

For: Carol Shae-Porter. Appears to vote with her conscience, and the wishes of those who elected her, not just someone who simply bends to party orders. May cost her party money, but she will win her next election.

- bill says:

Re: Annie and Carol

Annie may just be settling into her job, just as Carol was in 2007 when she broke her explicit pledge to vote against any war funding bill that lacked a specific timetable for withdrawal a mere two months after taking office (at the behest of Nancy Pelosi, of course).

Given that Carol never managed in her first 4 years in office (nor since regaining it) to become a co-sponsor of HR676 despite claiming throughout that period that she supported Medicare for all I’m not sure how much credit we can give her for the Amash vote – she may just have had enough seniority by now that Annie was selected to bear the brunt of any progressive backlash as one of those required to vote against the measure to ensure that it would not pass (there’s a lot of such back-room dealing in such matters, just as occurred with the CPC who unanimously reneged on their written pledges to oppose any health-care bill that lacked a strong ‘public option’ when their votes were needed to pass Obamacare – even Dennis Kucinich caved eventually, though it took a ride on Air Force One to bring him around, and it would not surprise me if that’s why he failed to get renominated and reelected after redistricting).

Designerfx (profile) says:

schakowsky doesn't do anything

not only does schakowsky not understand technology, she relies on her staffers for everything she does.

either she supports the NSA outright (her letters are typical “can’t let the terrorists win”), or she simply doesn’t even understand the issue at hand.

either way, I hope people realize the woman shouldn’t even be in office.

Anonymous Coward says:

Remember, if your representative voted for the amendment, give them a call/email to thanks them and urge them to continue pressing for the end of NSA spying on Americans. Giving them feedback when they’re doing the right thing on an issue is almost important as complaining to them when they’re doing the wrong thing.

R.H. (profile) says:

I'm liking my new Rep ^_^

Well, my representative [Dan Kildee (D-MI)] voted yea so I’m happy and will be sending a supportive e-mail. It’s too bad that Michigan’s delegation split though. With both Amash, a Republican, and Conyers, a Democrat, both from Michigan and both sponsoring this amendment I would have thought that my states delegation would have been all over this one.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Only One MA Rep Got it Right

Unless I’m reading it wrong, Kennedy voted AGAINST the amendment (he shows up in the list of 217). The other MA reps voted FOR it.

So really, you should be happy that all but 1 of our reps got it right.

Also, can we please put the idea that one party is for small government? There’s a reason the majority of Republicans and a large sum of Democrats voted against the amendment, and its not their love of small government.

Anonymous Coward says:

[Meta] Stale cache somewhere

I’m not seeing any new content at your site for the last 8 hours, even though it’s the middle of the week. There should be three or four articles since last evening’s Daily Dirt, but I only see one.

There must be a stale cache somewhere that’s not recognizing that the site’s front page has changed in that time, and I’m pretty sure it’s not my browser’s. It’s probably part of your hosting/load-balancing setup. Please fix ASAP.

Ashamed Washington State Citizen says:

Disgust

My rep. voted nay on the amendment so he is going to get harsh email as well as an earful on the phone about what it truly means to serve in the office I elected him to. His failure to comply has resulted in him losing my vote and as such he will be joining the rest of the U.S. population in the unemployment lines come mid-terms.

Its all just an illusion says:

Traitors every last one

don’t fool yourselves, their all in on it together, you think they didn’t know we are all being spied upon, the 12 who didn’t vote would have been enough to change the vote count, all agreed upon in advance check to see who will be up for re-election soon those are the “AYES” check their vote on the PATRIOT ACT and NDAA and how they voted on other bills online

boomslang says:

This was a great opportunity for congress to potentially reach the (previously thought unobtainable) 15% approval rating. I guess it is unobtainable after all. While the Administration will likely view this as a victory, in the end, it will lead to more encrypted peer-to-peer communication, which goes against what the administration wants.

On that note, it feels to me that the few people who make decisions at the agency have no idea how computers or networks work, so they go overboard in requesting everything. The high ranking decision makers are probably the type of people who run screaming from a room when they hear “computer virus” because they’re afraid of getting sick. It’s not surprising that they didn’t foresee whatever consequences that may follow.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: The vote

Does anyone know if the people who voted not to keep this are all up for election this time?

Yes we do. The term for each member of the House of Representative is two years. This means all 435 congressmen (and women) are up for reelection next year in 2014.

Also useful to know would be the Senate. The term there is six years, but reelections are staggered so that every two years, about one-third of the senators are up for reelection. There are two senators in each state and even their reelection dates are also staggered.

Senator Wyden of Oregan is a three-term Senator (technically 3+) having been elected to full six-year terms in 1998, 2004 and 2010. His next reelection will be in 2016.

One other thing to know would be the Primary and General elections. The Primary election is where the political party ask its members who should be nominated. The winner of this election goes on to the General election– which determines who is elected to that office.

To answer your question, all of the Representatives who voted for and against this amendment to a bill are up for reelection. Vote according to your values and conscience. If needed, don’t forget about the primary election.

PB says:

Identify by state, district

I realize the original government source doesn’t include this, but I think that when publishing such lists/reporting, it would be useful to attach the related states and districts to all of the names.

At a glance, we can see not only how our own representative voted, but how others in our state did as well as how other states came down on the vote.

superconeng (user link) says:

Online Web Desinging

This site is very important and famous for Online Website Designing AND Dewelopment.
SE Software Technologies is one of the foremost software providers and providing the services of Web development and designing,
OpenCart Websites Services, WordPress Websites Services, Accounting Software, Web Hosting Services, Domain Registration, SEO/SEM,
Consultation, E-commerce solution, Content Management System (CMS).
We are providing Services in different countries from last 10 years in UK, USA, Canada, Saudi Arabia Germany and Pakistan.

dannyyoung@live.ca (user link) says:

no secrets

my god ever since movie THE CONVERSATION some 40 years ago the art of eavesdropping got better wow there are no secrets anymore…..no more privacy so lets joinj haands and tell sad stories…. you know it only takes $1000 canadian to launch a small satellite in space today the trick is getting lox liquid oxygen and making sure your vector is true to desired orbit so now we got drones doing our dirty work and i agree with george noory some day these drones will connect with a 767 commercial no highway in sky kids….

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ยป

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...