What is ACTA? An international intellectual property trade agreement,
being negotiated in secret by U.S., EU, Japan, et al. Leaked proposed
wording indicates it may require ISPs not only to tell law enforcement
who is doing what but to disconnect customers for *suspicion* of
intellectual property violations:

http://www.eff.org/issues/acta

Who's against it? Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown, for two, and
notice their Cc: to Joe Biden:

http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/sanders_brown_acta.pdf

Should Get FISA Right include ACTA in its campaigns?

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

Okay, we have a new kind of account at Change.Org, and I have the bare bones presence set up for it. Under its auspices, we've posted a petition using their new petition tool. Here are the things we still need to do:

1. Publicize the petition
* The URL is: http://www.change.org/get_fisa_right/actions/view/get_fisa_rights_open_letter_to_president_obama
2. Post a blog on Change.org point to the petition and everything else
3. Those of us who have change.org accounts should join the new non-profit
* The URL is: http://www.change.org/get_fisa_right
4. Someone (me at least) needs to buff up our about/mission/history statements
* For this you need an account at bloggers.change.org, I believe

For those who are confused about our new account and our existing presence on Change.org, here's what Robin at Change.org wrote to me:

"creating a nonprofit profile on the site is different from having an Ideas for Change presence. Ideas for change is an annual event and soon we will be launching a new version of the site where people will submit all new ideas. A nonprofit profile is for an organization to use that is going to regularly run campaigns on the site so they can all be housed somewhere."

Hope his explanation helps.

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply

Please keep it up. Don't have the energy to participate more actively atm, but I've been lurking and following.
I really think this issue is a good acid test for people of our outlook.

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/feds-wanted-data-visitors-news-site/

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

please help me out

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?    

Show Last Reply

I agree that the NPP paragraph should be scrapped. However, if it is decided that we should reference the NPP, the intro should be short and to the point. Perhaps something like...

"Congratulations on winning the highly esteemed NPP; we proudly believe that you are a man on the cusp of greatness."

Also, imho, the second paragraph should be scrapped and it's points should be inserted into other sentences as needed.

Perhaps the first paragraph in this open letter should be like the third paragraph in the current draft... try something direct to the purpose of this letter... without a long rambling preamble... perhaps...

"Patriot Act and FISA reform are once again before Congress; now is the perfect time to follow through on your commitment to preserve American civil liberties and to curb executive branch abuses against the US Constitution."

Once the first sentence is settled, it will set the pace and tone of the remaining letter.

4  out of 4 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply

I agree with ddearborn and suggest adopting her suggestions.
The tone of the letter seems derogatory to the President.
We should be able to site concerns than suggest changes politely.

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply

Dear President Obama,
I've taken a few minutes this morning to think about the wording of this letter and offer my suggestions with openness and kindness. The opening of this letter could work, but it feels as if it is a bit dismissive in tone. "Certainly puts you in good company" seems to border on flippancy if read from that angle. "Certainly" creates this tone here. I've reworked the letter and hope that others will continue to shape and direct this important communication.

The recent announcement of your Nobel Peace Prize was a reassuring gesture from the world that the global community is listening, hoping, and caring about the future of America again. Today, we write to urge you to honor the spirit of peace and democracy by changing your stance on FISA. With FISA reform in Congress once more, the time is right for change. "Yes we can" protect civil liberties and restore Americans' faith in a government that supports rather than surveils.

We understand why your administration worked behind the scenes with Senator Sessions to weaken privacy and civil liberties protections during the Senate Judiciary
Committee hearings on Patriot Act reform, but we feel that this issue is more important than reaching across partisan lines, more important than appeasement. When you are weak on civil liberties, the bedrock upon which our democracy is built, you let down the public that worked hard for your election. We expect such practices from the previous administration. Your oath to protect the Constitution is important to the American people. Please follow through on your promises.

From here, the letter should detail the past history of the FISA discussions, the Justice Act results, and what we hope Obama will do in the future. Does anyone have these as talking points?

Overall, our letter's tone should match Obama's.

Best wishes all, Linda

3  out of 3 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply

1. If we are going to emphasize his peace prize, we should do more to correlate that award with what he is doing/Bush did. In particular, we could make the argument that his prize was at least partially a repudiation of the surveillance policies under the Bush administration, though we would need to be careful about how we craft this aspect in particular.

2. In the first line, I don't really like pointing out that the peace prize "puts him in good company" unless we are going to expand on that. I also think we need a better transition to discussing FISA/Patriot Act---which we could perhaps do to accomodate the "good company" by citing others who have won the award for promoting civil liberties.

3. When discussing Holder, we could cite the "conversation" he admitted was available on civil liberties concerns.

4. We will need an update on what is happening in the HJC hearings, or at least a recognition that those hearings are ongoing.

5. The discussion of Senator Sessions is overtly negative. Of course there is much reason to be extremely critical of him, but it would be fantastic if we could use more "hopeful" rhetoric at least in addition to this. Personally, I would like to add in a play on words of "audacity of hope" or the line the PCCC has been using: "yes we STILL can".

6. I"m not sure if saying we "urge him to live up to the morals of hte campaign" is the best way to describe it. I like citing his campaign a lot, but am not sure that morals is the right word.

7. I'm not sure if we need to say "please do it" as opposed to "please do" in terms of upholding the constitution.

8. Lastly, I don't think we need to say "reject the policies of fear on national security", we could probably just say "reject the policies of fear".

---Harry

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

This is the message I sent to Pres. Obama on the White House contact page:Mr. President, Congratulations on your Nobel Peace Prize—it certainly puts you in good company and gives you greater responsibility. I am curious to see how your status as a war president—they are now your wars, no longer Mr. Bush's—and a supporter of continuing the many provisions of the PATRIOT act that I feel have outlived their emergency usefulness, despite the FBI's claims to the contrary (they have a vested interest in making their work easier; my loyalty is to the Constitutional protection from unreasonable search). Naturally, I cannot as a citizen truly evaluate their claims, but if there is indeed a current TERRORISM-RELATED investigation that could be compromised by a nonrenewal of certain provisions, the renewal could be designed in such a way as to "grandfather in" that particular investigation and the provision in question be terminated upon the conclusion of that specific investigation. I was a supporter during your presidential campaign; I am a member of GetFISARight on Organizing for America and elsewhere, and I hope that the confidence in you that is expressed by the Nobel committee proves to be justified. Please, for our world, our nation, and yourself, make it so!
I offer it as the basis of our group letter, if you so choose, or start new! But please, let's get started!

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply