General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf you're OK with revelations of NSA snooping, you're part of the problem
If you're not surprised that the NSA was found to have been data mining millions of Verizon phone records, congratulations--you're a sentient being. None of us should be surprised. Every last one of us, however, should still be outraged.
If you find yourself shifting blame to congress, you're part of the problem.
If you find yourself posting about how the 'baggers should have been outraged when they found out about Bush's NSA spying, you've lowered yourself to the point where you're competing with near-primates.
If you're busy posting about Glen Greenwald's ego, or contending that he's lying, you're avoiding the inevitable, and you're a part of the problem.
If you're doing everything you can to berate those who are angry at this news, you're craven.
If your line of defense for Total Information Awareness includes pointing out at every turn that this was call data and not the actual voice recordings, please let me know so that I can consider ignoring you forever. And then send John Poindexter a thank you note, letting him know you appreciate everything he's done.
If you are harping on the inevitable nature of our spying apparatus, saying that everyone's known for years we've been spied on and that to be angry now constitutes an overreaction, you're sliding down a slippery slope, and your motives are suspect.
If you happened to actually notice in the Guardian or NYT that the warrant covers Verizon Business customers and not Verizon home or cell users, congratulations on your careful reading. Oh and by the way, would you care to wager about the existence of FISA warrants for Verizon cell users and AT&T users? I'll take that bet.
If you think that the President doesn't bear ultimate responsibility for this travesty, you're hurting this country in favor of worshiping the cult of personality.
If you're more concerned with Freepers' and Teabaggers' reactions than you are with the actual spying, you have no place at the table with those who attempt to hew to an ethical code of living.
And if you (oh my god I actually saw this on DU) end up telling other DUers that if they haven't done anything wrong on the phone, they have nothing to worry about, you're at somewhere less than zero.
There's a significant amount of spinning at DU this morning in favor of the NSA and the Administration. What the NSA has done is inexcusable, and I'd urge people to remember that, and to remember that there are things that are ultimately more important than a sense of having "won" something in the political arena.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)The highly classified program, code-named PRISM, has not been disclosed publicly before. Its establishment in 2007 and six years of exponential growth took place beneath the surface of a roiling debate over the boundaries of surveillance and privacy. Even late last year, when critics of the foreign intelligence statute argued for changes, the only members of Congress who know about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues.
warrant46
(2,205 posts)What a POS
HipChick
(25,485 posts)is me calling Verizon to ask them why my line continually isn't working..
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)n/t
HipChick
(25,485 posts)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I get concerned when records are gathered without FISA or some other judge ordering the process.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)run through profiling software that alerts analysts to a suspicious pattern. It's the parameters of that profiling software that is really important.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)party and the time and length of the call. A monitored call is wire tapping, listening to the contents of the call, it is very different. We must know the difference. Phone records are obtained in times of crimes by the investigators. My point was to point out the difference in phone records and wire tapping, many of the comments does not indicate the public are understanding the difference.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)What you're discussing is just one relatively compartmentalized program that collects metadata from CALEA compliant switching equipment. That's normally made available to the FBI and some other agencies.
NSA has the voice data, as well. It's under a different program codenamed ThinThread or a successor program.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Of the call also?
leveymg
(36,418 posts)networks. That was documented in the EFF law suit. Here's a schematic of how NSA direct data interception operates:
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Our ability on freedoms in some aspects are different and 9 11 had lots to do with those changes but on the other hand if we lose our ability to move about somewhat freely then what freedoms can any one exercise. Laws have been written to allow the large gathering of information so there in lies a problem and I seriously doubt this will be changed in Congress.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They are going to find the same stuff from me, too!
boilerbabe
(2,214 posts)with the trauma of Michelle Obama getting heckled by that racist lesbian and are not their usual intellectual selves! 
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)^^^^^
Logical
(22,457 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)
Seeking Serenity
(2,840 posts)but if I do, I'm gonna be royally incensed, the idea you mentioned that Democrats/liberals shouldn't protest this too loudly because that might give some kind of advantage to "the other side."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)advantage to the other side' is simply stunning. What gives advantage to the other side is that OUR side is now doing what we so loudly protested when THEIR side was doing it.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)as loudly as possible. The NSA, defined by its own rules, specifically says what records can be searched and under what circumstances; and only by court order. To throw out such a wide net is unconscionable
leveymg
(36,418 posts)the White House, under both Bush and Obama, the latter pursuant to the 2008 FISA Amendment which Senator Obama voted for along with a majority of the Democratic Senate.
It's not just the agency or the Intelligence Community. If things need adjustment, it's needed at all levels.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)The NSA violated their own rules as well.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)permits NSA to warehouse all data collected.
I believe that there is some sort of safeguard in place along the lines of rules and software that doesn't allow analysts to search for specific US persons without a reasonable cause determination made by a manager. The software has algorithms that automatically profile persons and red flag them for more intensive investigation. It's explained in the Jane Mayer article in The New Yorker that profiled an NSA whistleblower who invented the system, "Thin Thread", that Bush put into operation without the safeguards designed for it. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/06/1214209/-Your-Permanent-Record-What-NSA-Does-With-All-They-Know-About-You?showAll=yes
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)of tax data for individual taxpayers. Apparently, someone from the IRS disregarded that rule and released tax information anyway. And it's not the first time. So, I'm sure you can see why I don't have a lot of faith in this particular rule/regulation.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I'm not so worried about someone releasing NSA data without authorization as I am by its misuse by other agencies and private contractors with their own political or commercial agendas.
Hestia
(3,818 posts)I remember posting on a libertarian board (it was a good board other than politics) and I specifically said if you give one president the power, the one's coming up behind them will do the exact damned thing. Now here we are...being brought down by a Democratic president. Yes, this is his, he owns it all.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)clarice
(5,504 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)we have become an echo chamber.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Hello, hello, hello. Can you hear me?... Hear me...hear me... 
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Someone will drop a rock.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)that is supposed to be "check" on these overreaches. Everyone but us "chickens" are involved.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)
alfredo
(60,078 posts)we have the capability or the personnel to spy on all phone calls.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The United States' National Security Agency (NSA) maintains a database containing hundreds of billions of records of telephone calls made by U.S. citizens from the four largest telephone carriers in the United States: AT&T, SBC, BellSouth (all three now called AT&T), and Verizon.[1]
The existence of this database and the NSA program that compiled it was unknown to the general public until USA Today broke the story on May 10, 2006.[1] It is estimated that the database contains over 1.9 trillion call-detail records.[2] According to Bloomberg News, the effort began approximately seven months before the September 11, 2001 attacks.[3]
The records include detailed call information (caller, receiver, date/time of call, length of call, etc.) for use in traffic analysis and social network analysis, but do not include audio information or transcripts of the content of the phone calls.
The database's existence has prompted fierce objections. It is often viewed as an illegal warrantless search and a violation of the pen register provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and (in some cases) the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The George W. Bush administration neither confirmed nor denied the existence of the domestic call record database. This contrasts with a related NSA controversy concerning warrantless surveillance of selected telephone calls; in that case they did confirm the existence of the program of debated legality. The program's code name is Stellar Wind.*[4]
It’s cause for concern any time government exceeds the bounds of the Fourth Amendment, but it should be truly worrying when it’s in the context of mass-scale spying by the NSA. Based on what little we know of the NSA’s programs from public reports, a single “authorization” will routinely cover hundreds or thousands of phone numbers and e-mail addresses. That means that even if there’s only “one occasion” on which the NSA “circumvented the spirit of the law” or flouted the Fourth Amendment, the rights of thousands of Americans could easily have been violated.
Moving from confirmed fact to mild—but I think reasonable—speculation, there is something about the peculiar phrasing of these statements worth noticing: “collection carried out pursuant to the Section 702 minimization procedures.” Minimization procedures are the rules designed to limit the retention and dissemination of irrelevant information about innocent Americans that might get picked up during authorized surveillance. In ordinary criminal wiretaps, it makes sense to talk about “collection carried out pursuant to… minimization procedures” because, under the stricter rules governing such spying, someone is supposed to be monitoring the wiretap in realtime, and ensuring that innocent conversations (like a mobster’s spouse or teenage kids chatting on the house line) are not recorded.
But that’s not how FISA surveillance normally works. As a rare public ruling by the FISA Court explains, the standard procedure for FISA surveillance is that “large amounts of information are collected by automatic recording to be minimized after the fact.” The court elaborated: “Virtually all information seized, whether by electronic surveillance or physical search, is minimized hours, days, or weeks after collection.” (Emphasis mine.) In other words, minimization is something that normally happens after collection: First you intercept, then you toss out the irrelevant stuff. Intelligence officials have suggested the same in recent testimony before Congress: Communications aren’t “minimized” until they’re reviewed by human analysts—and given the incredible volume of NSA collection, it’s unlikely that more than a small fraction of what’s intercepted ever is seen by human eyes. Yet in the statements above, we have two intriguing implications: First, that “collection” and “minimization” are in some sense happening contemporaneously (otherwise how could “collection” be “pursuant to” minimization rules?) and second, that these procedures are somehow fairly intimately connected to the question of “reasonableness” under the Fourth Amendment.
*"Stellar Wind" is one codename for The Program. Another that is publicly known is "Thin Thread."
Stellar Wind is the open secret code name for certain information collection activities performed by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) and revealed by Thomas Tamm to The New York Times reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau.[1] The operation was approved by President George W. Bush shortly after the September 11 attacks in 2001.[2]
The program's activities involve data mining of a large database of the communications of American citizens, including e-mail communications, phone conversations, financial transactions, and Internet activity.[1]
There were internal disputes within the Justice Department about the legality of the program, because data are collected for large numbers of people, not just the subjects of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.[3]
For a detailed discussion of Thin Thread, see Jane Mayer's 2011 profile of NSA whistleblower Bill Binney,
Going backwards, related programs included Trailblazer, an NSA program that focused on interception and analysis of data carried on web communications networks, cell phones, VOIP, and e-mail. After receiving adverse publicity Trailblazer was shutdown but reportedly morphed into the NSA Turbulance Program. Thin Thread was a rival NSA program that went operational, resulting in massive domestic surveillance. This is described by Jane Mayer in a 2011 New Yorker article: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all
While most of the N.S.A. was reeling on September 11th, inside SARC the horror unfolded “almost like an ‘I-told-you-so’ moment,” according to J. Kirk Wiebe, an intelligence analyst who worked there. “We knew we weren’t keeping up.” SARC was led by a crypto-mathematician named Bill Binney, whom Wiebe describes as “one of the best analysts in history.” Binney and a team of some twenty others believed that they had pinpointed the N.S.A.’s biggest problem—data overload—and then solved it. But the agency’s management hadn’t agreed.
Binney, who is six feet three, is a bespectacled sixty-seven-year-old man with wisps of dark hair; he has the quiet, tense air of a preoccupied intellectual. Now retired and suffering gravely from diabetes, which has already claimed his left leg, he agreed recently to speak publicly for the first time about the Drake case. When we met, at a restaurant near N.S.A. headquarters, he leaned crutches against an extra chair. “This is too serious not to talk about,” he said.
Binney expressed terrible remorse over the way some of his algorithms were used after 9/11. ThinThread, the “little program” that he invented to track enemies outside the U.S., “got twisted,” and was used for both foreign and domestic spying: “I should apologize to the American people. It’s violated everyone’s rights. It can be used to eavesdrop on the whole world.” According to Binney, Drake took his side against the N.S.A.’s management and, as a result, became a political target within the agency.
Binney described Thin Thread to Mayer, who describes The Program this way:
Pilot tests of ThinThread proved almost too successful, according to a former intelligence expert who analyzed it. “It was nearly perfect,” the official says. “But it processed such a large amount of data that it picked up more Americans than the other systems.” Though ThinThread was intended to intercept foreign communications, it continued documenting signals when a trail crossed into the U.S.
< . . .>
Binney, for his part, believes that the agency now stores copies of all e-mails transmitted in America, in case the government wants to retrieve the details later. In the past few years, the N.S.A. has built enormous electronic-storage facilities in Texas and Utah. Binney says that an N.S.A. e-mail database can be searched with “dictionary selection,” in the manner of Google. After 9/11, he says, “General Hayden reassured everyone that the N.S.A. didn’t put out dragnets, and that was true. It had no need—it was getting every fish in the sea.”
In addition to NSA's Thinthread and Trailblazer programs, DIA operated its own domestic-focused pre-9/11 surveillance program. At least one of these monitored AQ cells operating inside the US. The story of the Able Danger has been well documented and fairly widely known. Able Danger was shut down by Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Steve Cambone in late 2000-early 2001. That operation built up a social network analysis focusing electronic surveillance on members of the so-called Brooklyn Cell that had remained in place after its establishment by CIA as part of Operation Cyclone, the Agency's operation that recruited and trained Jihadis for war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Much of bin Laden's organization grew out of the US and Saudi organized covert operations against the Russia and its allies in Central Asia and the oil-rich region of the Transcaucasus that flared up again as wars in Bosnia, Kosovo, Dagestan, and Chechnya.
As early as 1997, as the US and Saudi paramilitary organized by bin Laden were cooperating in Kosovo, US intelligence officials were bragging that they had "mapped out" bin Laden's financial and donor network by human and technical means. Al Qaeda was already the focus of multiple surveillance operations inside the US, but this was gravely complicated by intelligence agencies from several countries stumbling over each other and the fatal duplicity of their network of interwoven double-agents that created the opportunity for the 9/11 attacks.
NSA and DIA technical collection and analysis, elsewhere referred as "The Program" survived the reorganization of intelligence that followed 9/11, and the closing down some legacy programs that followed a series of disclosures and scandals involving "The Program" in the middle of the decade. Part of this was described by Shane Harris in The National Journal, "TIA LIVES ON":
February 23, 2006, http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0223nj1.htm or http://mediachannel.org/blog/node/3509
As early as February 2003, the Pentagon planned to use Genoa II technologies at the Army's Information Awareness Center at Fort Belvoir, Va., according to an unclassified Defense budget document. The awareness center was an early tester of various TIA tools, according to former employees. A 2003 Pentagon report to Congress shows that the Army center was part of an expansive network of intelligence agencies, including the NSA, that experimented with the tools. The center was also home to the Army's Able Danger program, which has come under scrutiny after some of its members said they used data-analysis tools to discover the name and photograph of 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta more than a year before the attacks.
The other project has been re-designated "TopSail" (formerly Genoa II) and would provide IT tools to help anticipate and preempt terrorist attacks. SAIC has also been contracted to work on Topsail, including a US$3.7 million contract in 2005.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)FISA court.
Under the PATRIOT act it is legal to collect metadata, but that doesn't make it right.
I liked the NSA, and the military arm ASA now INSCOM, before Bush corrupted it. Their mission was to protect us from foreign threats. They were barred from spying on US citizens. That was the job of the FBI and CIA.
I think Bush was not happy with the FBI because of the lack of enthusiasm for Bush's torture agenda, so they put more power into the CIA and NSA. That hurt us because the CIA had no expertise at interrogation, the FBI did. Torture is for breaking people and terrorizing a population. It is not an investigative tool.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)a big scandal back then. That he was using the Telecoms to spy on the American people. It WAS against the law, THEN. And we were hopeful, for a while, that the law would be applied. Part of which made it necessary for the Telecoms to compensate all Americans (the amount was $1,000 or the right to sue airc) who were victims of his illegal spying by the Telecoms. The claims and law suits began almost immediately.
But then Congress came to their rescue with the FISA Bill. In an incredible move by our 'democratic government' a bill which was RETROACTIVE, remember the disbelief over that, was introduced basically rescinding the spying law BACK FAR ENOUGH to make legal what had been illegal when they did it and our Congress including many Democrats shamefully, Obama who had been outspoken against the spying, changing his mind also and voted for it.
So iow, Bush and his spying telecoms were saved from accountability under the existing law by Congress, which helpfully changed it to protect them.
It is stunning to see the lack of outrage in so short a time now, over what generated so much outrage during the Bush years, on the 'left'. It is equally stunning to see the sudden outrage from the right who were fully in support of Bush's illegal spying back then.
Partisanship is more of a threat to our freedoms than any of the attempts by government to take them away. Extreme partisans on both sides can always be counted on to support anything that is done by their 'team' making it possible for these laws to go into effect.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)Shock Doctrine tactics on us to give Bush near dictatorial power.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Not being able to see that Democrats and Republicans have sold us out on this will lead to the downfall of America as a whole!
Phillip McCleod
(1,837 posts)SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)social profile on anyone. Who they called, when, and from where. With that information they could easily track the movement and associates of anyone they wished. I think that is stepping much too close to fourth amendment protections, and is far beyond the scope of their work, in my opinion.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)good at instilling fear in the population.
When Bush demanded these powers, I remember we warned his supporters that some day a Democratic President will inherit that power. I think at that time they were crowing that they will reign for 100 years.
Obama has given up some power seized by Bush, we need him to push for the repeal of the PATRIOT Act.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)renewal of the Patriot Act coming up in a few years, I agree it's high time to either repeal or severely restrict it.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)all spying laws from the Bush era. They were passed in a era of fear.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)High tech COINTELPRO.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)
Historic NY
(37,457 posts)from the millions & millions of phones in the urban area who was with Occupy. Every phone is capable of being monitored, as long as it has GPS, uses 911 or e-911 or a variety of installed apps. If the government isn't data mining then your okay with the thousands of companies that do it too.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)"I don't think we have the capability or the personnel to spy on all phone calls."
Oh, how wrong you are.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)http://www.themediaconsortium.com/reporting/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/affidavit-bp-final.pdf
My name is Babak Pasdar, President and CEO of Bat Blue Corporation. I have given this affidavit to
Thomas Devine, who has identified himself as the legal director of the Government Accountability
Project, without any threats, inducements or coercion.
I have been a technologist in the computer and computer security industry for the past nineteen years
and am a "Certified Ethical Hacker" (E-Commerce Consultants International Council.) I have worked
with many enterprise organizations, telecommunications carriers, as well as small and medium sized
organizations in consulting, designing, implementing, troubleshooting, and managing security systems.
This statement is to make a record ofmy concerns about the privacy implications for our society from
what I personally witnessed at a major telecommunications carrier, as summarized below.
What I know:
• I know I saw a circuit that everyone called the "Quantico Circuit."
• I know that all other sites had store numbers or affiliate numbers. The "Quantico Circuit" was
the only site being migrated that had such a unique name.
• I know that it was a third party connecting to the client's network via the "Quantico Circuit."
• I know everyone was uncomfortable talking about it.
• I know that connecting a third party to your network core with no access control is against all
standard security protocols, and would fail almost any compliance standard.
• 1 know that I was a trusted resource. During the project, I at all times had access and control
over the communications to the most sensitive of the organization's systems. This included
their sales applications, billing systems, text messaging and mobile internet access, including email
and web. I even had a client badge for entry to the building and access to facilities.
• I know the client had Network VCRs situated at various locations throughout their data centers.
These devices collected and recorded all network communications and had the capacity to store
them for days, possibly weeks.
• I know that many of the organization's branch offices and affiliate systems did not have that
unfettered access, because I instituted the controls.
What is likely, based on normal industry practice:
• A third party had access to one or more systems within the organization.
• The third party could connect to one or more of the client's systems. This would include the
billing system, fraud detection system, text messaging, web applications. Moreover, Internet
communications between a mobile phone and other Internet systems may be accessed.
• The client could connect to one or more of the third party's systems.
• The client's Data and Cell networks are interconnected.
• It is unlikely that any logging was enabled for any access to the Quantico circuit, because the
client's technical experts suggested that this was not enabled. They were tentative in even
discussing the subject. Even if logging was enabled the logging system was so inappropriately
sized that it was useless.
What is possible due to consistency with known facts but for which I don't have proof:
• The third party may be able to access the billing system to find information on a particular
person. This information may include their billing address, phone number(s), as well as the
numbers and information of other people on their plan. Other information could also include
any previous numbers that the person or others on their plan called, and the outside numbers
who have called the people on the plan.
• The third party may be able to identify the Electronic Security Number (ESN) of the plan
member's phones. This is a unique identifier that distinguishes each mobile device on the
carrier's network.
• With the ESN information and access to the fraud detection systems, a third party can locate or
track any particular mobile device. The person's call patterns and location can be trended and
analyzed.
• With the ESN, the third party could tap into any and all data being transmitted from any
particular mobile device. This would include Internet usage, e-mails, web, file transfers, text
messages and access to any remote applications.
• It also would be possible in real-time to tap into any conversation on any mobile phone
supported by the carrier at any point.
• It would be possible for the third party to access the Network VCR devices and collect a variety
of information en masse. The Network VCR collects all communications between two systems
indiscriminately. It would then archive this information making it available for retrieval on demand.
The third party could access the Network VCR systems and collect all data
communications for single mobile device such as text messaging, Internet access, e-mail, web
access, etc. over some period of minutes, hours, days or weeks. The same can be done for
communications of multiple, many or even all mobile devices for some period of minutes,
hours, days or weeks.
• Even if the client did not provide specific login and access for the third party to one or more of
their systems, without any access controls it is possible for the third party to leverage
vulnerabilities to "compromise" the client systems and obtain control or collect sensitive
information.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)makes you wonder what we'll learn in the coming days.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Enablers are part of the problem.
Iggo
(47,584 posts)
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)So likely both parties are fully aware this has been going on since the Bush Era.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Reid/McConnell
Boehner/Pelosi
Mike Rogers / Dutch Ruppersberger
Diane Feinstein / Saxby Chamblis
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)exonerated all the Big Communications Corps who had been spying on the American which, when this country was a Democracy, USED to be against the law. When the spying by Telephone Corps was revealed it was a SCANDAL. See how far down the slope we have gone since then? So much of a scandal that customers, under the THEN law, were entitled to monetary settlements. I, eg, was notified that the law permitted me to receive at least $1,000 as compensation. Or of course we all had the right to sue.
And then, our Representatives, in order to save the Telecoms, passed the FISA Bill making their crimes legal, RETROACTIVELY.
And we still think they are working for us!!
Obama of course had initially been outspokenly and eloquently opposed to such a bill, being a Constitutional lawyer and a Democratic candidate for president. Until the vote came up. Then he switched sides. That nearly lost him the election. But people like me, an Obama supporter who was shocked by his betrayal on that vote, would never have supported anyone who voted for Bush's war, so we had no other choice than to support him, but with far less enthusiasm and a lot more awareness of just how bad things had become in this country.
Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #47)
guyton This message was self-deleted by its author.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)When Lindsay Graham says he supports something, it's generally a good reason for concern. As far as I can tell at this stage, Ron Wyden is the only person who deserves a pass.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)committee.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)you aren't a sentient being- to indulge in your language.
The expanded FISA Amendment Act can be laid at their doorstop. So can the 2012 extension of said Act.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I see that the GOP is already defending the NSA's actions, which in itself is a reason for concern. Of course the Congress is complicit, and worthy of nothing but scorn.
rpannier
(24,349 posts)Or do they get a pass
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I wrote it, and it's not real friendly toward the President.
brewens
(13,640 posts)have prevented 9/11. They had everything they needed already. All they had to do was their jobs!
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
BrainDrain
(244 posts)an abomination, whatever you want to call it.
We have NO-ONE else to blame but ourselves.
JEB
(4,748 posts)those that release any of theirs.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I feel the same way about the 'important people' which is why I don't see the hysteria over Whistle Blowers reporting wrong doing.
JEB
(4,748 posts)Domestic Security
Assassination
Attack
Domestic security
Drill
Exercise
Cops
Law enforcement
Authorities
Disaster assistance
Disaster management
DNDO (Domestic Nuclear
Detection Office)
National preparedness
Mitigation
Prevention
Response
Recovery
Dirty bomb
Domestic nuclear detection
Emergency management
Emergency response
First responder
Homeland security
Maritime domain awareness
(MDA)
National preparedness
initiative
Militia
Shooting
Shots fired
Evacuation
Deaths
Hostage
Explosion (explosive)
Police
Disaster medical assistance
team (DMAT)
Organized crime
Gangs
National security
State of emergency
Security
Breach
Threat
Standoff
SWAT
Screening
Lockdown
Bomb (squad or threat)
Crash
Looting
Riot
Emergency Landing
Pipe bomb
Incident
Facility
HAZMAT & Nuclear
Hazmat
Nuclear
Chemical spill
Suspicious package/device
Toxic
National laboratory
Nuclear facility
Nuclear threat
Cloud
Plume
Radiation
Radioactive
Leak
Biological infection (or
event)
Chemical
Chemical burn
Biological
Epidemic
Hazardous
Hazardous material incident
Industrial spill
Infection
Powder (white)
Gas
Spillover
Anthrax
Blister agent
Chemical agent
Exposure
Burn
Nerve agent
Ricin
Sarin
North Korea
Health Concern + H1N1
Outbreak
Contamination
Exposure
Virus
Evacuation
Bacteria
Recall
Ebola
Food Poisoning
Foot and Mouth (FMD)
H5N1
Avian
Flu
Strain
Quarantine
H1N1
Vaccine
Salmonella
Small Pox
Plague
Human to human
Human to Animal
Influenza
Center for Disease Control
(CDC)
Drug Administration (FDA)
Public Health
Toxic
Agro Terror
Tuberculosis (TB)
Tamiflu
Norvo Virus
Epidemic
Agriculture
Listeria
Symptoms
Mutation
Resistant
Antiviral
Wave
Pandemic
Infection
Water/air borne
Sick
Swine
Pork World Health Organization
(WHO) (and components)
Viral Hemorrhagic Fever
E. Coli
Infrastructure Security
Infrastructure security
Airport
CIKR (Critical Infrastructure & Key Resources)
AMTRAK
Collapse
Computer infrastructure
Communications
infrastructure
Telecommunications
Critical infrastructure
National infrastructure
Metro
WMATA
Airplane (and derivatives)
Chemical fire
Subway
BART
MARTA
Port Authority
NBIC (National
Biosurveillance Integration
Center)
Transportation security
Grid
Power
Smart
Body scanner
Electric
Failure or outage
Black out
Brown out
Port
Dock
Bridge
Cancelled
Delays
Service disruption
Power lines
Southwest Border Violence
Drug cartel
Violence
Gang
Drug
Narcotics
Cocaine
Marijuana
Heroin
Border
Mexico
Cartel
Southwest
Juarez
Sinaloa
Tijuana
Torreon
Yuma
Tucson
Decapitated
U.S. Consulate
Consular
El Paso
Fort Hancock
San Diego
Ciudad Juarez
Nogales
Sonora
Colombia
Mara salvatrucha
MS13 or MS-13
Drug war
Mexican army
Methamphetamine
Cartel de Golfo
Gulf Cartel
La Familia
Reynosa
Nuevo Leon
Narcos
Narco banners (Spanish
equivalents)
Los Zetas
Shootout
Execution
Gunfight
Trafficking
Kidnap
Calderon
Reyosa
Bust
Tamaulipas
Meth Lab
Drug trade
Illegal immigrants
Smuggling (smugglers)
Matamoros
Michoacana
Guzman
Arellano-Felix
Beltran-Leyva
Barrio Azteca
Artistic Assassins
Mexicles
New Federation
Terrorism
Terrorism
Al Qaeda (all spellings)
Terror
Attack
Iraq
Afghanistan
Iran
Pakistan
Agro
Environmental terrorist
Eco terrorism
Conventional weapon
Target
Weapons grade
Dirty bomb
Enriched
Nuclear
Chemical weapon
Biological weapon
Ammonium nitrate
Improvised explosive device
IED (Improvised Explosive
Device)
Abu Sayyaf
Hamas
FARC (Armed Revolutionary
Forces Colombia)
IRA (Irish Republican Army)
ETA (Euskadi ta Askatasuna)
Basque Separatists
Hezbollah
Tamil Tigers
PLF (Palestine Liberation
Front)
PLO (Palestine Liberation
Organization
Car bomb
Jihad
Taliban
Weapons cache
Suicide bomber
Suicide attack
Suspicious substance
AQAP (AL Qaeda Arabian
Peninsula)
AQIM (Al Qaeda in the
Islamic Maghreb)
TTP (Tehrik-i-Taliban
Pakistan)
Yemen
Pirates
Extremism
Somalia
Nigeria
Radicals
Al-Shabaab
Home grown
Plot
Nationalist
Recruitment
Fundamentalism
Islamist
Weather/Disaster/Emergency
Emergency
Hurricane
Tornado
Twister
Tsunami
Earthquake
Tremor
Flood
Storm
Crest
Temblor
Extreme weather
Forest fire
Brush fire
Ice
Stranded/Stuck
Help
Hail
Wildfire
Tsunami Warning Center
Magnitude
Avalanche
Typhoon
Shelter-in-place
Disaster
Snow
Blizzard
Sleet
Mud slide or Mudslide
Erosion
Power outage
Brown out
Warning
Watch
Lightening
Aid
Relief
Closure
Interstate
Burst
Emergency Broadcast System
Cyber Security
Cyber security
Botnet
DDOS (dedicated denial of
service)
Denial of service
Malware
Virus
Trojan
Keylogger
Cyber Command
2600
Spammer
Phishing
Rootkit
Phreaking
Cain and abel
Brute forcing
Mysql injection
Cyber attack
Cyber terror
Hacker
China
Conficker
Worm
Scammers
Social media
PrestonLocke
(217 posts) 
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)are they going to actually say "as soon as we attach the detonator we are going to put the dirty bomb on the bridge"?
wouldn't it be more like "when sally gets home we are going to the birthday party"?
"You hear that ya dang hayseeds, we're using codenames."
Brilliant!
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)Thank you.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And right on the mark.
Robb
(39,665 posts)I'm infinitely more upset about privately held companies collecting our personal data than I could ever be about government doing it.
I'm Upset about both. But government I can perhaps do something about. I've not the money to affect corporations, who likely have more extensive profiles of me and my habits than the government could manage with a thousand years of wiretaps.
Government, on some level, at least believes it has my best interests at heart, even when it's wrong. Corporations only want to keep me alive enough to send wealth their way.
Response to Robb (Reply #23)
Name removed Message auto-removed
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)and you base that assessment on what? I certainly don't see that or believe it.
Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #35)
Name removed Message auto-removed
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Response to hrmjustin (Reply #96)
Name removed Message auto-removed
DLevine
(1,788 posts)
mike_c
(36,281 posts)It DEFINED the difference between life in a free society and life in a dictatorship. Guess it doesn't, anymore. Welcome to the panopticon.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Into the crapper hole.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)We used to have an evil boogeyman to compare ourselves to. Now we don't, and anything goes. They can define "freedom" any way they want.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)nature is the same all over. To think that we would never sink to that level without constant vigilance and an very informed population, was the height of arrogance, an ignorant sense of superiority. We are so convinced of our superiority it has become our downfall. And that too is not unique. We are not the first to be so completely blinded by our own sense of superiority.
GeorgeGist
(25,326 posts)
Eric Blair would be surprised at how easily we gave up our rights, and became proles for Big 'Bama.
Lily Tomlin was so spot on, with her "I try to be cynical, but it's so hard to keep up."
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)think
(11,641 posts)
Gore1FL
(21,164 posts)I'm just not shocked by it.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I'm still angry about it, but I'm not surprised. And somewhere behind all of that, I'm disappointed that I'm not surprised, even though I knew better.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)People who you voted for are responsible for implementing this. And it's gone way too far for them to turn back now.
I'd rather confine my outrage to things I can actually do something about.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I reject that notion completely.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)This was all set in motion by the passage of the fucking USA PATRIOT Act which IIRC passed the senate with only one dissenting vote. A lot of Democrats voted for it in the house as well.
But I think it goes back even further and that was just an excuse to do what they have wanted to do probably since the '30's. And I don't know about you but I always assumed they could listen in on my phone calls whether they were doing it legally or not.
Yes it's out of control now but apparently not enough of us were screaming loud enough in 2001 to overcome the paranoia that seemed to infect the entire country.
I don't like it either but it's gone beyond the point of no return. And things I can't change I no longer worry about.
Of course you don't have to shut up. Just don't let your fear of it dominate your life.
Pisces
(5,602 posts)You forgot to add this to your list. I don't give Obama a pass, but I am not dumb enough to think it just started. The facts are
that we are just finding out about it.
Its the same with the drone program. As if the CIA didn't assisinate people all the time. The only difference is that the general
public didn't know about it.
I guess your rules should include see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. As long as you can claim plausible ignorance you
are A ok with spying and killing?
There is nothing new under the sun. THis stuff has been going on and will continue to go on. Back to ancient times there has been
spying and poisoning of our enemies. I think a history lesson is in order. Here is another trite saying for you:
Past is Prologue.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)If it's not glaringly obvious to you that I'm aware the Bush Administration did the same, let me make it clear: I AM. As to the remainder of your post which attempts to blame-shift to me (being ok with killing and spying) and the Bush administration (they started it), I refer you back to the OP. You're a part of the problem.
Pisces
(5,602 posts)It has been going on since Bush and selectively as long as we have had phones. The CIA has done things illegally in the name of protecting us since its inception. The US can and will continue to do things and justify them with the explanation of National Safety. No President will do differently.
Call me jaded, but history tells us everything about what choices leaders make and what they think they have to do to maintain power and dominance. The US will not relinquish its power position and they will do whatever they deem necessary. Hello Machiavelli.
Pholus
(4,062 posts)you'd know that this issue was ALWAYS here. Poindexter. TIA.
For some reason, it became uncool to talk about it in 2009 and draws a lot of scorn from some people.
Even accusations of being a right wing paranoid (twice today for me in fact).
Never got called a right wing paranoid when Bush was doing it.
What changed about the issue?
idwiyo
(5,113 posts)peace13
(11,076 posts)The travesty is that some are just waking up to this. The NSA and its power grab was * / Shooter invented. Many of us have marched, called , and written about this for years.
Really, we were lied into wars, and bankrupted by our own government, You do realize that if you move more than $10,000 your own bank will report that to Homeland Security. You now have to show ID everywhere. All of this has been in place for years.
We are prisoners in our own country that is for sure. The distraction that the NSA is spying on us is just that. Look for the other hand to see what is new.
Many of us have been very concerned for years and continue to speak out even in these desperate times.
Edited to say, I am not shifting blame , I am imploring you to regard this 'news' as a total distraction and urge you to look for what they do not want you to see today!
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But in 2013, the ultimate responsibility rests with President Obama.
840high
(17,196 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)"I am imploring you to regard this 'news' as a total distraction...."
So....we should care deeply, and downplay this as much as possible!
You can't even parody the apologism anymore...
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)that's what I think half of us are anymore, just fans.
peace13
(11,076 posts)I think the Patriot Act *ucks but some dangerous people put it into law many years ago. Do you remember the reports about NSA and rooms full of monitoring equipment. 60 Minutes reporting on phone company employees with full knowledge of the extent of monitoring. Hey it was 100 % then so now is it 200%. Right! It is all bad but it encompasses organizations well beyond Obama. He may love it, I don't know. The fact remains, it is the law. They can and will do it because no president in history has ever given power back. That too was discussed in 2001.
In fact this has nothing to do with Obama when you look at it. It has to do with a society being taken hostage while the victims looked on and did nothing, for the most part. If you weren't on a corner during the * debacle you really shouldn't be judging those who were.If you didn't do something to stop the Patriot Act from becoming law then really you have no beef. Except for the fact that Obama is responsible for all of your ills.
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)Where's that popcorn thingy?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Hear, hear! Thank you for the pre-emptive dispatch of the shameless propaganda and the strong, much-needed declaration of what is really important here.
think_critically
(118 posts)The outrage is not unwarranted but why is there no outrage regarding the fact that verizon keeps that information to begin with. Shouldn't they just destroy it after a billing cycle. Do you honestly believe that they have this huge treasure trove of information and don't do anything with it. I can guarantee you that they do. They probably sell it to the highest bidder. The information that the government has pales in comparison to what businesses have. At the least the government has to get court approval to do this. Spare me the outrage. This has nothing to do with Obama. He'll screw the PR up with this just like he does everything else but from a practial matter, anybody who uses their smart phone on a daily basis or does any kind of google search does not give a damn about their privacy. Point blank period.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Thank you.
You're not going to find me defending Verizon, or AT&T, or any other mega corporation. They're not my friends, and they're part of the problem too. However, your "point blank period" declarative in no way makes your claim about people not caring about privacy any more valid. Technology will continue to allow more and more intrusive behavior by our government against us. We need a non-corrupt government to protect us from these intrusions; we don't need our government doing precisely the opposite with the willing help of telecom companies.
think_critically
(118 posts)People get outraged when they hear a story like this but here's the irony. We have no problem sacrificing our privacy in the name of expedience and convenience i.e. using your smart phone, using google maps, searching for random stuff on the internet etc. But we have a huge problem when it comes to giving up our security in the name of national security. Mind you, I"m not naive enough to think that the government is always on the up and up but I damn sure don't trust google or any of these other companies to do the right thing. In a digital world all of your information is stored some where in a database and somebody will have access to it. Banks already sell information about your buying habits to all sorts of people. At the end of the day, the privacy ship has sailed and we all can act outraged if we want to but we are the one's who have been complicit.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I'm blaming the NSA and the President. It so happens that I've (reluctantly) given consent to a telecom company to have this information about me. I have not given consent for the government to have this information in the furtherance of some scheme to "protect" me.
Orwell didn't dream big enough.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)They have the full force of the federal government bearing down on them.
I don't want to make this about Obama, but to say it has nothing to do with him is just wrong. He's the head of the executive branch. If he ordered the NSA to stop it, they'd have to stop it. He supports this to the hilt.
jbond56
(403 posts)I'm glad your awake now but this is 100% legal and has been for a decade.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Yes, it is. What we've long suspected has now been PROVEN. Do you see how that has some significance? I've been awake, and I'm not licking the boot that wants to step on my neck.
jbond56
(403 posts)Its "breaking" because they cant make other scandals stick. Its legal through 2017.
In the future we will all have 15 minutes of privacy.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)the GOP already thinks it doesn't go far enough: now all that remains is to get the Dems behind it by having the GOP squall about it--hypocrisy generating new hypocrisy, like yeast
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022957733
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)How surprised should I pretend to be? Remember the direct mining out of the AT&T room in San Fran?
Anybody who thought that genie was going back....
leftyladyfrommo
(18,874 posts)You just have to figure that nothing is private unless you are standing in the middle of nowhere talking to someone face to face. And even then there might be a satellite watching.
I just figure that if it's e-mail or cell phone don't say anything that is not completely generic.
Drives me crazy. And I don't have anything going on that anyone would care about.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Thank you for an outstanding post and thread, DisgustipatedinCA.
Something IS wrong in the United States of America. And those going along with the destruction of the Bill of Rights ARE part of the problem.
still_one
(92,489 posts)who voted for it at the time.
The problem I see is that most progressives will find it wrong no matter who did it, but the MSM forgets the past, and only points out how bad it is under a "Democrat".
In most of the stories they also conveniently forgot to say this is perfectly legal, because they along with Congress gave bush a free pass. Which is another reason they do not mention it because they dropped the ball on this, they also helped push us into an illegal war which killed over a million people, and cost billions. They didn't do their job.
GoCubsGo
(32,099 posts)After all, the ones who originated this shit were the ones who had their minions parroting, "If you have nothing to hide, you don't need to worry." Now all of a sudden it's a bad thing? It will be fun to watch these assholes tie themselves in knots over this. Are they more opposed to everything Obama is for than they are for the government snooping they started? I swear, sometimes I think Obama is acting like them on purpose, because that's the only way he'll change anything with these intransigent clowns, who oppose every damn thing he does.
still_one
(92,489 posts)
RainDog
(28,784 posts)
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Not sure what else we can do. writing to our congress critters doesn't seem to do much on any issue.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)When they get constant marches and strikes, preferably national strikes. It is as it always has been
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)I have been utterly sickened by a whole lot of what I have been reading here -- HERE , at a Liberal democratic site! -- be it about spying on US citizens/businesses or freedom of speech. 
The LAST thing this country needs is more sheep, even if they have a "D" after their name.
frylock
(34,825 posts)
mn9driver
(4,429 posts)The media would right now be busy laying total responsibility for Boston, and every other domestic terror incident at the door of the White House.
I was against the USA Patriot Act in 2001. My Congressman, Marty Sabo, voted against it. I praised him for that. On the Senate side, only Russ Feingold voted against it. Even Paul Wellstone voted for it. Americans gave up their privacy willingly in 2001, out of fear. They were warned by a few people that it was a really bad idea. It didn't matter.
This is not going away. Ever.
siligut
(12,272 posts)Hardly new revelations to many of us and still just the tip of the iceberg.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center
The Utah Data Center will gather data from intercepted satellite communications and underwater ocean cables. Analysts will analyze, decipher, and store the information for the purpose of spotting potential national security threats. The facility will be heavily fortified with backup generators and powerful equipment to keep the vast computer network cool.
The Utah Data Center, also known as the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center,[1] is a data storage facility for the United States Intelligence Community that is designed to be a primary storage resource capable of storing data on the scale of yottabytes (1 yottabyte = 1 trillion terabytes, or 1 quadrillion gigabytes).[2][3] Its purpose — as the name implies — is to support the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI), though its precise mission is secret.[4] The National Security Agency, which will lead operations at the facility, is the executive agent for the Director of National Intelligence.[5] It is located at Camp Williams, near Bluffdale, Utah, between Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake.
The data center is alleged to be able to capture "all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Internet searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter'."[2] According to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, the federal government is legally prohibited from collecting, storing, analyzing, or disseminating the content of the communications of US persons, whether inside or outside of the United States, unless authorized by an individual warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.[6]
The planned structure is 1 million or 1.5 million square feet[3][7][8] and it is projected to cost from $1.5 billion[9][10][11] to $2 billion when finished in September 2013.[2][3] One report suggested that it will cost another $2 billion for hardware, software, and maintenance.[3] The completed facility is expected to have a power demand of 65 megawatts, costing about $40 million per year.[2][3]
tblue
(16,350 posts)is exactly the problem. We have to oppose him when he is wrong. When you shout down progressive voices, the only voice you hear is conservative. I can't stand it. Thanks for a brilliant post. This is messed up.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)them collecting data on Americans. I'd be more upset if they were also intercepting content.
I think we should repeal the Patriot act and return the NSA to its original mission.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But I suspect that neither you nor I would/will be surprised to find that the NSA is doing exactly that, to one degree or another.
How's life in Lexington treating you?
jbond56
(403 posts)Content is broadcast for free via radio waves. All they have to do is record it.
alfredo
(60,078 posts)Lexington has been wonderful. The pollen has eased up and the humidity has ramped up.
since we've elected a good Liberal as mayor, the town has come alive with art, music, breweries, and people friendly projects. All of those have created jobs.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Because they said so right? Do you think they would invest tens of millions of dollars for secret facilities to monitor communications while not monitoring content?
jbond56
(403 posts)Say you record all this content that is freely floating in the air. Then you take the meta data provided by the legal warrant. Know you indexed content that is easy to access. Nobody would ever do that.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... to protecting us in cyberspace, and that unlike our private property where there is a physical space owned/controlled by us that circles the private space of our houses, etc., the government chooses to believe there is nothing that protects them or corporations from claiming the rights to spy on your private information stored on other people's computers.
Ask yourself why employers are forcing applicants to turn over facebook passwords to get hired. This has been fought back at the state level. I've been helping our state get legislation passed here to fight this.
Ask yourself why the IRS claims the right to look at all of your email on servers after it has been there for an arbitrary period of time or if it has been read.
Ask yourself why online backup firms like Carbonite are heavily advertising on both the left and right side of the aisle on talk radio outlets, and that they have a copy of your personal computer contents online where it is "no longer protected" by the physical boundaries of your home like it would be if you backed up your computer instead to a secondary disk in your house.
We need to pressure the congress, the president, and the courts to define yes or no whether the fourth amendment protects our privacy in virtual spaces, and if not, then push for a constitutional amendment for something that does and get a tech task force to define practical boundaries so that it can provide a good set of ground rules that allows for technical progress in the future, but sets rules so that our privacy doesn't get abused in that space. The spirit of the 4th amendment needs to be made law today to protect us the way our forefathers would have wanted, and shouldn't be ignored due to "technicalities" the way that so many powermongers in our elites want to today.
This should be possible, as there are situations where the PTB want others owning a piece of information being stored on computers by others when it suits them. An example of this is copyright and patent law, where they go after people that "pirate" copies of music, video, and computer software, mostly because powerful interests own these properties and want their ownership protected, even if they are sitting on someone else's computers. It would seem that if they own information on others' computers, etc. that allows them to take action on how people use that info, that we as individuals should be able to make the same claims of private information stored on others' computers as well that we should be allowed to "own" in the same way.
It is the fourth amendment protections or lack thereof that is the core of all of these different online privacy abuses that needs to be fixed to tackle them more constructively rather than trying to go out and taking on each issues separately and losing each time to the PTB.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Some people have said something to the effect of, "I agree, but where do we go from here?" I don't know the answer to that question. I believe that large parts of the Federal government are corrupt, and that the very few who want to fight for us are precluded from doing so by secrecy built into the PATRIOT Act. Is difficult not to conclude that our government sees all of us as potential enemies.
suffragette
(12,232 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)You're gonna be in twubbul!
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Thanks for the much-needed levity.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)chervilant
(8,267 posts)michigandem58
(1,044 posts)when she screws up some good old fashioned uninformed panic with facts. Damn her.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)michigandem58
(1,044 posts)probably don't know...
What kind of information is being gathered.
How it is processed or reviewed.
When it started.
It's legal basis.
What kind of congressional and judicial oversight is involved.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)trials or convictions and that's okay now? We should just trust the CIA and our Government without question when they assassinate people whose names we don't even know, let alone what they are supposed to have done?
If there is a legal basis for the Death Penalty, in Democracies governments don't generally just kill people without informing the people why they got to that phase of our judicial system, (yes we still have one believe it or not) without the public learning what that basis is.
If Congress is overseeing the assassinations, that should be public information. I have never heard of Representatives of the People, which is what Congress is supposed to be, keeping something as important as the taking of a life, secret.
We know that large numbers of children are dying in these attacks. Can someone explain why we are killing children? I don't feel any safer when a child is murdered, in fact I feel less safe. And I don't feel very confident in any Government that kills people in secret and just tells the people 'trust us'.
We have gone further now than even Bush dared to go. Killing US citizens without any evidence as to why they deserved the DP.
And what possible legal basis is there in a democracy for administering the DP without charges, without trial and without even any evidence of a crime being presented to the people in whose name these killings are being executed?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Hair on fire and all, I'll run circles around you. Let's do this thing.
michigandem58
(1,044 posts)Start Googling then fill in the blanks.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I'm thoroughly apprised of everything you mentioned in your post, and I wrote the OP with that full knowledge. If you have something specific to level, do so. If you don't, great, but stop wasting time.
michigandem58
(1,044 posts)But on the off chance you did, it would have been nice to see some substance that would make you more believeable.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)And now you're telling me I'm a liar. Post your fucking question or shut the hell up.
michigandem58
(1,044 posts)What kind of information is being gathered?
How it is processed or reviewed?
When did it start?
What is it's legal basis?
What kind of congressional and judicial oversight is involved?
Now get Googling!
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)1. CDR
2. That information isn't available to any of us
3. 2002
4. It was illegal under Bush. Congress made it retroactively legal. It's still very immoral and unethical.
5. Congressional: Intelligence Cmte & House & Senate leadership. Judicial: FISA Court, which approved every single request last year, around 1600.
6. Typed on an ipad extemporaneously, no peek, and I sure as fuck don't count on the likes of you to vet my level of knowledge. An apology on your part is in order, but I don't believe you posess the necessary integrity to get it done.
michigandem58
(1,044 posts)that I can't know how many of those you got yourself. If so, pretty good.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)
Dustlawyer
(10,499 posts)just watch how quickly this will be used against them. This is to protect Wall Street, corporations, and the 1%. Mission creep of having access to this valuable intel!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Dustlawyer
(10,499 posts)happen again. If everyone here at DU would recognize that Democratic politicians are not always your friends, that even Obama had to owe "favors" for the campaign money he received, maybe they would start demanding COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM (CCFR)! Then you would really see some domestic spying in earnest!
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)It's how they kettle protesters now.
fjlovato
(29 posts)If you think you are not as stupid as conservatives, you are the problem. Until you name someone who has been hurt by this 'information gathering" keep your mouth shut. Liberalism is a philosophy of individual rights but these rights are not meant to keep the government from getting information to keep us safe. Such information cannot be used in court against YOU but can be used to identify someone who is planning activities to harm us. After finding such activity, the government has to establish other information that can be used in court. Untie your shorts!
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You have to be at least as tall as Zippy to get on the roller coaster. Sorry.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I guess it is now quaint too.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)this kind of massive data gathering is very, very problematic with regard to discovering terrorist plots. As the database of collected information grows larger and larger, a huge number of false positive matches (i.e. correlations of data that appear to reveal a terrorist plot, but in fact do not) swamp the very small number of actual positive matches. Our investigative agencies thus spend the vast majority of their time and resources analyzing and discarding the false positives. Since time and resources are finite, the larger database actually makes it harder to identify threats.
However, this type of data gathering is very helpful in tracking troublesome political movements (Tea Party, Occupy, Etc.) and political opponents.
KG
(28,753 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But I now have proof of the call detail records, and only informed speculation about the actual content. I imagine I'd have been skewered if I had added speculation (no matter how reasonable) about that for which no solid proof exists in the public domain.
KG
(28,753 posts)apologies for any confusion.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I did want to make clear that I agree with you, but that I left that out of the OP for cause. Thanks for your post.
klebean
(284 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 7, 2013, 01:09 PM - Edit history (1)
The core issue in this matter is the fear this data will be used by totalitarian regimes, thus it's naive - if not a somewhat precious notion - that in this day and age we (the People of the USA) should not engage in a cold war-type race to outrun the advances of much less democratic nations.
For example, consider the (wealthy) radical Wahhabi movement in Africa coupled with the explosion of cell phone use/ownership in Africa...obviously the threat doesn't end with the death of leaders like Osama in an age of rapid advances in communication technology.
(The context of the quote below is in regard to cryptanalysis from this excellent and comprehensive article published over a year ago.)
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/
"These goals have considerable support in Congress. Last November a bipartisan group of 24 senators sent a letter to President Obama urging him to approve continued funding through 2013 for the Department of Energy’s exascale computing initiative (the NSA’s budget requests are classified). They cited the necessity to keep up with and surpass China and Japan. “The race is on to develop exascale computing capabilities,” the senators noted. The reason was clear: By late 2011 the Jaguar (now with a peak speed of 2.33 petaflops) ranked third behind Japan’s “K Computer,” with an impressive 10.51 petaflops, and the Chinese Tianhe-1A system, with 2.57 petaflops."
If the link I put in my post doesn't work this time, it's an article entitled "The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)" at wired dot come
existentialist
(2,190 posts)I do think that the focus on precisely what NSA is snooping into at any given moment misses a larger point.
Phone records, internet messages (including everything posted here), who even knows how many records are constantly created on an ongoing basis.
The NSA (and numerous other agencies, companies, countries and individuals) have the capacity to access very large parts of those records at any time.
That is an even larger problem, of which we should, at a minimum, be constantly aware.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
locks
(2,012 posts)I have spent my morning writing to my Congressman, two Senators, and Obama of my outrage at the latest Orwellian tactics they are approving and using against our own citizens as well as against our "enemies." I worked hard to elect them because I believed they would protect our Constitution and all our civil rights. This "transparency" administration has been everything but transparent and instead of killing FISA as I hoped have renewed and expanded it beyond even policies dictatorships use. We knew this was happening; where were we? Our excuse that it would have been worse under another Bush and the Repugs is only that.
It is very, very difficult to speak truth to power, especially when our guys are in power or our jobs depend on the huge profits of the corporations, but how else do we explain to our grandchildren they are living in 1984?
Duer 157099
(17,742 posts)I would bet that this data is being used for financial gain somehow. Insider trading? How quaint.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Even though it looks like they are not within the NSAs mandate they still do it.
It's the government taking actions and hiding those actions from we the people. How can a democracy discuss our privacy issues when it's classified top secret and kept from us with a leak most likely being vigorously pursued and punished?
Can we trust our government?
Our laws, policies, and constitutional rights are not enough to keep them in line. What will?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Of all the things going on in this country and the world to be outraged about, of all the things that have the potential to harm me or other people or our planet significantly and directly, the government knowing who I call on the telephone just doesn't rise very high on the list. Yeah, it makes the list, but not even close to being in the top 10.
I'll save my real outrage and energy for more worthy causes.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)No 2 ways around it.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)
Blue Owl
(50,543 posts)n/t
KoKo
(84,711 posts)el scorcho
(58 posts)I will not donate another nickel of my money or spend any time canvassing on your behalf until the Patriot Act is repealed in total.
You want my support?
Earn it.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Have we no memories? It's not like we haven't known about this program for at least 7 years.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)pam4water
(2,916 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Destroy the malignant, shameless propaganda.
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)(ring a bell?)
Cha
(297,911 posts)a bell?
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)Not a satirical comment about a satirical character that once clearly deviated from the Democrats.
Edit: to remove the "GRRRR!!" factor
Cha
(297,911 posts)Kurovski
(34,655 posts)People want to pretend this shit is a soccer match and cheerlead, have at it.
Au rev-fucking-war!
Cha
(297,911 posts)It's a serious debate.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)the news content on cable and network television. Take each outlet in small bites, then contrast and compare. You'd be absolutely amazed at what you'll learn by doing that. For example, I read that many on DU never watch Fox because they don't consider them a valid news source. In contrast, I watch a bit of Fox every day. I *want* to know what the conservatives are thinking on any given day. What better way to get that pulse than listening to five minutes of Fox and friends. And let's be honest, I can do the same thing by watching MSNBC if I want the pulse of the left.
We do a dis-service to our intellect when we refuse to watch a specific show or commentator because of our political ideology.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)In the morning MSNBC is mostly right-wing conservative garbage. Any liberal/progressive thoughts or positions are delivered very ineffectively, if at all (think Hannity & Colmes).
The P.M. hours on MSNBC have become more and more lackluster as MSNBC's liberal voices seem to rally to crucify Republicans (which is easy to do) much more so than shining a spotlight on the problems we have within the Democratic Party. If the PM lineup serves to keep our nation divided on a partisan basis instead of illuminating the real problems we must surmount to even begin to reverse course, then MSNBC is serving the elite's interests quite well (unfortunately).
To my mind a liberal voice in today's America should entail much, much more than simply stating how badly the Republicans suck. That narrative is just not going to change many conservative hearts and minds.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)good, and then for some humorous liberalism, Stephanie Miller right after him. And you're right, you have to go to the evening hours on MSNBC to get the opinion based shows. On Fox, it's pretty much all day long.
TheKentuckian
(25,034 posts)
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)Fuckin A.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)With all this snooping and spying and culling of all of our info we will not be able to stop them ....and I suspect that is their goal.
Initech
(100,124 posts)They own the Tea Party and the Heritage Foundation, ALEC, and most legislation making groups. If they get their greedy mitts on Tribune Corp - they will be full blown dictators. 
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)First, you rock for posting this and it is SO ON POINT, I want to give you a (((CYBERHUG)))). Second, I would LOVE to post this over at my blog Independent Underground News & Talk, if the Original Poster (O.P.) gives me permission!! Please let me know and you ROCK again.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)So let's get this straight.
1. There is a big giant corporation that has records on who you called up and who called you up. Not what you said, but who called who.
2. They use these records for all sorts of purposes. Billing you for that is just the beginning.
3. A government agency, whose entire operation is secret, also looks into these records to try to track down some specific behavior related to terrorism. Nothing more. It's so secret, people didn't even know about it until now. The NSA isn't going to reveal how often you called that phone-sex hotline, though you may start getting fetish ads from Verizon for some mysterious reason.
Whaaaahhhh! The big-mean-government got a bit of information that the innocent mega-corporation had all along!
Cue the NAZI comparisons. It's just like millions of people being rounded up and murdered! Because U.S. government is always bad and mega-corporations are angels.
That about it? Sounds like. We all believe in republican framing now, apparently.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
/ Seriously guys, don't you outrage-a-holics have anything better to do with your time?
// This is one of these cases where the extreme left really sounds like the extreme right.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Got it.
It's not "a bit of information." And there is a difference between the corporation and the government having it.
Fail (at whatever it is).
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)But I'll give you bonus points for at least attempting to actually argue the question.
1. The "bit of information" is literally which phone number called which phone number and when. That is a stunningly small amount of information compared to the actual conversations themselves. (Which can also be subpoenaed, in some cases even retroactively.)
2. There absolutely is a difference between a corporation and the government having the information: unlike the corporation, the government has absolutely no economic incentive to misuse it. Glad you figured that one out.
3. Just FYI, although the Democrats are generally considered center-left, according to polling there are more self-described Conservatives in the Democratic party (13%) than there are self-described Very Liberal (10%) party members. You personally seem to have an issue with us, but we help you win elections.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Says the person who names himself after a tribes.
Like I'm not reality-based. Right...
"2. There absolutely is a difference between a corporation and the government having the information: unlike the corporation, the government has absolutely no economic incentive to misuse it. Glad you figured that one out. "
The government will misuse it because of other incentives. Glad you figured that out. The Founders did, too.
More fail. 
Mission statement, dude:
After more than a decade online, Democratic Underground still hosts the most active liberal discussion board on the Internet. We are an independent website funded by member subscriptions and advertising, and we have no affiliation with the Democratic Party.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)with by some of those 'conservatives' you mentioned who infiltrated the Democratic Party and revealed themselves when they could no longer hide their disdain for Democrats. Are you familiar with Daily Kos btw? Quite a few 'former Republicans' including its founder, posing as Dems made their appearances as soon as they roped in enough Liberals (most of whom left when they began to understand what was going on) back in the early days. They came armed with talking points (which made them stand out like sore thumbs) such as 'reality based community' and 'concern troll' etc etc, too lame to bother listing.
Conservative DO help us win elections, but not for the reasons you seem to think. They help because the current iteration of the Republican Party is so radical that even Republicans are scared of them and many have decided to become 'democrats'. The problem is they are trying to change the Dem Party and we of course will fight hard to make sure they do not. They have their own party which they are more than welcome to try to change, it badly needs changing, but THIS party is and always was, the party of the people, though thanks to the Third Way, it is fast becoming a corporate party.
Liberals are fierce fighters, always were. Which is why they are so feared by the 'right' and their corporate bosses. But up to recently liberals were willing to give some rope to their party hoping to see what was promised during the Bush years. Now of course liberals have learned some hard facts so you can expect to see a real battle for the Democratic Party. We were lax, due to the horrors of the Bush years, but we are no ready for action to make sure that this Party remains true to its ideals and we won't be as patient was we have been with elected officials who betray those who elected them.
Dems win because of their liberal base. Many sadly have left the party and are now Independents due to the influx of Third Wayers. That 13% of Conservatives you speak of will not make up for the exodus that is taking place of those who do the work to get Democrats in power, unless we can bring them back into the party. I disagree with them leaving, this is OUR party and they should stay and fight to keep this party from being taken over by 'conservatives' imho.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Not the reverse, which is what you seem to believe. I suggest you read up on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)something was invented for Karl Rove how despicable to use against Democrats. You seem to miss the point, that you just made my point. YOU used it here to insult Democrats with, did you not? My comment stands, I was around when this all began and witnessed the infiltration of this party first hand.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Then when I, without rancor, correct your unambiguously false and invented statement, you immediately try to pretend I was slamming Democrats with it instead. A hilariously illogical turnaround that ignores what was just said.
The truth is that "Proud Member of the Reality Based Community" has been my D.U. tagline practically since it was coined. I've applied it to every post I've made - ones that strong leftists in my party agreed with, along with ones they haven't.
So let me gently suggest that if you are feeling tweaked by that line, it's not because of me. It's because deep in your conscience a little voice is saying "I really shouldn't be pulling 'facts' out of my ass like Republicans and FOX news do".
Finally, since we're on the topic of fact-correction, let me explain to you that self-described conservatives haven't "infiltrated" the party. We've always been here. If you haven't noticed us, it might be because we don't go engaging in hysterical attention-seeking behavior, like for example in the D.U., making "A Democratic politician is LITERALLY HITLER/NAZI/FASCIST and I'm LEAVING THE PARTY OVER (minor quibble)" types of posts every two weeks.
Saying "reality based" isn't an insult to real Democrats because Democrats ARE the Reality Based party. Yes, we do have a handful of crackpots, but to quote Howard Dean speaking to a Republican panelist on Bill Maher, "You have about forty nine percent crackpots in your party, we have only about ten."
Try not to be a part of that ten.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)It is intended to be a slam against 'real democrats' and has been used that way for nearly ten years. It is intended to imply that the 'left' which be Democrats, are NOT reality based. It is a lame, childish 'talking point' better used to slam the far right with, which in ten years I have never seen it used for. Only to slam the 'left', the 'hippies' whatever that means and to me, I prefer people who use their OWN words, not regurgitated 'talking points' which are now associated with infiltrators in the Dem Party from the Republican Party. If you are not familiar with that history, you should be.
Your insinuation is clear, you have confirmed it with your 'don't be part of that ten' in a not so clever attempt to use that talking as it has always been used, to slam Real Democrats with.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)...with a good dollop of paranoia as well. The Real Democrats™, who are much different than plain old regular Democrats, are being slammed by quote-unquote 'talking points' which are now associated with infiltrators in the Dem Party from the Republican Party.
Ohmygod! Infiltrators! Hide the womyn and children! What would happen if one of these infiltrators married a Real Democrat™ and bred? The Zombie Apocalypse most assuredly.
Snark aside, Sabrina. Let me assure you that I don't assume every hard leftist is a crackpot. If someone wants to present a cogent, factually founded argument that, say, the U.S. should have Medicare for everybody, and that the inevitable disruptions as literally one sixth of the U.S. is being remade is something we could manage to win an election through... Well, I'll be happy to listen, though perhaps a bit skeptically, since things are always harder than they look politically. Hell, even in Canada, they hated the changeover for quite some time.
If, on the other hand you want to go screaming that President Obama is an evil Corporatist™, who has "sold us out" (by doing what he said he was going to do), that we're on the brink of becoming NAZI Germany, and that Real Democrats™ are being infiltrated and called hippies (hippies?!? that is so 1960s), well I'll just wince the same way that the remaining handful of Moderate/Liberal Republicans do whenever they see crazy-eyes Bachmann on stage or listen to Rush almost singlehandedly alienate an entire new generation to Republicans (thanks Rush! megadittos!!).
"Proud Member of the Reality Based Community" is a slam against crackpots. The Republican party is full of these crackpots. People who argue by assertion. Engage in mindless tribalism. Pull false "facts" out of their ass. Pretend that they're the arbiter of who is "Real" and who RINO. Spend more time attacking members of their own party for insufficient purity than they do the opposition. Lose elections. And when caught stating something that is 180 degrees opposite of established fact, instead of being the slightest bit embarrassed, double down on the wild unsubstantiated assertions, slathering more on top.
These are also characteristics that you have exhibited in this very thread. Not liberals. Not far left liberals. Not "Real Democrats™". You.
If you want to be effective in persuading people who do not already agree with you 100%, I am not "insinuating", I am explicitly saying that you would do far better to not sound like a crackpot.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
treestar
(82,383 posts)I posed the question below - what if the government wants it to prosecute Bush/Cheney or go after the banksters? 
Jonzey50
(2 posts)I couldn't have said it better myself. Weel done!
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)in the wall.
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,167 posts)So pressure Congress. Pressure the White House. But please don't give Republicans more reasons to vote for them.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Never disappeared, just from civilian sight. I bet the Mad Admiral is cackling away right now at some tidbit of information he just found on Senator X. This will never end, it will only get more intrusive.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Has anyone been damaged by it? Has it found terrorists? Nobody seems to want any facts on it.
It's not the 18th century anymore, it's an information age in which so much information is around it's like having none at all. The needle in the haystack is why it doesn't seem like it would even identify terrorists, much less obtain prosecution on ordinary crimes.
What if the government wants it to prosecute the Banksters? Then it's OK, right?
Why doesn't anyone have the least curiosity what the government thinks it is going to do with this information?
Red Mountain
(1,739 posts)SOMEBODY......wherever........if they try...........can invade my privacy.
I would never know.
The question becomes what they do with my private information.
many a good man
(5,997 posts)Nevertheless I will join the chorus expressing my outrage. I am shocked, shocked I tell you.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I agree that we're being shown something that an intelligent, interested person would have already concluded was in place. But, what else is going on that we're not focusing on?
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Yargle bargle Glen Greenwald's a libertarian stop "clutching your pearls" woof arf.
We're supposed to be smarter here.
SlimJimmy
(3,183 posts)quinnox
(20,600 posts) 
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)you're part of a different problem.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)you were warning us Liberals about, the Civil Liberties Union? THAT 'noise machine'? Frankly I always thought that the 'Noise Machine' was comprised of Right Wingers, not Liberals. You know, like Fox, who supported Bush's spying on Americans policies and never disagreed with him about anything. You have the distinction of being the first person on DU to call all Liberal journalism the 'Noise Machine'.
Btw, did you try to 'pop' Bush at any time, or is your current support for Government spying something new?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)And, what problem would THAT be? That nose ring doesn't FIT properly?
forestpath
(3,102 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)president of the United States could conceivably access the call records, that is, the records of who is called and how long of the opposing candidate and party.
That is a serious matter. That should not even be remotely possible.
840high
(17,196 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Okay ... Maybe I am part of the problem; but maybe someone can tell me ... without referencing some alex jones/infowars conspiracy theory, or that quaint Ben Franklin quote ... how the government having/seeing my phone records will affect my life?
Even if they use those records to trace who I have spoken with and for how long; even if they were to use those records to trace every website I have ever visited; even if they were to use that information to do everything preceding to everyone I have ever spoken with ... how will that affect my life? Or, if easier, how would that affect your life?
On the other hand, we DO know that surveillance of this nature has disrupted the plans of those intent on bring harm to us. And, we DO know what happens when we don't disrupt those plans.
So ... I guess my refusal to live in fear based on some abstract concept of "freedom" that, IMO, has not been impaired makes me part of some ill-defined problem. I'm good with that.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)no one is saying you have to live in fear. but if that doesn't fill you with outrage, then you should contact a physician.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)you concern is noted.
Especially, since that stuff is already available to anyone that wants to find it.
panader0
(25,816 posts)I have known for years that the police can and do listen to cell phone calls, for as long as there have been cell phones.
I don't like or condone spying but it is inevitable and unavoidable in this age.
Edgar Hoover....
Cha
(297,911 posts)doesn't make it so. You're "craven" I tell ya!!!111
Initech
(100,124 posts)One time I owned a dumbass in a debate who said that. I was like "OK then you won't mind telling me your full name, address, date of birth, mother's maiden name, and social security number." Shut that moron up real quick!
99Forever
(14,524 posts)There is NO excuse for any of it. None. Zero.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)If you are upset about this now you are way behind the curve. Look into Thin Thread, Trailblazer, Solar Wind... Go back and watch the 60Mintues story on this issue or how about the immunity given to comm's companies for their acquiescence to programs like this. This is nothing new it has been going on for yrs. The outrage here is that at the time Democracy Now or KO was bringing attention to these action most people were of the "if you don't have anything to hide what is the problem" opinion. After 9/11 Americans wanted more "security" well this is what that looks like.
Generic Brad
(14,276 posts)We knew this crap was happening when Bush was president. But we wait until now to get our panties in a bunch? No one complained this much when retired Admiral Poindexter worked with Cheney to get the contract for Total Information Awareness.
Not saying I like this, but this whole thing smells to me as part of the Republican campaign to discredit the Obama administration. Case in point - Sensenbrenner who pushed to make domestic spying legal as part of the Patriot Act is now one of the people screaming the loudest that we are being spied upon. No shit, Sensenbrenner.
DallasNE
(7,404 posts)Of course this smells of a Republican campaign to discredit the Obama administration. I point a finger in Jim DeMint's direction in a post just below this one. Sensenbrenner, DeMint -- two sides of the same coin.
DallasNE
(7,404 posts)That's right, forget about legislating and concentrate on scandals.
It looks like DeMint's plan is working to perfection. Drip, drip, drip.
The time for all of the hand wringing over snooping was a few months ago when the Patriot Act came up for renewal. Doing DeMint's bidding now is not helpful. Besides, none of this is new news, pointing to Republican mischief flowing from DeMint's marching orders.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)The same people whining about haters now whined about haters then. "I trust Obama!" got repeated a lot.
As it turns out some people only oppose the erosion of civil liberties if it's the other guy doing it. If it's our guy we'll spin and spin and spin.
DallasNE
(7,404 posts)Smelling a rat over disclosure of old news at this time hardly suggests taking the erosion of civil liberties lightly. My thrust has been over where was all of this outrage when the Patriot Act was renewed a few months ago. That is when a difference could have been made but, no, this conveniently is coming out now when it can serve no useful purpose other than to further DeMint's stated goal of Congress not legislating and instead go all in on scandal. Is there any wonder some of us smell a rat and call it to attention. By the way, nobody is suggesting that this isn't within the scope of the Patriot Act. In fact, it was disclosed today that this has been continuous since 2007. This should be a broad-side attack against the Patriot Act. That is my spin and I am going to stick with it.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)It's absolutely vile. I also want pressure on everyone willing to use the awful thing.
I can't speak for anyone else for our guy, but I worked toward his election, donated to, and voted for him, so I'm gonna have to choose the President. 
The main problem with smelling a rat/Republican scandal is that for the most part Republicans are on record as supporting it. Of course I realize that reality isn't much of a barrier to them. 
WovenGems
(776 posts)Years ago NSA bought three Cray computers and there was no outcry. Why? With all the means of communications now an up to date system was needed. So what has changed? It ain't like the NSA has been out of its shadow box ever.
Timbuk3
(872 posts)That's it.
I don't need to defend or attach anyone.
Not Bush.
Not Obama.
No one in the House, or the Senate.
Repeal two bad laws, and this shit stops.
That's all I have to say.
CdnExtraNational
(105 posts)Import phone records and create a database map of all the people who communicate with each other along with their frequency of communication.
You could get a report of who is associating with who, and also find people who might be communicating with a lot of "disposable SIMs/phones" frequently.
I could write a program to do this in about 4 hours!!!! Of course doing the import the first time and updating it would take more time.
This would be very useful if an incoming call/text/email is found to tip of an imminent terrorist attack to go and scoop up the group immediately.
I thought it is well understood that this is what the NSA does?
Perhaps this is just another new SCANDAL from the SCANDAL machine.
If President Obama refused to sign the order to do this, there would be even a bigger scandal and possibly a terrorist attack on his watch.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)in the system.
There seems to be an unresolved tension between the 4th Amendment and technology. NSA operations may need to be more closely aligned with the former. Unless the system's operators can show that universal surveillance and retention of telecommunications has actually prevented great harm, and is necessary to continue doing so, then I see no reason to scrap the Bill of Rights to allow unlimited acqusition of all phone and email messages among Americans.
There's a better way to target terrorists. Don't allow them into the US, even the ones the CIA considers to be its own terrorists: e.g., the WTC '93 bombers, the 9/11 attack cell; the numerous and sundry al-Qaeda operatives attracted by Anwar al-Awlaki, and the Tsarnaev brothers. We really have to more closely control the CIA's own operatives, because these account for 90% of all the fatal mass casualty terrorist attacks in the US during the last several decades.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I'm leaving off the nutty conspiracy theories about how this is all some terrible plot that you're a part of because that isn't spin as much as the usual people punching at whatever imps they see in their peripheral vision. Once you hit the point you think spoiled mayonnaise in your fridge is a Republican plot to make Obama look bad, arguing makes both of you look silly.
The three current spins are kind of mutually exclusive, and that they're all being fired at once kind of shows some people are desperate to turn this into a non-issue. They really need to choose: We spied on Americans and it's a good thing, we spied on Americans and it's a bad thing (but Obama had nothing to do with it. Blame congress!) or we didn't spy on Americans at all. None of those three can exist at the same time, yet here they all are in the same thread. The President has taken the latter tack, so I expect it to solidify behind that one.
Apophis
(1,407 posts)Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Shame the Good Germans.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
- Don't worry though, it's not like tyranny is lurking around the corner or anything.....
rpannier
(24,349 posts)I side with James Madison
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Creepy as hell.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That's why secret government would never have been tolerated by The Founders. If the NSA programs are useful and necessary, and can be designed to operate in conformity with the 4th Amendment, then they must be shown to have that effect. The American people can't be expected to just trust those who make that claim but forbid us enough information to make an independent, informed judgement as citizens.
It would be wise for the President and Congressional leaders to simply order the NSA to tell us directly what it's been doing, and allow us to make up our own minds whether we wish it to continue.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)chervilant
(8,267 posts)Seems like you've hit a nerve...
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)"If you're not surprised that the NSA was found to have been data mining millions of Verizon phone records, congratulations--you're a sentient being. None of us should be surprised. Every last one of us, however, should still be outraged. "
I couldn't have said it better.
bigtree
(86,013 posts)ODS, pure and simple.
Nothing more ignorant than letting Congress off of the hook. They are the most direct representation of our wishes and concerns out here. It is our elected representatives who are charged with placing checks on Executive power. Expecting the Executive to be responsible for that is just weak, and a curious surrender to the assumed authority that the WH is asserting here.
I don't know what you think protesting against a lame-duck president is going to do at this point, but I'd suggest focusing your energy and ire on the folks actually charged with setting the limits on Executive authority; instead of pretending that poutrage is some workable substitute for direct political action.
Did anyone tell you who actually makes laws in our democracy?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Did you happen to catch the last sentence of my OP? I wrote it for individuals such as your self. It was either that, or vomit. See you.
bigtree
(86,013 posts)Congress makes the laws. You want to reign in the president, you'll need to petition Congress.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Imbecile or not, I don't live in a helpless world where I assume that it's going to take the cooperation of John Boehner to keep the President from doing evil. You must be extremely frustrated at every turn. You should explore the concept of the President maintaining a sense of personal responsibility for his actions.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Exactly right.
Especially this:
This has got to be the worst reaction. At least the other responses require some thought.
Jonzey50
(2 posts)It's is difficult for me to get through all of this self-righteousness in this post. Get over yourself.
Would you rather have had the 2 terrorist attacks that were directly thwarted through this program have happened?
We live in a different world, now. There is no better way currently to gather intelligence on our "enemies." The 4th amendment is going to have to be flexible in certain areas, and in a representative government, we have to trust our elected officials to make the right and ethical decisions (which is why we have be smart, informed voters.)
I am a proponent of having a NEW Constitutional Convention. Our current one is outdated for the times we live in. I'm not saying we need to forfeit our right to privacy, but in the modern, interconnected world of cyberspace that we live in, we need to adapt how we navigate this delicate balance...and maybe stop worrying about what a few rich white guys from 200 years ago may feel about it.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Thanks.
Thenewire
(130 posts)The Democratic Party has been corrupted by conservative beliefs and it has itself to blame. The continuation of the republican surveillance policy and the establishment of a police state should be opposed by every progressive individual that belongs to the Democratic party. The Democratic Party should remove all those who defend conservative ideals. If they are unwilling to do this than a liberal political party should be formed to undo the damaging shift to the right.
Conservatism is a pathogen that exist only to ruin whatever is good in this world. They poison not only our political environment but our very existence and hope for a better tomorrow. Their beliefs are not based on rationality or science but on superstitions and supreme authority. We should no longer tolerate their loathing of human progress. We should no longer tolerate their hypocrisy and cannibalistic nature.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts) 
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)He's the one who just made a speech about limiting executive powers. He also knows that he alone can't control the NSA. It's as plausible as anything else.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
gulliver
(13,198 posts)You aren't.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You're in opposition to that which has long been held dear and sacred in this nation. . Call me names all you want, but if you're in support of this Stasi-style of secret surveillance, you can continue to lick at boots until they kick your teeth in, but I'm not playing. Sometimes in life, there are rock-solid principles you need to stand up for, no matter how uncomfortable or afraid you may be, and no matter who you find on the opposing side. Ultimately, what do you stand for? What principles, if any, are bedrock issues for you?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)attacks in order to speak the truth are very much appreciated these days.
quaker bill
(8,225 posts)The doors swung wide open with the Patriot Act. At some point in time it was going to be time to close them again. They were only ever going to be closed if people got outraged. No where near enough people were ready to be outraged during the yellow ribbon / you're with us or with the terrorists / "24" days.
Now finally they seem to be. This is a good thing.
Look, at the peak, these bozos were sending agents to infiltrate Quaker meetings, as "credible threats". Most Quaker meetings I know have a hard enough time organizing a decent potluck lunch. They are not a "credible threat" to anyone.
Ya think they might have been looking at phone calls and e-mails? I am pretty sure they were and have been for most if not all of a decade now.
Here is the cool thing. Given enough data it becomes a huge task to find the meaningful bits. It is the zebra effect.
