Big Brother is watching you

[scipio]

"NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...5-10-nsa_x.htm

Good lord, when will people en masse stand up and say "enough is enough"?

Will they?

Where is the million man march against living in a state quickly becoming fascist?

You see people across the USA getting up in arms at the issue of same-sex marriage - and yet this issue seems to hardly raise a whisper from the "man in the street," yet this is ACTUALLY HARMFUL TO THEM PERSONALLY.

I weep.

[specialk]

Hopefully people will stand up on election day when it really counts, and say enough is enough about the whole damn direction this country is going!!!!!!!!

[White_Male_Canada]

"NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...5-10-nsa_x.htm

Good lord, when will people en masse stand up and say "enough is enough"?

Will they?

Where is the million man march against living in a state quickly becoming fascist?

You see people across the USA getting up in arms at the issue of same-sex marriage - and yet this issue seems to hardly raise a whisper from the "man in the street," yet this is ACTUALLY HARMFUL TO THEM PERSONALLY.

I weep.

You over-react to a drive by media smear. You`re being manipulated.

The fact of the matter is is that this program is legal, has been deemed legal by the courts for over 25 years and was modified in 1994. Who was President then ?

It`s called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, P.L. 103- 414, 47 USC 1001-1010),

enacted October 25, 1994,

intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance effectively and efficiently despite the deployment of new digital technologies and wireless services that have altered the character of electronic surveillance. CALEA requires telecommunications carriers to modify their equipment, facilities, and services, wherever reasonably achievable, to ensure that they are able to comply with authorized electronic surveillance actions.

Legal , designed to collect phone numbers,look for patterns, and relate them to known terrorist phone numbers.


The person or persons who leaked this classified intelligence is the one who has violated federal law and must be prosecuted to the maximum.

Or , do nothing and allow them to conspire and attack you again.

[White_Male_Canada]

When did President Bush say this :

I am convinced that the Supreme Court never intended any dictum in the particular case which it decided to apply to grave matters involving the defense of the nation.

It is, of course, well known that certain other nations have been engaged in the organization of propaganda of so-called "fifth columns" in other countries and in preparation for sabotage, as well as in actual sabotage.

It is too late to do anything about it after sabotage, assassinations and "fifth column" activities are completed.

You are, therefore, authorized and directed in such cases as you may approve, after investigation of the need in each case, to authorize the necessary investigating agents that they are at liberty to secure information by listening devices direct to the conversation or other communications of persons suspected of subversive activities against the Government of the United States, including suspected spies.

Answer: He didn`t. That was FDR , May 21, 1940

[scipio]

The fact of the matter is is that this program is legal, has been deemed legal by the courts for over 25 years and was modified in 1994. Who was President then ?

It`s called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, P.L. 103- 414, 47 USC 1001-1010),

enacted October 25, 1994,

intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance effectively and efficiently despite the deployment of new digital technologies and wireless services that have altered the character of electronic surveillance. CALEA requires telecommunications carriers to modify their equipment, facilities, and services, wherever reasonably achievable, to ensure that they are able to comply with authorized electronic surveillance actions.

Legal , designed to collect phone numbers,look for patterns, and relate them to known terrorist phone numbers.


The person or persons who leaked this classified intelligence is the one who has violated federal law and must be prosecuted to the maximum.

Or , do nothing and allow them to conspire and attack you again.

Oh I love how people like you twist this.

NOTHING in your quote or that act says that they can TAP PEOPLE'S PHONES WITHOUT A WARRANT.

All it says is that the phone companies must alter their technology to BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THESE REQUESTS. It doesn't state the obvious THAT THESE REQUESTS HAVE TO BE LEGAL.

THe point here is that they AREN'T GETTING WARRANTS, DESPITE HOW RIDICULOUSLY EASY IT IS TO DO SO.

Yes it is fucking illegal. You're just trying to obfuscate the issue. WHAT IS ILLEGAL IS THAT THEY ARE COLLECTING THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT A WARRANT.

Hey if this is so legal smart guy, how did QWEST refuse to fork over the information and get away with it? Why didn't the NSA press the issue there? BECAUSE IT WASN"T LEGAL.

I don't care what FDR said or who was in Office in 1994. I'm not some Democrat saying "Bush is bad", so don't come at me with the totally childish argument that "Well, Clinton did it too, wah wah, so you're wrong."

[Quinn]

"NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...5-10-nsa_x.htm

If they're listening to my phone calls, I feel sorry for them. It's almost all business and phone sex with my wife (I'm working out of PA, instead of NYC, for a month or so).

-Quinn

[Trogdor]

No one cares so long as people have their beer, the apprentice on tv, and cigarettes.

This reminds me of an experiement, years ago. This was to see how people react with authority. Well, they had a bunch of people and sat them in a room. In another room, was guy strapped with electrodes. Now when the guy said a wrong answer, the people zapped him with electric shocks.

And here's the funny part. These people kept zapping him, despite the guy rolling around in agony from the shocks, because an authority figure, in this case the scientist in charge told them to keep zapping him if he siad the wrong things.

And guess what? The guy being zapped was in on it. The shock machine was not even real, the guy wa san actor. The experiment shows how people will do something, despite how dispicable it is, because somone in authority TOLD them to do so.

Same thing with post 9-11. The people in gorernment said, " See this horrible, horrible thing that happened? You HAVE to give up your rights and freedom so we can PROTECT you!" and most of the people said, "Sure, we will do that!"

People forget that our government are OUR employees, they are NOT our bosses. WE pay their salaries and so on. People tend to gasp in shock and/or surprise whenever I say this revelation to them.

It's gonna be Escape from L.A. within a few years.

[ezed]

Imagine the number of phones, cell phones, computers in the world. Now monitor this data! From all of them all the time. I think they'll have to outsource it to India or China.

[stillies77]

crazy politics shtuff

[White_Male_Canada]

The fact of the matter is is that this program is legal, has been deemed legal by the courts for over 25 years and was modified in 1994. Who was President then ?

It`s called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, P.L. 103- 414, 47 USC 1001-1010),

enacted October 25, 1994,

intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance effectively and efficiently despite the deployment of new digital technologies and wireless services that have altered the character of electronic surveillance. CALEA requires telecommunications carriers to modify their equipment, facilities, and services, wherever reasonably achievable, to ensure that they are able to comply with authorized electronic surveillance actions.

Legal , designed to collect phone numbers,look for patterns, and relate them to known terrorist phone numbers.


The person or persons who leaked this classified intelligence is the one who has violated federal law and must be prosecuted to the maximum.

Or , do nothing and allow them to conspire and attack you again.

Oh I love how people like you twist this.

NOTHING in your quote or that act says that they can TAP PEOPLE'S PHONES WITHOUT A WARRANT.

All it says is that the phone companies must alter their technology to BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THESE REQUESTS. It doesn't state the obvious THAT THESE REQUESTS HAVE TO BE LEGAL.

THe point here is that they AREN'T GETTING WARRANTS, DESPITE HOW RIDICULOUSLY EASY IT IS TO DO SO.

Yes it is fucking illegal. You're just trying to obfuscate the issue. WHAT IS ILLEGAL IS THAT THEY ARE COLLECTING THIS INFORMATION WITHOUT A WARRANT.

Hey if this is so legal smart guy, how did QWEST refuse to fork over the information and get away with it? Why didn't the NSA press the issue there? BECAUSE IT WASN"T LEGAL.

I don't care what FDR said or who was in Office in 1994. I'm not some Democrat saying "Bush is bad", so don't come at me with the totally childish argument that "Well, Clinton did it too, wah wah, so you're wrong."

You`re either feigning, or really are ignorant.

The numbers are being kept track of,not the discussions. There is no individual "phone tapping" and listening to personal conversations being done with this specific data mining system.

A warrant is only needed if the NSA/FBI wished to actually trace the number to the owner`s name. Recording phone numbers and which number it dialed to is non-private information,so the 4th doesn`t apply(See Sth vs. Md ).

Qwest refused to co-operate when asked. It was President Clinton who signed into law the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994, after it was passed in both the House and Senate by a voice vote. That law is an act "to make clear a telecommunications carrier's duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for law enforcement purposes, and for other purposes." The act made clear that a court order isn't the only lawful way of obtaining call information, saying, "A telecommunications carrier shall ensure that any interception of communications or access to call-identifying information effected within its switching premises can be activated only in accordance with a court order or other lawful authorization."

The law that President Clinton signed into law and that was approved by voice votes in 1994 by a Democrat-majority House and a Democrat-majority Senate not only made clear the phone companies' "duty" to cooperate, it authorized $500 million in taxpayer funds to reimburse the phone companies for equipment "enabling the government, pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, to access call-identifying information that is reasonably available to the carrier." Again, the law, by referring to "other lawful authorization," states clearly that a court order isn't the only form of lawful authorization possible(www.nysun.com).


You call it obfuscation. I call it details. You prefer banal generalities and being told what to think. You even repeat what your told verbatim as if it were the whole truth.

May 27, 1999
Lawmakers Raise Questions About International Spy Network

http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/...27network.html

If the National Security Agency wants to reach out and collect the phone records of ordinary Americans to build a database it can mine for information — in other words, snoop into anybody's calling patterns — it's probably legal. "This activity by the NSA doesn't violate anything the court has said with respect to the Fourth Amendment," Fairfield University professor Don Greenberg, chairman of the college's politics department, said Thursday. "It's definitely not an unreasonable seizure. They are not listening in on your calls. People who have access to your phone records are not necessarily sworn to any kind of secrecy,".

http://www.connpost.com/news/ci_3814068

Phone-Records Surveillance Is Broadly Acceptable to Public

May 12, 2006 — Americans by nearly a 2-1 ratio call the surveillance of telephone records an acceptable way for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, expressing broad unconcern even if their own calling patterns are scrutinized.

Lending support to the administration's defense of its anti-terrorism intelligence efforts, 63 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say the secret program, disclosed Thursday by USA Today, is justified, while far fewer, 35 percent, call it unjustified.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1953464