American NSA Out Of Control

Status
Not open for further replies.
Supposedly the system in question isn't a backdoor, but a portal where the companies involved can drop the information for agencies to look at.

This is similar to things made for the MPAA/RIAA and doesn't give them direct access to all information, only information that has been requested and passes scrutiny (same procedure most companies put warrants through).
 
I don't necessarily believe there are such portals inside these companies, and that the actual PRISM slides are talking about a different kind of data collection -- done from outside of the companies. Nor do I think they were intentionally trying to be obscure with the phrasing in those slides, as they probably revealed what was already obvious to the people who were sitting in on those presentations.

Perhaps they have beam splitters [1] inside the backbone providers, so all traffic reaches its destination unharmed, but the NSA gets all the packets. SSL traffic would be more difficult, but not impossible.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
 
This whole thing is just getting started. American's are pissed off.

Bunch of teabaggerz BS is what I call it.......they are only pissed off because someone told them to be! The ACLU and EFF have been angry (for good reason) since about 2002...they are the only ones with a speck of consistency in these matter.

LIttle story. I used to own a retail store and once sold an expensive central heater to a guy who worked for the city of baltimore. I delivered it to a location way out in the sticks and brought it into his basement.

A couple weeks later a black car with 4 people pulls into my store parking lot and 4 guys in suits get out - they walk in the door and corner me, holding out their cards and saying "Craig - FBI, let's talk".....

They take me back into the office and it's Habeus Corpus. No way I was allowed to leave or avoid them. Turns out the guy was using the City of Baltimore purchase orders to outfit his house (among other things) and the FBI was following his every move for months...which included phonecalls to me and the delivery of the boiler.

They pulled out the phone records and asked me exactly what was said during the duration of each phone call. Then they pulled out a contact sheet of 100's of pictures of me delivering the boiler and asked me about them.

Keep in mind there was nothing but dirt piles around that construction site - it was hilltop in the middle of nowhere.

This was ALL pre-internet and pre-digital cameras (probably 1989).

Bottom line - Big Brother is watching if he wants to. But he needs a judge to sign off and other things first. That's the way the system works. Without it, the Boston bombers, etc, would never have been caught.

Reality does matter. Again, people would have to clearly tell me what I am losing...not conceptually (if and when this and that happened), but in reality. Unlike under the Bushman, they are not listening into every overseas phone call any longer.

I suppose I should complain that I need to register my car or my boat. What right does the gubment have to know how many HP my outboard has. Righteous Indignation.....

The bigger question....which already has an answer...is what these anarchists (teabaggerz, etc.) want. They want no taxes - they think they deserve 100% of the money they earn, even though it is enabled by the rest of us. They want the "right" for all these mass murders to occur and shame on you if you even question it.

Lots of "rights".
 
We're all wary of the Orwellian nightmare - and, FWIW, I think rightly so. The notions of liberty and freedom and privacy are all important.

But here's a thought. Instead of creating an Orwellian nightmare where everything is watched all the time... how about a Brave New World nightmare? Instead of shutting the camera eye, disconnecting the microphone... turn them all on. And give them so much information they can't possibly make sense of it all at once. Instead of the challenge being getting the information, and figuring out the limitations of that information, turn the tables - make the challenge be finding what's relevant. Generate enough noise to drown out the real stuff.

Just a thought.
 
Most of the people that seem OK with it seem to accept the notion of scrutiny for security, because we all want security. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that.
 
See again the problem is with people...and always will be.

People need to man the data-centers that process all of this data....someone brought up earlier how at&t was manning a surveillance op for the govt or something along those lines. I am not worried as much about a person who dedicates their life to serving the country, I am worried about people who do not serve in that capacity having access to all of that data.

If a person wants to target you all they need to do is mine a server for some data and they will have stuff on you...everyone is guilty of something when you look at them under a microscope.

This kind of data mining shouldn't be done unless they are going to do it right, and nothing on these servers should be able to be used to prosecute anything other than a crime that can be classified as an actual act of terrorism and it should be stated that way if they are going to act like this is what it is for.

You are innocent until proven guilty, an investigation against you before the arrival of a search warrant and affidavit is wrong and therefor any act committed that is not considerable as a terrorist act should not allow for evidence collected in this manner to be used against you, if it does not work like that, than this whole thing is just a masquerade ball on the set of dirty dancing and the people backing it would just believe they are mad swayze.
 
I'm not "ok" with it but I also know the reality of security for a nation that many people want to destroy. Some see a conspiracy. I see congress looking into it and looking for solutions to better guarantee our privacy while still maintaining security. As long as that due process is ongoing by our representatives that we elect then I am ok with it.

As far as being prosecuted by the info I don't think that's what is happening. It seems the info is used to gather evidence to get a warrant for more direct monitoring.
 
See again the problem is with people...and always will be.
You are innocent until proven guilty, an investigation against you before the arrival of a search warrant and affidavit is wrong...

"Innocent until proven guilty" sorts of implies that you have actually done something and that building the case and going to trial is the challenge. You're not 'proven' innocent in this situation, merely found to be so - the mere accusation can be enough to ruin your life in the case of serious crimes.
 
"Innocent until proven guilty" sorts of implies that you have actually done something and that building the case and going to trial is the challenge. You're not 'proven' innocent in this situation, merely found to be so - the mere accusation can be enough to ruin your life in the case of serious crimes.

I was not arguing that at all...but you are looking at what I said the wrong way.

I am implying that if in this country you are in innocent person until someone legally proves you guilty of something, that information collected against you before you were being specifically being investigated for a crime should be null just like any other evidence against a citizen that is illegally collected or has a broken chain of custody.
 
Reading this thread.... I'm in some disbelief on how many people seem "ok" with this.

Most of the people that seem OK with it seem to accept the notion of scrutiny for security, because we all want security. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that.
Two thoughts keep rolling through my head as I'm reading this thread the first is Benjamin Franklin's warning that "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." the other is from Thomas Jefferson "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

It seems to me to many people are far too willing to give to trade away their liberty and privacy for the illusion of safety and B that our government no longer respects or fears the people it’s supposed to serve.
 
Reading this thread.... I'm in some disbelief on how many people seem "ok" with this.

What amazes me MUCH more is how people have been OK with it since about 2001 - that's 12+ years. It's even more amazing that they cheered it on as it was being expanded...

But I am only one vote. I tried.
As I said before, 85% or so of Americans were "for" a military bearing on a full time basis. How can you be surprised that 85% of Americans=a lot of people?
 
What amazes me MUCH more is how people have been OK with it since about 2001 - that's 12+ years. It's even more amazing that they cheered it on as it was being expanded...

But I am only one vote. I tried.
As I said before, 85% or so of Americans were "for" a military bearing on a full time basis. How can you be surprised that 85% of Americans=a lot of people?

I've said this so many times that I'm blue in the face. Our government does not have our interest in mind. And just about anytime and every time you tell people that, they either assume you have a tin foil hat on or you're simply trolling.

I knew this was going on then. I knew it was going on now. And I have a clear understanding of exactly what our government is capable of. I don't know when it started. I suspect it started way before 2001, having worked for the government myself.
 
I haven't read the entire thread, so this might have been pointed out already, but this is old news. I'm not in disagreement that it's a 4th amendment violation, but this was going on and generally known about several years ago, so I'm a little confused about why it's all of a sudden considered a "breaking story."
 
I haven't read the entire thread, so this might have been pointed out already, but this is old news. I'm not in disagreement that it's a 4th amendment violation, but this was going on and generally known about several years ago, so I'm a little confused about why it's all of a sudden considered a "breaking story."

The general population has a short term memory. Today its news, tomorrow it is forgotten, and sometime later it will be news again... maybe... This assuming people just don't accept it and move on. Which is also another problem with the general population..... They come to accept things and not do anything, which is why government continues to gain more control and we continue to lose both privacy and rights.
 
The general population has a short term memory. Today its news, tomorrow it is forgotten, and sometime later it will be news again... maybe... This assuming people just don't accept it and move on. Which is also another problem with the general population..... They come to accept things and not do anything, which is why government continues to gain more control and we continue to lose both privacy and rights.

To expand on this idea.....

One of the reason why people accept it is because most everyone waits for someone else to do something about it. The guy next to you waits for you, you wait the next guy, and he waits for the guy behind him.... ect... ect...

As Americans we talk a big talk, but we don't do much about anything. And so time passes and eventually we just accept the world "as is".

It's really sad actually.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom