General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAm I the only one who thinks their government spying on me is worse than a terrorist bombing?
A government can put me in a concentration camp and make me suffer worse than becoming pink mist.
A terrorist can't do that, or at least cannot torture that many of us.
Our priorities of what is and is not dangerous are completely fucked in the head folks. Governments start wars that kill millions of people, terrorists do not.
Get your priorities straight from a security perspective and you'll see how threatening to our real national security a government overgrown with Orwellian power is.
We must do something about this. Non-participation is the only way.
If they want to listen in on all of us, let us give them nothing to listen to.
Meet people in the real world social network. If you want to friend them, spend more time with them.
Use snail mail to communicate, it's not as leveraged an action to spy on that medium. A computer cannot do that as easily.
God forbid we not use our phones like a meth addict uses meth.
Give the government the silent treatment.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)For perceived protection from the statistically small chance of a terror attack, we're willing to terrorize ourselves.
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)This is THE major turning point in American politics.
There is no one on the national level to turn to save us, except ourselves.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 05:48 PM - Edit history (1)
while I am undergoing tests for a deadly disease......What terrifies me is going bankrupt and having absolutely no place to live... This is a possibility...And earning $8,500 a year disqualifies some from
Medicaid in certain state.s.....
A Republican controlled House, Senate and a President Christie scares me way more than the possibility that my cell # might be collected and monitored because I made 50 calls to the Sudan over the past 2 days...
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)
Cha
(297,188 posts)through that, buster. 
LWolf
(46,179 posts)
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)mick063
(2,424 posts)How far will it go?
This is how entire communities ignored the ash falling on their town from the crematorium down the road. Everyone just goes about their business and pretend it isn't happening.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)"But if the other side had gotten into power, the ashes would be falling thicker and deeper!"
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Their blind, unquestioning defense of all things Obama sets the stage for the unitary executive power to continue to expand into the next repub president.
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)Who do we vote for?
I voted for him to be protected from this.
I can't vote for a Republican because they're the ones who started this shit.
Where do we go from here? Every Democrat might as well not be trustworthy now.
LuvNewcastle
(16,844 posts)"where do we go from here." Our system requires the people's faith in the legitimacy of the government. If we have no faith in the people who represent us, if they refuse to do what they said they would do while they were running for office, we have really hit bottom.
:shudder:
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)are the ones who could usher in the next Rethug president and Congress.
treestar
(82,383 posts)One, that's not what they are doing. Collecting metatdata from phone companies in not "spying" on you. They don't know who you are. To listen to your conversations, they'd need some sort of warrant. If they had that warrant, why would it be a bad thing?
You're saying you'd rather see people jumping out of the towers than having metadata in the hands of the government or let them wiretap phones where they have some probable cause or whatever is required under the law. Find some perspective.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You're enabling it. I hope you're proud of your Big Brother stance, but I detest it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)...records of my phone calls, and being able to track my location 24x7. This is unequivocal.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They cannot track anyone's location 24/7, even those whom you might admit need trailing.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)And someone calls you after you arrive in DC, how does your phone company know where to route the call?
I know. They are tracking you. Mind you, in relationship to cell towers.
Then of course cellphones can now provide location data in more detail with built-in GPS and wifi data.
It is possible and I guarantee you it has been used.
treestar
(82,383 posts)No way around that, unless I don't want a cell phone and the conveniences that go with it. I seem to not mind since in return I can call anyone anytime and find out where things are or look up information any time. Take photos where I am without having to have a camera.
A, T & T knows where I am at all times. Kind of spooky, but apparently not bothersome enough to give up the phone.
It's a question of balance. The convenience is too great - it would have to be a lot less and there would have to be a lot more A T & T could do about where I am before I found it to be a problem.
If I call Yemen 10 times, they will possibly look into me more. If I went to a mosque I'd be looked at more. Those are the people who should do the complaining. If they notice it and are annoyed by it.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)If they're collecting data, yours no doubt is sent directly to the Null device. That's true of just about everyone on DU, I'm pretty certain.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I don't take advice on matters of principle from someone who was a Freeper in good standing for 7 years. But just so you know, I'm not particularly concerned with proving that I was specifically harmed. One of the cornerstones this nation was founded on is under serious attack. I don't plan to act the traitor and support this steaming pile.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)on it. I'm not offering any advice, either. I figure you're a grown-up person who can decide for himself what to do. I'm also not interested in looking up things from the past. If that floats your boat, well, there it is. You're wrong about the time, though. Seeya.
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 10:23 PM - Edit history (1)
on DU have often come across as not very liberal. Good grief.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)is being observed by people who don't regard people like him as "interesting".
There are no elections for the position of "Disgustipated".
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)in order to have basic rights to freedom from oppressive governments, or to have basic rights to privacy and to be free from the government being able to enter our homes without probable cause and a warrant. Remember the 4th Amendment? I wouldn 't blame anyone who did not anymore.
So the old 'you're not interesting enough' mantra has been used and debunked many times. Our rights as individuals were never based on how interesting or boring we were. Not to my knowledge anyhow.
I don't care what they are using the information they are collecting without our knowledge (thanks Whistle Blowers now we know) or consent for, I don't care if they never use it at all, I don't care if they find people interesting or not, it is the PRINCIPLE that matters.
Why are we seeing this total lack of understanding of what this issue is and always was all about?
Back when Bush was caught doing this, here on DU not one person had a problem understanding the principle that was violated by his use of the Telecoms to spy on the American people that I recall.
That was what drew the line between the morons on the Right who blindly supported anything their leader was doing AND trotted out the old 'you're just not interesting enough' etc talking points to try to defend it. I never thought I would see this here, this effort to NOW excuse these huge violations of our rights, because it sure wasn't around during the Bush years, on any Democratic forum I was a member of.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)MineralMan
(146,288 posts)Keep up the good work.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)that requires clarification, I do what people do on discussion boards, respond. You always have the same right to refute if you can, anything I say. That is your choice, just as it is mine to respond. I doubt I have responded to every, single comment you ever made, that would be a gargantuan task, in fact that is quite an exaggeration! Lol!
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)"AT&T provided National Security Agency eavesdroppers with full access to its customers' phone calls, and shunted its customers' internet traffic to data-mining equipment installed in a secret room in its San Francisco switching center, according to a former AT&T worker cooperating in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuit against the company."
That's an old story, but it looks like it was true. At this point, those in power could reasonably have the power to do this.
You're suggesting that allowing an absolutist regime powers of this kind won't lead to something worse than 9/11.
1920s Berlin was a progressive place, there were gay clubs everywhere. They were even to the point of pushing for legal same sex marriage.
Even the early Nazi party was filled with homosexual men.
After the night of the long knives, those men were eventually sent to concentration camps punished under Paragraph 175. Because they were not jews, they were not sent to execution, they suffered in the camps until they died of malnutrition and exhaustion.
We think it is impossible for massive swings in power and thinking to occur, but the truth is that that is the way things work in this world.
God help us with what is now possible.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)It's unlikely to be of much use.
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)
Learned that when I asked God to be 6'5" and turned out 5'11". There went the basketball career. :-P
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)It isn't.
We all know about normal wiretapping, it doesn't keep someone from organizing crimes over the phone.
Why can't they let us know about this kind of wiretapping? Huh?
Because they don't want us to know. A terrorist worth their salt would know they are being listened to, it's the general population who has to be lied to.
treestar
(82,383 posts)People in law enforcement (and prevention as our society seems to demand) seem to believe that where they are following X around thinking he may plant a bomb somewhere, that it is better if X does not know they are doing so. I have actually questioned that in the past - maybe they are more likely to prevent if it he does know they are onto him. Then there is no use in carrying out the attack.
But that is a question at least worth discussing. Here I see just blanket accusations that the government wants to spy on innocent people for no good reason.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Will the innocent be notified of their innocence? Will they be reimbursed for damages? Will those that pursued the innocent be charged?
treestar
(82,383 posts)Innocent people get investigated all the time. It is putting the cart before the horse to say the cops should investigate only the guilty. They have to find the guilty and that means talking to a lot of people. So much more so in looking for terrorists.
If you aren't X, they'll quit following you and look for X. If they happen to stumble on your commission of a crime, they can't use their FISA based found evidence for that, so they'll have to let you get away with it and do their job, look for X.
Say the cops use DNA to rule out a suspect. They should be punished for having been "wrong" in looking into that person? That's the level of perfection you are demanding here. And that could be traumatic for a person, not like knowing some spook might have looked over how many numbers were called by my number - at this point that "spook" is a computer only, too.
In fact, you should be against say OSHA inspections. What of the plants they inspect that turn out not to have any violations? Weren't they and their employees violated too?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)How many people spied upon gave their permission or were served a warrant?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)So if opposing the Keystone Xl Pipeline or hating Monsanto are someday soon crimes, all that data will still be there.
And since it is the forces behind Keystone and Monsanto that control the puppets' strings, we can all assume how that will play out. it sure doesn't seem that too many in Congress (or the guy in the Oval Office) are all that much for the Constitution.
premium
(3,731 posts)If you believe that, I've got some land to sell you in So. NV.,
Only used to test nuclear weapons for 40+ years.
If they can track the number, then they damn well know the name of the owner of the phone.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)in the hands of the government?" Of course not, how absurd.
The question is do you think having your government spy on you is worse than the dangers of terrorists? That's the question regardless of how it was specifically written in the OP. So before you try to prove that the government isnt spying, please answer the question.
Personally I think it's an easy question that our founders would have no trouble with. But there are some here that seek the comfort of authoritarian leadership. Which school do you fall in?
The question of whether or not our government is spying is a totally different question. I am guessing the word "spying" is what is giving us a bad time here. So let's not mention that pesky word. Our government admits it has and is collecting data on masses of peoples. There cant be an argument about that. Both Bush and now Pres Obama say it's nothing to worry about. Some here are skeptical of both and some here are only skeptical of Bush. After all how could someone with a "D" behind their name deceive us?
So do you think it is ok for our government, either D or R administrations, to collect massive data on civilians without specific cause?
treestar
(82,383 posts)It is a balancing act. The President wisely said:
The discussion here lacks a perspective on those percentages. We have to make these choices as a society. We made choices around 2001-3 and we have to live with them and so does the President. Scapegoating him does not absolve us. In fact if the President just abandoned the laws made earlier, he'd be accused of dictatorially doing what he wants rather than follow the law. The President is willing to have the discussion while others just want to blame him and walk off in a huff:
--President begins to exit, another question, mostly inaudible is asked by another reporter, regarding the leaks of this information, President goes back to the podium--
President Obama:
"I don't, I don't welcome leaks. Because, theres a reason why these programs are classified. I think theres a suggestion, somehow, that any classified program is a quote/unquote secret program, which means its somehow suspicious, but the fact of the matter is, in our modern history, theres a whole range of programs that have been classified because, for example, when it comes to fighting terror, our goal is to stop folks from doing us harm and if every step we are taking to try to prevent a terrorist act is on the front page of the newspapers or on television then presumably the people that are gonna try to do us harm will be able to get around our preventive measures. Thats why these things are classified. But, thats also why we setup Congressional oversight. These are the folks you all vote for, as your representatives in Congress and they're being fully briefed on these programs. And if in fact, there were abuses taking place, presumably, those members of Congress could raise those issues very aggressively. They're empowered to do so.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)without specific cause? That's a straight forward question.
I dont want our government to have that kind of power.
Do you agree or disagree?
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)They have millions of people to listen to millions of our phone calls, and write EVERYTHING down. Now what do they want with Aunt Martha's recipe for deviled eggs? They want to STEAL her recipe is what they want. I say HELL NO! That recipe has been in our family for eons. So I would much rather see people being blown from tall skyscrapers any day than lose Aunt Martha's recipe. The nerve.
All this "spying" is what WE get for NOT doing a FULL investigation of 9/11. And if people still want a reason for 9/11 being an inside job, was this ALL worth it? HELL YES!
LuvNewcastle
(16,844 posts)I think the government's powers these days are a lot more scary than the possibility of a terrorist attack. The potential for abuse of those powers is far too great.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Scarier than the planes slamming into the towers?
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)I think being disappeared by a government is worse.
I think dissidents being locked away and tortured in detention camps is worse.
This is the fork in the road:
One direction leads to 1984, the other to what type of society we will reconstruct after the great struggle to come is over with.
neverforget
(9,436 posts)
lamp_shade
(14,828 posts)MineralMan
(146,288 posts)There are always others who think in similar ways as you do.
premium
(3,731 posts)you've got plenty of company here.
randome
(34,845 posts)Is it any surprise, then, that there are many who would not agree with you?
How many deaths WOULD be worth the collection of phone metadata? Do you have a number?
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)The problem is that scum is everywhere in this world and is drawn to power.
Giving our government absolute power is the biggest flame that sociopaths will drawn to, to kill the sons and the daughters, the mothers and fathers, the brothers and sisters of millions more.
Forcing our will on others via the method of violence is always disgusting, but we cannot let one terrible act beget a thousand more.
The greatest disservice to their memory is to let a scumbag politician use their suffering and your loss to will a loss of freedom on all of us.
randome
(34,845 posts)Getting from phone metadata to 'absolute power' is quite a stretch, IMO.
Are you saying that nothing is worth this rather modest collection of data? What if a nuclear bomb could be stopped by analyzing phone metadata?
Rigid, absolute positions don't allow for growth and circumstances so I am unwilling to stake out any 'line in the sand' position for myself.
If, by some bizarre circumstance, I could save your life by violating some law or amendment or whatever, I would likely not even hesitate to do so.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)to make a poor political point.
randome
(34,845 posts)So you implied my daughters' lives are not worth saving if in doing so, it violates your rigid position. I'm saying I disagree with that.
Lives are more important than some fundamentalist theology, even when that theology is tied to the Constitution instead of the Bible.
Absolutes only exist in the mind, not in the real world. I think every single one of us would not hesitate to save someone's life without regard to whether or not it violated some item on a list.
I bet even you would not hesitate.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)but establishing a mass spying system that seems easy pickings for abuse is a tad different, you would have to admit that right?
randome
(34,845 posts)But I don't see it as 'absolute power', either. For the most part, I give the current Administration the benefit of a doubt.
If enough people really feel strongly about this, why aren't we marching on Washington to demand an end to the Patriot Act? I think it's because most people see the collection of metadata to be on the cusp of being too intrusive but it doesn't quite cross the line.
It's close, I have to admit.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)Just think about what someone can do with the ability to spy on all of your phone conversations if they don't mean well.
You presume that someone who is an authoritarian won't see this as a wild night in Vegas. I'm telling you right now, someone is sizing this kind of power up and they are planning to go wild on all of us.
randome
(34,845 posts)Of course we don't know what they're REALLY doing but that's always the case with government agencies.
I won't lose any sleep over it. They can have my Precious Bodily Numbers any time they want.
Let's see, during the past couple of days, I called my daughters' allergy doctor, I received a call from my cable provider, my ex called me about something, a couple of head-hunting consulting firms called me. Not too much about going 'wild' in my life.
Sure, that's just my own personal example but I have seen no sign that any of this information is being abused in the way you theorize. Could it? Of course. And I would prefer that the program stop.
But I'm not that concerned about it, either.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)If you were in a relationship with someone, do you think you would trust them if they said they cheated and lied to you about it, but didn't do it more than once?
Do you really trust someone who has lied?
Most of our lives are mundane, but you never know who is going to come to power and what their issues will be. Perhaps they will think those with allergies are inferior and should be exterminated to cleanse the population.
You just never know.
I'd suggest you've probably said things on the internet or on the phone that could be used against you by someone who did not share the same political beliefs as you. You could be punished because of that.
With so many things in this world, it is very hard to see the end result at the beginning.
No one thought Hitler was serious, he was a complete joke. I could prove that people just thought this, but the problem is that not taking him seriously lead to the Holocaust.
We cannot be stupid enough to make the same kinds of mistakes. Obama is obviously not an honest President, but he probably wouldn't do anything along the lines of Hitler.
Who comes after though, you just never know.
randome
(34,845 posts)And we are still talking about phone metadata, right? So things I've said, regardless of the mechanism, are not being collected.
And...Hitler? Please don't give Godwin's Law any more traction. I'm tired of hearing about how all roads lead to Hitler.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Just patterns, hur dur.
The Drone War Doctrine We Still Know Nothing About
http://www.propublica.org/article/drone-war-doctrine-we-know-nothing-about
In these attacks, known as “signature strikes,” drone operators fire on people whose identities they do not know based on evidence of suspicious behavior or other “signatures.” According to anonymously sourced media reports, such attacks on unidentified targets account for many, or even most, drone strikes.
Despite that, the administration has never publicly spoken about signature strikes. Basic questions remain unanswered.
What is the legal justification for signature strikes? What qualifies as a “signature” that would prompt a deadly strike? Do those being targeted have to pose a threat to the United States? And how many civilians have been killed in such strikes?
The administration has rebuffed repeated requests from Congress to provide answers – even in secret.
randome
(34,845 posts)If Congress wants to stop playing games, they can force the President to give the info to them.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Your opinion isn't worth anything.
The opinions of Russell Tice and Babek Pasdar, however, are worth something.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/01/21/russell-tice-confirms-everything-weve-surmised-about-bushs-illegal-wiretap-program/
First, Tice’s description of the program confirms everything we have surmised about the program. The program:
Established the means to collect all American communications
Analyzed meta-data to select a smaller subset of communications to tap further
Conducted human analysis of those messages
That is, the Bush administration used meta-data (things like length of phone call that have nothing to do with terrorism) to pick which communications to actually open and read, and then they opened and read them.
~snip~
And of course, everyone’s communications–everyone’s–were included in the totality of communications that might be tapped.
Including–especially–journalists. We knew that both Christiane Amanpour and Lawrence Wright’s communications were tapped. Well, apparently so were every other journalists’.
Tice figured out that they were getting journalists’ communications when he realized that they were separating out all the journalists’ communications–but then ensuring that those communications were still collected 24/7.
From March 2008:
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.
randome
(34,845 posts)His resume showed experience with 'Space Communications' and when asked about it, he said 'I watch Buck Rogers.' Of course this is just from Wikipedia but I'm not inclined to spend much time on him.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Of the WTC disaster. Prior to 9/11 the same justification was used yet it didnt help. They had lots of data.
By the way when you ask a "So you are saying,.." question, usually the answer is "hell no that's not at all what I am saying."
randome
(34,845 posts)The August memo that no one read? "Who could have foreseen that terrorists...blah, blah, blah" by Condoleezza Rice.
At least now, with 3 layers of review, I'm willing to bet our chances are better with a Democratic administration that actually wants to keep us safe.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Those that are evaluating the data are most likely the same ones used during the Bush admin.
randome
(34,845 posts)But in the end, it's phone metadata and I think it's use would be very limited and it's misuse easy to track.
There may be enough internal controls to prevent anyone from getting personal access to the data. Of course we don't know that. Obama could be much more forthcoming about what kind of safety measures are in place.
I would also not have a problem with shutting the whole thing down, I just don't see it as a particularly egregious matter.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)be used to violate our rights. THe next president may not be so honest.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)nt
CAG
(1,820 posts)originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)because God knows wanting a government that doesn't spy on my ass 24/7 and thinks I have the right to privacy is really something only a whackanut would want.
If I haven't violated the law, or it is not suspected that it has happened, then I should not have my privacy violated. I should be able to think, speak, and act freely so long as it does not injure others.
In this new day, unfortunately, we are under the kind of surveillance that suggests we are all suspects in crimes that have yet to even be committed.
CAG
(1,820 posts)Stalin, or the mass murder of 3000 innocent men, women, and children.
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)You're equating the deaths of 3,000 people with the deaths of 6,000,000. Notice the difference in the zeros. We call those orders of magnitude.
9/11 was bad, but no where near as bad.
The problem is that you do not see the directness of it all.
We will be in serious trouble of a nature like the Holocaust or WWII if this loss of freedom continues.
If we erode the rights that protect us from the Holocausts or the WWIIs, then we make it certain those horrors will revisit us again.
People are not biologically different from the times when those wars happened.
We did not come up with some magical adaptation to change our violent ways.
Only codes of law that are effective can tame the beast within us all.
And you are arguing that the very code of laws that protects us is disabling those who "wish to protect us."
Pathetic, sad, and disgusting indeed.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)again, alex?
CAG
(1,820 posts)Its tiring to hear over and over that someone is against something and equating that something to something much more horrible. Thats what beck and jones do....we should be Above that.
....and i love after your incorrect accusation of me of equating 3000 deaths with 6000000 deaths, you go onto your slippery slope argument of prism leading to the holocaust.....wow
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)so they can know who is posting.
Yeah, you caught me. It's Alex Jones. But really, when the aliens from planet zork-zork come to take over the government started by the illuminati, this will all be old news, won't it?
Because pointing out the fact that liberal democracy can become fascist dictatorship in less than a decade is really only something Alex Jones could do, right?
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)nt
KG
(28,751 posts)CAG
(1,820 posts)just hope to minimize the amount of terrorist events. Its a little disingenuous and not much of an effective argument to point to one terrorist bombing to say something isn't working. The other side could simply point to other events that have been prevented by project 1984.
Response to originalpckelly (Original post)
mother earth This message was self-deleted by its author.
nenagh
(1,925 posts)"Palantir, the War on Terror's Secret Weapon". So, in 2011, it explained how the Palantir program works.
The scope of the info, if the article is correct, allows the CIA agents apparently to link activities of a would be bomber to stop the action before it occurs. They are able to track actions that individually may not appear suspicious.
If this prevents a bomb going off, I'm all for that. Maybe it can help track pedophiles, don't know.
I'd link to the article if I had the tech know how...
But I found it odd that Bloomberg published the info several years ago.
(Written by Ashlee Vance and Brad Stone)
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
CrispyQ
(36,461 posts)A very thoughtful post, worthy of reading. This part really resonated.
I am very disheartened by this knowledge. That this is being done demonstrates a deep and threatening distrust on the part of the US government of US citizens. That is a contradiction of the idea of democracy. The government is supposed to be of, by and for the people. If that is the case, then the "government" and the "people" are not separate, and the government does not operate a surveillance program on the people.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Twofish
(63 posts)Count me in that group.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)I have always said that we will never be totally safe-----this is life, after all. So going to extraordinary methods in an attempt to make us "safer" is useless. We will still not be safe, and we will also not be free.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)It's OK If You're A Democrat
The New "Normal"
think4yourself
(837 posts)You are not the only one. The 4th Amendment might as well be removed from the Bill of Rights.
I don't recognize this apathy on here.
sagat
(241 posts)
gulliver
(13,180 posts)The 911 planes didn't just take down buildings. Bush and the Republicans magnified Bin Laden's success exponentially. The bombings you seem to think are so harmless are much more likely to bring about concentration camps than surveillance under court and Congressional oversight.
We over-simply at our peril.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)you guys don't care about me and my little portion of this country. Ugh
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)It's everyone. Including themselves. If they are downloading the whole internet, it's literally everyone. I don't see two sides here.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)and who knows, it may be billions of people are reading this freely and openly without restriction
Not for nothing, the man in the gabardine suit is a spy and his bowtie was really a camera.
(c)Paul Simon
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)NOT live through another one.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to 'keep us safe'? And how exactly does spying on Americans who are not suspected of any crime, 'keep us safe'? How will this stop another 9/11 from happening, and since all this has been going on for over 12 years and we are still not safe, when exactly will we be safe?
How many other rights do you think we need to give up to ensure our safety? And what is more desirable, striving for 100% security which is literally impossible, or remaining a free country? Didn't Bush tell us they hated us for our freedoms? So how does US handing over our freedoms make us safe? Do you think they will just say 'okay, they took away their own freedoms, they were so scared, we don't need to bother them anymore, Mission Accomplished'?
I must be stupid or something, but I did not see how handing over our rights to the government when Bush was doing it, was going to stop another 9/11 and I still don't see it.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)at its best. sigh
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)social and economic problems.
9/11 was a big, huge deal. Of course. But look at what we've done since. What have we spent, in blood, turmoil, and the loss of a sense of personal security?
Are we safer? We'll never know. But we are poorer. And fewer. And less trustful, not just of our enemies, but of each other.
This is how they win.
randome
(34,845 posts)I would have liked that better than how we've handled it since 2001.
But the PNAC agenda was not about keeping America safe. We will be dealing with the ramifications of this for a long time since 'peace' is not much in fashion among the politicians.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)than kill a bunch of people.
indepat
(20,899 posts)all other firearms, promote a living wage, promote the lowering of burgeoning wage inequality, promote lower infant and maternal mortality, promote clean water and air, promote greater wage equality, promote all aspects of public health, promote all others aspects of the general welfare for starters. Keep us safe, my ass. 
forestpath
(3,102 posts)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)and it is beyond pathetic to see the Corporate Brigade recycling Bush era threats of "Terra! Terra! Terra!" for their craven partisan apologism.
Hypocrisy reeks. Especially for grave, despicable assaults on Americans and our Constitution.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)
undergroundpanther
(11,925 posts)the government has become a terrorist.
