why are so many on our side falling for this"scandal"?

[veganlush]

,it's scandal season in d.c. We have a democratic president and a repugnant house. Remember when they were trying to pin multiple murders on the clintons? The call logging story is seven years old. They are logs of numbers called and call duration, not wiretaps. It has prevented attacks and politically they are unavoidable. If Obama had curtailed them and we got hit, romney would be in the Whitehouse now.

[bowens43]

1. so you're perfectly happy to trade freedom for a political gain?

IMO that is a pathetic attitude. Bush was fucking us and we screamed , Obama fucks us and so many here say 'no problem, we're being fucked by a Democrat, it's ok'

[veganlush]

2. it's logs, not warrentless wire taps

Some actions and intelligence are necesary to prevent attacks. Why not address what i actually posted?

[Android3.14]

3. Wow. Do you even listen to yourself?

Logs is too much.
The fact of the matter is that the government is tracking innocent people as if they were criminals.
Your complacence is despicable.

[veganlush]

8. so who should they track?

just criminals? Do you listen to yourself? Should they leave Innocent people completely un-tracked, and only track criminals? Should we have criminals register themselves, so that we will know that it is appropriate to track them? likewise, shouldn't we have the innocent declare themselves so? call logs show what numbers are communicating with each other, date, time and duration of call, to be used later only if a connection to a suspicious person is made.

[LiberalFighter]

19. They should track those that they have probable cause to track. No more no less.

Tracking everyone is what they did in Russia.

[veganlush]

44. where does probable cause come from?

if a cop is watching over an event, like say, a sporting event, he looks around the crowd for suspicious behavior, etc...in so doing, he is also looking at everyone else. How can you head off trouble if you're not looking at all? The call logs are just that-they don't associate the numbers with names. they go back later to see who an individual deemed suspicious is talking to. We aren't talking about wiretaps here, we're talking about call logs. Do we whine when at a sporting event or other gathering if a cop looks at us? Why not? why not stomp up and down about that?

[premium]

49. That's not the definition of probable cause at all.

In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which an officer or agent of the law has the grounds to make an arrest, to conduct a personal or property search, or to obtain a warrant for arrest, etc. when criminal charges are being considered. It is also used to refer to the standard to which a grand jury believes that a crime has been committed. This term comes from the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

So, show us the probable cause that the NSA has for the blanket gathering of phone records.

[LiberalFighter]

56. The officer is policing a public event

Your cell phone activity are not public events. Neither is your mail or conversations you have in your home or locations that you have an expectation of privacy that is not in the public venue.

The law requires probable cause for a warrant to listen in on a conversation and the warrant is limited to specific phone numbers associated with the person in question. The law also requires a warrant to open mail or packages and the warrant has to be specific.

[veganlush]

61. why the strawman?

Of course warrants are required, but we aren't talking about wiretaps, we're talking about call logs.

[LiberalFighter]

62. There isn't any strawman. You are looking for exceptions and excuses.

You equate that it is only call logs. And that doesn't wash.

A business does not have to provide any records or access to the property to law enforcement unless there is a warrant. Even then they are specific in nature. In the case of cell phone records the users have an expectation of privacy. Just as land line users have an expectation of privacy.

It would be like maintaining a log of magazine and newspaper subscriptions from all companies. Requiring cable/satellite companies to provide a log of all tv shows or movies their viewers watch. Requiring all gas dispensing locations to provide a log of all customers purchasing gas from them that use credit or debit.

[veganlush]

63. so there's no value

In intercepting clandestine terrorist communication?

[premium]

20. Wow,

I can't just can't believe that someone who claims to be a progressive dem is defending this assault on our 4th Amendment. But, I guess it's ok because it's a Dem. Admin.

[WeekendWarrior]

30. Re: 4th Amendment: Let's not forget the word "unreasonable."

I see nothing unreasonable about this at all.

[premium]

33. This right here is what makes me sad that you see

no problem the govt. collecting data on 100's of millions of innocent Americans phone records.

[WeekendWarrior]

35. I'm sorry you're sad, but in what way is it harming the innocent?

Tell me how this does you harm. Or anyone. Seriously.

[premium]

36. Just the fact that the govt is collecting data on innocent americans

phone records doesn't bother you?
I truly hope you're not the future of our country.

[WeekendWarrior]

37. HOW IS IT HARMING ANYONE?

You haven't answered that question.

I'm over half a century old, so you don't have to worry about me being the future. I've seen much, much worse than this in the past—things that did REAL harm—and we still managed to survive.

But unless and until you can tell me how innocent people are being harmed, you're wasting your breath.

And I'm not joking. HOW ARE INNOCENT PEOPLE BEING HARMED?

It's a simple question. Surely you have the answer.

[premium]

38. WHO THE FUCK CARES IF IT'S NOT HARMING INNOCENT AMERICANS?

Just the fact that they are collecting data on innocent Americans should be cause for alarm, what part of that don't you understand.
I guess I'm old school where we could expect the govt not to intrude on our 4th Amendment right without probable cause.
Can you point out the probable cause for wholesale data collection of 1000's of millions of innocent Americans phone records?

Seems most here don't agree with your position, which probably reflects most of the American people.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022964607

[WeekendWarrior]

39. All right, then

you couldn't answer that question, let's move on to the next questions:

How does this violate probable cause? Why is this unreasonable search and seizure?

This is obviously a measure to help prevent terrorist attacks and it does no harm whatsoever to collect phone numbers and call duration of 1000's of anonymous Americans.

Unless and until you can tell us how this is harming anyone, you have no reason to crow.

Let's reserve our outrage for something that does real harm.

[premium]

40. Show us the probable cause for obtaining a blanket warrant

from a secret court to collect data from 100's of millions of innocent Americans phone records, you know, that pesky 4th Amendment that you seem to be so willing to throw away.

I am an American, I have every reason to crow and express my outrage at what is, IMO, an outragous violation of our 4th Amendment right.

Once again, your views are in the minority here.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022964607

[WeekendWarrior]

41. You haven't answered a single one of my questions

and you keep saying the same thing over and over again. You have yet, however, to demonstrate how this violates the 4th Amendment or how it harms anyone.

My view may well be in the minority here, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Anonymous data collection harms no one as far as I can tell, and I'm happy to be corrected if it does. And it's only when that data points to a specific problem—potential terrorist activity—that anything is done about it. Then the proper warrants are obtained and the problem is investigated further.

This knee-jerk assumption that something outrageous is going on only weakens your position. So I'll say it again. Unless you can tell me specifically who is being harmed by this and how it violates the 4th Amendment, you've got no argument.

[premium]

42. And you refuse to show how there is probable cause for a warrant from

a secret court to collect data from 100's of millions of Americans phone records.
Probable cause means that there is evidence of a crime about to be committed or that one has been committed and there is evidence of it, just where does that probable cause exist?

[WeekendWarrior]

43. There is no warrant

The law doesn't require one in this instance. They aren't tapping any phones. They aren't invading anyone's privacy. They don't even know who the people are. They are merely looking at call patterns to search for suspicious activity with known terrorist phone numbers.

When I go to the airport, my luggage is x-rayed and I have to pass through a body scanner. When I go to a bar, my ID is checked to make sure I'm old enough to drink. In neither of these cases is there any evidence that a crime is about to be committed, yet they are both perfectly acceptable in order to prevent potential harm to the public.

That's what the NSA is doing in this case. And I'd say it's a lot LESS invasive than the TSA telling me to take my shoes off.

I'll say this again: save your outrage for something that's actually outrageous.

[muriel_volestrangler]

60. Knowing who you talk to, and when, is an invasion of privacy

It's naive to think that they don't know who people are from numbers; some numbers are in public records, others are given to government entities (eg when you apply for something, and they say "we must have a daytime number for you&quot . Others will be in credit card records for purchase of the phone (and yes, we you credit card records are involved too), or guarantee records. Only people goign to significant lengths to purchase an untraceable phone may not be indentifiable.

Can you source the quote (preferably under oath) for "they are merely looking at call patterns to search for suspicious activity with known terrorist phone numbers"? A very good question has been asked on DU: did they use this to track people involved with Occupy Wall Street? The government frequently labels any protesters as 'terrorist related' (another example is environmental protesters). When you go to a bar, or on an airplane, you are choosing to use a public place, one of which is not allowed for those under 21, the other of which is a known vulnerable target for terrorism. Using a phone, however, is legal for everyone, and does not put you, or others, at risk of death.

This may be less invasive; that's because you don't realise it's happening. But you don't know who is looking at your records, or even who is checking who is looking at your records and how they use the information. Other people think that when, for instance, Clapper lies to Congress about this, as he did in March, then we need to investigate what else government officials have been lying about.

[treestar]

46. Government actions does have to cause some type of harm

before it is actionable. You're going to be infuriated when you find out about the legal doctrine of "standing."

[premium]

47. So you're ok with the NSA collecting the data

of 100's of millions of innocent Americans phone records without probable cause, Americans who have done nothing wrong, not even suspected of doing anything wrong?

The harm is, IMO, that it destroys the trust of govt with the people, it violates, IMO, the 4th Amendment no matter what the appeals courts rule.
Secret courts? No recourse to appeal to the secret court? Is this the America you want? I certainly don't and I find it sad that some here thinks this is ok because some secret court says it is.
No thanks, and I will speak long and loud against this un-american crap.

[treestar]

48. Do you know about the doctrine of "standing?"

it is really going to make you mad.

Only the guilty should be subject of investigation? How do the police figure out who is guilty in the first place, so that they never ask anything on innocent Americans?

If a murder takes place on my street and the police come to my house to ask if I saw anything, they are bothering an innocent person who did nothing wrong.

Violates the 4th Amendment no matter what the courts rule? Who decides then? The media? Tweety? There is no legal jurisprudence in your world. Who decides? You? President Obama is as good as any other then. I'll take the job.

[Freddie]

52. I agree with you

But it's not a popular opinion around here

[ShadowLiberal]

65. The NSA is wasting valueable time and resources tracking innocent people

This isn't just a few innocent people in the wrong place at the wrong time to be suspects in some crime. This is wiretapping just about everyone!

Chances are well over 99.9% of the data that the NSA is gathering is useless junk data on innocent people.

If you get that kind of absurd amount of junk data it's going to make it nearly impossible to actually find valuable data on actual criminals in there. Other countries have tried similar data retention policies of people's web browsing, and had the police come to that same conclusion, and admit logging everyone's web searches did more harm then good for them at investigating actual criminals because there was just too much junk data to go through.

[pnwmom]

22. No, they're not tracking anyone. They're keeping a database so that

if there is an attack, or other information suggesting a future attack, they can follow the phone numbers. They can't wiretap unless they can get a separate order for that, which has always been the case.

[SunSeeker]

24. Thank you for interjecting facts. nt

[WeekendWarrior]

32. That's a complete mischaracterization of what they're doing

They aren't tracking innocent people as if they are criminals. They are looking at phone numbers in a database and looking for connections to terrorist activity.

How does that equate to tracking people? They're tracking numbers, not people. How, exactly, has any innocent person been harmed by this?

[grammiepammie]

51. Wow

Please. It is telephone numbers not connected with names and it has been going on since the Bush years and now, all of a sudden, it's a huge scandal.

[andlor]

14. +1

[WeekendWarrior]

28. What freedom have you traded? Name it.

I mean, seriously. What freedom have you traded because the NSA is looking at phone numbers?

The pathetic attitude is one that takes a non-issue like this and acts as if it's the end, or even the beginning-of-the-end of the world.

This is much ado about absolutely nothing. And I would have said the same thing during the Bush years.

[MH1]

50. What freedom am I giving up? Are you like Piers Morgan, "this the WORST civil rights violation EVER"

(Having, apparently, completely missed slavery, Jim Crow, the death penalty, oppression of women ....)

ETA: I'm not completely comfortable with what is happening, but a) it's mostly old news anyway; b) I'm in the tech world and this is complicated and most people don't even have a clue WTF they are talking about and I don't have the energy or motivation to educate them; c) the hype - particularly when I paused on Morgan's show for long enough to catch him saying that and I about fell out of my chair - is just ridiculous. Yes there are issues and it could be misused, and some people could get a little f*cked over by it, or even A LOT f*cked over by it, but for MOST people it is a COMPLETE non-issue, and people have been getting f*cked over by things outside their control (governmental and non-governmental) forever, and at far higher incidence rates than this is likely to do. This is republicans and other Obama-haters throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.

[CountAllVotes]

4. Obama is not off the hook in my book

and yeah, I'm sick of this sh*t.

Obama spies and lies. And yes, that is the truth.

Get over it and quit making excuses for a damned liar that spies on his own countrymen/countrywomen!

FUCK THAT SHIT!!!!!



How very UN-AMERICAN of you! Shame on YOU for accepting this sh*t!

[veganlush]

9. I'm awaiting your better solution.

should any monitoring of any calls occur? At least Obama added back in the requirement of the court signing off if wiretapping is required based on connections made from logging.

[veganlush]

10. Obama added court oversight back in, where bush had gone without it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014502576

[brush]

12. There's more to it than that.

Didn't that reporter Rosen out an operative that had managed to become a mole in North Korea, an almost impenetrable country, and the people working with the agent were also exposed, as was the whole operation?

Like I said, there was more to it than the big bad Obama monitoring call logs. Lives and to a degree, national security were involved. The reporter's hands are not clean on this as journalists know not to cross certain lines when it comes to these kinds of stories. Apparently the desire for a scope was more important thing to that particular reporter.

I don't see much difference between what Libby and Cheney did to Valery Plame and this.

Perhaps our outrage is misdirected.

[Cha]

58. Posters are lying about the facts. And, your calling us "un-American" is

is so 1950s.. Joe McCarthy style.

And, that shit doesn't fly around here.

NSA Bombshell Story Falling Apart Under Scrutiny; Key Facts Turning Out to Be Inaccurate

snip***

"Canonizing bad reporting as a means of inciting a debate is as bad as no debate at all. Attachment to empirical reality must remain a central trait of the left, otherwise the progressive movement is no better than the non-reality based propagandists on the right who will say and do anything to further the conservative agenda. So perhaps some positive changes on domestic spying are eventually achieved, but at what cost? Greenwald, who doesn’t really care about “left and right,” isn’t concerned with anything other than his personal agenda and clearly he’s willing to do whatever it takes in pursuit of those goals. Specifics presently."

***snip

http://thedailybanter.com/2013/06/nsa-story-falling-apart-under-scrutiny-key-facts-turning-out-to-be-inaccurate/

[napoleon_in_rags]

5. Here's the important 2006 story.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619

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.

I'm glad its out in the open and people are questioning and having a conversation, but this is a long term thing.

[pilar007]

66. Mark Kline.

I remember well. He wrote a book that got little attention, especially from mainstream outlets...the same ones that are now shocked that government continues data-mining.

[napoleon_in_rags]

67. Probably kickin' himself in the rear.

"Why didn't I wait till Obama was elected! I could be a rock star!"

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Because we evolved past sheep?

[savalez]

54. Or did you just change herds?

I for one am very suspicious of these so called "scandals".

"Conservative Advice To GOP: Don't Legislate, Focus On Scandals"

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/05/17/184824660/advice-to-gop-dont-legislate-focus-on-scandals

[Sunlei]

7. yes, this is why we need to get rid of the Rs in Congress, they love and vote for this crap.

We will never get rid of this crap if the very Rs who still TODAY wine/dine rove/cheney/bush gang aren't voted out. Vote like your life depends on it.

[Myrina]

16. Its parent was the Patriot Act. The only D who voted against that was Russ Feingold,

And the majority from both parties voted to renew it when it came up a couple years back.

Both parties hands are dirty on this one.

[Sunlei]

18. biz zaire, the usa crammed those laws in 10 days..now we have to spend trillions to feed the monster

we could have had a very nice healthcare system and thousands of trained Gov medical personal for that money. And a free lunch/breakfast for every school child.

Instead we have thousands of paid for profit contractors with employees who read message boards and listen to game chats trying to lure terrorist-talkers.

[randr]

11. The radar gun scans us all as we drive

How else do you catch the speeders? Given that the radar records of our locations and speeds are not stored nor, necessarily, identified with each of us as individuals.
I see a need to cast a wide net when it comes to identifying those who would harm us.
I also see a more important need for American foreign policy to foster an image that lessens the anger and hatred directed at us. This would include reigning in the American Military Industrial Complex and their increasingly intrusion into our foreign policies.
This old hippy still believes that Peace is the ultimate solution. All the rest is bullshit.

[Triana]

13. I'm not. I figured this was going on since back in bu$h years...

...with his "Patriot" Act and congress back then. I remember reading about some of this then. No one largely cared. The media ignored it.

NOW? Well...suddenly everyone is poutraged to find out that what passed into law and was implemented then - is happening now.

Well. Duh.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

15. I'm not crazy about it

and, truth be told, I'm not even sure how effective "programs" like this are but most Americans decided post-9/11 that they want a national security state and Congress made what is going on right now legal (doesn't mean it's "right", just legal), so it's fair to assume that this will continue as long as it's legal. It's ultimately up to the public through Congress to change the law and/or the courts to strike down as unconstitutional. But there's no "scandal" here to speak of IMHO.

[Myrina]

17. Well, considering they were monitoring the Tsarnaev's & still didn't stop the Boston bombing ...

I'd say not too effective.

[CountAllVotes]

21. you nailed it

Yep, that did a lot of good didn't it?

Were they really "tracking" him? If so, why didn't they catch him before he caused such tragedy and death?

Fruitless effort!

[treestar]

23. that's one case

No system is foolproof.

And if you don't want these logs to go to the government, accept the attacks that happen.

[MjolnirTime]

25. Because they've been looking for reasons to hate Obama all along

He's the guy who's already destroyed Social Security ten times over, remember??

[dlwickham]

31. and we have a winner!!

you hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head

these people don't like Obama and they're looking for reasons to attack him

of course, i still think that some of them are nothing more than trolls looking for attention and attempting to disrupt this site

[Freddie]

53. It's another trumped-up "scandal"

Now their strategy is to get the left pissed off, and it's working beautifully.

[MjolnirTime]

57. all the other scandals fell apart so they called their buddy Glen Greenwald.

[Cha]

59. Before that even..he's the guy who

didn't wave a wand and give us Single Payer.

But, he give us Obamacare which is a strong foundation for having single payer implemented in our future.

[markiv]

26. uhhhh, because I have a verizon phone and i'm pissed off?

my question is, why does every single defender i've seen, have something obama in their avatar or signature?

as long as we're insinuating axes being ground

[bunnies]

27. Wait till the big Benghazi scandal of 2020.

It promises to be a real humdinger.

[tridim]

29. I don't know, but it's odd that the same people on DU fall for these "scandals" every time.

It has become a snap reflex for them.

Something about old elm trees ?

[MjolnirTime]

34. That Tree is infected with worms.

[polynomial]

45. You mean there is gaming going on here!

That’s one of the famous lines in the Humphrey Bogart movie Casa Blanca. The local police, gendarme of the city make the claim to Bogart in his café that there might be gambling going on knowing all the time there is.

It’s very funny to think about all the data base stuff out their which includes business marketing, credit, criminal, educational, scientific, stock market economic, research, manufacturing, jobs, employment, development, transportation activity in ground and air, of course weather too.

It would seem to be better to crash into a huge big building with giant jet planes loaded with passengers and fuel to create a hate based war on a clear sunny day. All those data bases cross referenced to solve terrorist attacks. As an example my company has the right to look at my telephone record if I was involved in an on the job accident. I don’t have a problem with that.

Now, as far as looking at millions of Americans in just the point to point calling without looking at the content is in many senses just a scientific nonintrusive approach to what statistics call looking for the “outlier” or “trend” a data point that is distinct exclusive, and a direction, sort of what is called a vector that can create a field to the target area of terror, sabotage, violent acts of civilian mass murder. Many could defend such actions as commonly done in what business call marketing surveys. As in gas wars!

It happened with the so called 911 flag that did alarm the Bush administration. Many know that not taking any action is like holding the door open in the American society for terrorist actions to take place. That is the real reason for the Republican media supported data taping outrage exists. Consider the finding in such an analysis by professionals that get the common eureka moment that the Bush administration used these same features that gave exact knowledge terrorist actions will take place. With that said would totally destroy the Bush/ Cheney policies of the time.

Correlating information like that can be used in a court of law to support high crimes not just of abuse but direct intentional motives to subvert the constitution placing presidential, cabinet level, and military chiefs indictable for crimes, especially torture, or profiteering through torture too. The difficulty is finding the persons who are willing to take the responsibility to challenge the lawlessness of any pear political opponent, its obvious Obama is not the one. The media fight would be incredible, and likely dishonest in this period of time.

Its very certain hate radio and right wing cable Fox news extremist would have to spend everything they have to buy themselves out of the mess they created. Again America will never have a Golden Age of prosperity. That famous line in the preamble, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is fading with the Bush Cheney policies. Can America really achieve Life, liberty, and happiness through torture? From my view, no it is the wrong way to go.

[creon]

55. people have good reason

people have good reason to dislike it.
The Patriot Act was, and remains, bad law.
It should have neither been passed, nor should it have been renewed.

A decision was taken and was renewed:

to trade some civil liberty for national security.
I regard that decision to be a mistake.

But, in a dispute between national security and civil liberty, national security will win the dispute.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

64. Let me put it this way: So many on our side support Chris Christie in NJ. Anything's possible.

[UCmeNdc]

68. The GOP is all in support of the Patriot Act

The GOP is playing a game here.