Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Online Privacy Again at Issue(chasing Porn covering Gestapo like watching?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Civil Liberties Donate to DU
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:32 AM
Original message
Online Privacy Again at Issue(chasing Porn covering Gestapo like watching?
Keep everything about everyone on internet and we'll sort it out later - just want data tying Internet addresses to destinations on the Web and to e-mail sent and received - for now. Law requiring phone companies'records on who called whom being kept for 18 months to be extended to - forever? - by FCC?

Cato Institute: "You're talking about a massive transfer of power."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-internet2jun02,0,3795364.story?track=tottext

Online Privacy Again at Issue
The government asks Internet firms to keep records longer to track terrorists and child pornographers. But some fear misuse.

By Joseph Menn Times Staff Writer June 2, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO Big Internet and telephone companies are girding to fight an unprecedented call by the Bush administration for them to keep detailed records of customers' online activities for two years.

The request by Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III would dramatically expand the government's ability to track what people do online and with whom they communicate.

It follows disclosure this year that the Justice Department had solicited potentially billions of online search queries from some of the same companies and that the National Security Agency had requested calling records of virtually all U.S. customers.

Gonzales and Mueller asked Google Inc., Time Warner Inc.'s AOL and other companies to preserve the data at a May 26 meeting, citing their value to investigations into child-pornography distribution and terrorism. Internet companies typically keep customer histories for only a few days or weeks.<snip>
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, hell, they may as well start up the Department of Mail Opening
next!!! Open and xerox all of our mail, everything from that birthday card you sent to little Freddie on his third birthday, to that Dear John letter you got from your heartless former girlfriend! It's the same damn thing....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-02-06 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I agree - the cover of internet porn needs to be blown away, but that
may be dangerous and difficult given media spin

Our media loves a sex angle, and the reporters are too lazy or stupid or biased to care about civil rights if it does not involve a shield law for reporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
brianmckenna Donating Member (8 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-02-06 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Media does not want to offend the powers in charge
There is not much in the press about amendment e. The State has its hands full defending against the censorship by a State Judge of a website that supports amendment E.

Newspapers such as the Yankton Press and Dakotan will not print paid election ads supporting amendment E. The Judge runs the town of Yankton.

The Judges Order is illegal on 2 fronts. A Judge can not censor a political website and the one of the parties committed perjury. Not just a small lie but out right perjury. Claimed she never used her ex's social security number but his number appears on her credit report. The Judge ignored the proof of her credit report. The only way is could appear on her credit report is if she used it in a financial transaction. The Yankton Sheriff knows and even wrote a letter he knows of social security number fraud but it is not his problem.

The South Dakota Supreme Court wants a Grand to hear the case. Justice has a price.

Maybe he could right a bunk of no account checks using fake social security numbers as that is what judges favor in South Dakota

None of the U.S Senators or House of Rep wants to do anything as it is a hot potato best to stay away from.

goggle southdakotagov.info
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Nov 29th 2022, 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Civil Liberties Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC