NSA Surveillance

See, this is what happens in a debate, going from one extreme to the other. I never at any point said a THING about commerce use of this data and you go on an assumption without ANY information. As a matter of fact I am NOT ok with private corporations harvesting consumer information. HOWEVER private corporations are not trying to take my personal emails, text messages, or phone call information to use it for potential legal action against me either. Let's keep this debate on topic, shall we?

 

I was merely asking a question.

The "government"* itself is not collecting this data. They are requesting it's delivery from the corporations that do.

*albeit there may be an exchange of money which greases these wheels

And private corporations most certainly ARE using it for legal action against you -- or more specifically, legal protection against you. Legal action is a 2-way street, and the bigger war trunk you have in terms of information is an asset in your corner.

No offense, but I find Target tracking my spending habits, frequency of purchase, and consumer trends -- then marketing products to me based on that information -- to be far more onerous and invasive than the NSA trying to determine if I want to blow some shit up and kill people in the process.

So, it is on-topic, because the gub'ment is acquiring their data from these corporations -- it's not an independent action.

 

I disagree with you on this part Humanity. There is a big difference in what we have at hand here, and the point I have been trying to get across, and that is that for the GOVERNMENT to obtain information on a person with the intent to investigate or "track" someone and/or their actions should require a warrant. Period.

 

Fair enough.

Although -- from what I have read, I believe the government does not need a warrant to acquire the data -- but they DO need one to access/analyze it.

Of course, I could be lagging in the news cycle. It may have come to light that they have been analyzing it without a warrant. I'm just stating the last I personally heard.

 

Acquiring is is just as good as accessing/analyzing it. I seriously doubt that they are acquiring it and just letting it sit dormant. If they obtain the information, they ARE going to go through said information. They should not even be able to have it in their possession, or access to it without a warrant. Just because I didn't USE that $100 bill I took from you does not excuse me from breaking the law by taking it in the first place.

 

Apparently they aren't breaking the law by acquiring it.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013...lection-order-it-may-be-legal-but-is-it-wise/

And, in reference to the first point you bring up -- the amount of metadata they are acquiring is so vastly huge, there is essentially no way of monitoring EVERYONE'S data.

Furthermore, FISA, the FISC, PRISM and the Patriot Act all require warrants for specific targeting of individuals -- even if that "individual" is just a phone number.

Now, the fact that this is done in a secret court and the concept of "secret laws" is extremely disturbing and needs to be investigated and uncloaked. There should never be such as thing as a "secret law."

 

Also, here's this about Section 215 of the Patriot Act which makes all this possible.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...candal_what_patriot_act_section_215_does.html

 

Okay, technically the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) makes all this possible, but I digress...

 

I believe many in this thread need to educate themselves on the US Constitution...the 1st Congress...the State Ratifications...
And the supporting declarations (documents) put into the record by the states, as part of the ratification process (and the basis for the bill of rights, along with the Constitutional Amendments)

And, as important...Why.
(Part of the why, is how the British Monarchy treated the American and British Colonies. And a large reason for the Revolutionary War)

Happy reading!

 

"Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.

When we look at the American Revolution this way, it was a work of genius, and the Founding Fathers deserve the awed tribute they have received over the centuries. They created the most effective system of national control devised in modern times, and showed future generations of leaders the advantages of combining paternalism with command."

- Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States

 

As long as nobody fucks with my LP porn, we good.

 

The government cannot and will never be able to guarantee peace and security so why should you give up your privacy? They can't stop any of these crazies from doing what they've done but they love to use all instances of terrorism foreign and domestic as a ploy to strip you of your rights (for your protection). Anyone willing to give up freedom for security is a moron in my opinion.

 

I am not against the government but I am against communism and loss of freedom! Plus its sad when vladimir Putin is lecturing us on freedom

 

And I've repeatedly tried to explain it's not phone records or whatever, Bill. It's the computerized metadata used by phone companies to route and track calls - a customer ID number, where the call originated, which phone switching systems the call went through, and so on. There is no personal information (other than the customer ID number). The NSA still has to contact the phone company, with a warrant, to obtain any personal information.

Actually, if you really want to see what's in metadata, look at the full header of an email message you've received (on your computer, it may be under the "view source" menu item). That's the metadata. It shows the sender's email address, the routing (what servers the message went through), the original service provider, the receiving service provider, the message type (html, text, etc), whether the message was scanned for viruses, what anti-virus program scanned the message, the software (version, etc) used to create the message (companies have to get credit for their email software), and so on. Not one word of personal information.

To find out who actually sent the message (the name & address associated with that email address), one must still contact the sender's email service provider. And, while the service provider can routinely sell the info for profit (spam, etc), law enforcement agencies and similar are required, by law, to obtain a warrant.

Two messages ago, I provided one example of how this info might be valuable to the NSA - to find out, in real time, where a call originates. Once again, when a call comes into a suspected terrorist's phone (monitored by warrant), they have no way of knowing in real time where those incoming calls are coming from or who is making them. They can request that information from the phone company, but that takes time. Processing the data themselves is quicker. And, by knowing where, they can then dispatch personnel to watch that suspect as well. They can find out later who that suspect actually is (who is associated with that customer ID number) by contacting the phone company (with a warrant).

 

God bless. I Couldn't agree more. People think that the Government is watching them. Uncle sam doesn't give two shits about you. Hate to tell you skeptics this but your not that important. God bless TW God bless America.

 

That's not what this is about. This is about due process, and the 4th amendment. FISA has it's own secret court that approves court orders for data. A secret court that issues secret wiretapping orders that has never, in it's history denied a request from the NSA.

Why would a government agency circumvent the judicial system? The short answer is to avoid oversight. And we all know how that's worked out given the recent abuses of power.

I don't do anything illegal, I've never been arrested and I don't even have a Facebook page or post any personal information (beyond how much I love tacomas!) on the internet. Completely irrelevant to the conversation however, as that's not the key issue here.

 

I do think the government is too powerful and has too many shady things going on. However, out of the hundreds of millions of citizens, why should I think the government is out to spy on me? It isn't like they even care who I am, I am just a social security number who pays their excessive bills.

The case would be different if I had some known record or was a known threat. If it helps them to track terrorists, I can see why they should do some of this stuff.

 

There was a good point made by someone that I was discussing this with. The data that's been aggregated, it sticks around forever. In that should you ever run into a situation where you come under scrutiny, the sum of every comment that you've ever made on the internet can be searched, taken out of context and used against you. Maybe in the court room, maybe by an investigator, maybe by a customs agent.

There have been times where I've been on the phone with my dad (who really doesn't care for certain politicians and is basically a crotchety, sarcastic old man) where I've thought to myself, "Gee if anyone were monitoring this call I could certainly see how the context of this conversation could be taken HIGHLY out of context."

 

Well you got one thing right in your post.......