Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem there was and remains a lack of free information flow between the foreign intelligence community and the domestic intelligence community. The "wall" between them was set up by the Intelligence Oversight Act, and that wall still exists even between foreign and domestic intelligence departments within Homeland Security.
That is always the excuse. It was said that the Patriot Act would solve that. No, the problem is they were so busy with their mass spying and feeling old ladies up at the airports that they missed the problem right in front of their face.
That is always the excuse. It was said that the Patriot Act would solve that. No, the problem is they were so busy with their mass spying and feeling old ladies up at the airports that they missed the problem right in front of their face.
It's the same excuse because lawyers interpret the Oversight Act for different groups according to whose butt needs covering at the time.
Prior to 9/11, the intelligence community lawyers interpreted the Oversight Act strictly in order to best cover the butts of agency brass. In their interpretation, "the wall" was high and thick and had no openings.
When the 9/11 commission cited "the wall" as part of the problem, executive branch lawyers--who had a different set of butts to cover--rushed out with their interpretations that the previous interpretations of a high and tight wall were erroneous and that the wall was really low and had plenty of openings.
Because of this new and different interpretation, the law itself was never changed, and in fact the same "wall" exists even within Homeland Security.
Essentially, the effect of the "wall" is that there is no free flow of inquiry and response at the analyst or field agent level. An inquiry from, say, an FBI field agent has to go up his chain to his high brass in order to go over the "wall" to the CIA or DoD (which includes both the NSA and the DIA). Then that inquiry has to go down the chain on the other side of the wall to be tasked to an analyst who might have the answer.
In the same way, if an analyst in NSA or DIA sees information that had not been previously asked for in a formal inquiry, that report has to go up his side of the "wall" through his brass, then maybe it will cross over and somehow find itself in the hands of an FBI field agent who can use it.
So the "red tape" of having to goto another nation for web history that is PUBLIC DATA protects people? Um hello, public data is public whether it is web history or public library records. It's not like they are phone tapping without probable cause.
Yes, they are. Um hello, we don't need a Patriot Act to let the government read public data.
A federal judge in New York ruled yesterday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers without judicial oversight or public review.
I don't get it. I don't understand so many who claim to be against it but yet they are unable to blame either Bush or Obama depending on their party affiliation.
I'm against it and blame BOTH Bush and Obama. They both signed the law.
Check out the ads that show up on your computer? Look familiar? Private companies have the legal right to follow consumers buying habits; Google, Facebook they have the right to "spy" on your posts and your searches. Telemarketers have the right to continue calling your private phone line trying to get you to spend money. Yet Americans are concerned because NSA can look at your phone records (not the audio) and see who is calling who? Really? Are we that pathetic?
I have nothing to hide, hell, they can listen to my phone calls for all I care. Give me a National ID, doesn't bother me. I have to show ID to get on a plane, buy a car, open a bank account, sometimes even to make a purchase in a store, so why should I care that NSA is looking at who I am calling and who is calling me?
Check out the ads that show up on your computer? Look familiar? Private companies have the legal right to follow consumers buying habits; Google, Facebook they have the right to "spy" on your posts and your searches. Telemarketers have the right to continue calling your private phone line trying to get you to spend money. Yet Americans are concerned because NSA can look at your phone records (not the audio) and see who is calling who? Really? Are we that pathetic?
it wasn't that long ago that it was unthinkable that the IRS would target people over their politics.
Quote:
I have nothing to hide, hell, they can listen to my phone calls for all I care. Give me a National ID, doesn't bother me. I have to show ID to get on a plane, buy a car, open a bank account, sometimes even to make a purchase in a store, so why should I care that NSA is looking at who I am calling and who is calling me?
Its none of their business.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Um hello, public data is public whether it is web history or public library records. It's not like they are phone tapping without probable cause.
Private Companies Spy on Consumers every day
