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.
May the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America rest in peace.
Sadly, many of you could care less.
The article described documents stolen by Snowden, which describe plans by the NSA and British agencies to obtain many varieties of data from smartphones - both from calls made by the smartphone, and from apps used on the smartphone.
If the NSA is doing that collection without a warrant, then it's a clear and flagrant violation of the 4th amendment.
Is there any evidence they are actually collecting it? If so, throw the book at them.
Is making plans and setting up schemes to collect it, a violation of the 4th?
Actually, the ability to collect data from phones is nothing new. I'm sure machines that can collect such data from cell phones, became available as soon as the cell phones themselves did.
For that matter, I'm sure that, seventy years ago, technology to listen in on landline phone calls was just as available. And I'm sure old J. Edgar was drooling over the prospect of listening in as Pretty Boy Floyd called a henchman to ask when and where the next shipment of machine guns would be delivered.
I'm sure he had equipment that could be connected to phone lines, and had various plans for doing so. But he pretty much didn't actually do it, unless he had a warrant from a judge. And so, J. Edgar did nothing wrong.
Now we find that another govt agency is also drooling over the prospect of wiretapping (as it were) into various private data streams to hear Achmed Saiid al-Kaboom in Des Moines, discussing with a known purveyor of plastic explosives in Chicago, when and where the deliveries would be made. And they are clearly making plans to collect that info, and probably plans of what they will do if/when they get it.
But are they actually collecting it, without a warrant?
If not, then all this info is as useless and unimportant, as J. Edgar's plans were... and the NSA is just as "Not Guilty". And this story is a tempest in a teapot.
So, are they actually collecting the information, without a warrant?
We have lots of evidence they are dreaming and planning. But that's not illegal. And there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, it's their job.
If they are actually collecting any of this info without an explicit warrant, then as I said, we should throw the book, and some high-up people should spend a lot of time in prison.
My sentiments exactly.
WHY??
Very simple. My phone HAS NO "APPS".
It does not have text capability.
It does not connect to the internet.
I don't even use voice-mail!
I don't use the camera feature.
It makes (occasionally) and receives (frequently) phone calls.
That is all it does.
I will never have a "smart phone".
Ok, you're not a smart phone owner. Your phone data is still collected. Maybe the next Snowden disclosure will finally wake you from your apathetic slumber. For the good of the country, lets hope so.
The article described documents stolen by Snowden, which describe plans by the NSA and British agencies to obtain many varieties of data from smartphones - both from calls made by the smartphone, and from apps used on the smartphone.
If the NSA is doing that collection without a warrant, then it's a clear and flagrant violation of the 4th amendment.
Is there any evidence they are actually collecting it? If so, throw the book at them.
Is making plans and setting up schemes to collect it, a violation of the 4th?
Actually, the ability to collect data from phones is nothing new. I'm sure machines that can collect such data from cell phones, became available as soon as the cell phones themselves did.
For that matter, I'm sure that, seventy years ago, technology to listen in on landline phone calls was just as available. And I'm sure old J. Edgar was drooling over the prospect of listening in as Pretty Boy Floyd called a henchman to ask when and where the next shipment of machine guns would be delivered.
I'm sure he had equipment that could be connected to phone lines, and had various plans for doing so. But he pretty much didn't actually do it, unless he had a warrant from a judge. And so, J. Edgar did nothing wrong.
Now we find that another govt agency is also drooling over the prospect of wiretapping (as it were) into various private data streams to hear Achmed Saiid al-Kaboom in Des Moines, discussing with a known purveyor of plastic explosives in Chicago, when and where the deliveries would be made. And they are clearly making plans to collect that info, and probably plans of what they will do if/when they get it.
But are they actually collecting it, without a warrant?
If not, then all this info is as useless and unimportant, as J. Edgar's plans were... and the NSA is just as "Not Guilty". And this story is a tempest in a teapot.
So, are they actually collecting the information, without a warrant?
We have lots of evidence they are dreaming and planning. But that's not illegal. And there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, it's their job.
If they are actually collecting any of this info without an explicit warrant, then as I said, we should throw the book, and some high-up people should spend a lot of time in prison.
Are they?
You are normally level-headed. However, I believe this post demonstrates a downright amazing amount of naivete on your part. A host of "if/then" statements does not eradicate the general idea that you are giving the NSA the benefit of the doubt. Given what we already know about the NSA, I believe your hedging on the behalf of the NSA is a rather blatant and egregious oversight that cannot be accepted by any rational thinker out there.
Dreaming and planning at the NSA....but that's it....no action??? Count me as amazed that you even went there.
I believe your hedging on the behalf of the NSA is a rather blatant and egregious oversight that cannot be accepted by any rational thinker out there.
You believe wrongly.
Even if we have no evidence of illegal activity, the revelation of these files gives grounds for a major investigation of the NSA.
That said, you can also count me as NOT being one of the people who goes running around waving his hands and screaming in panic when old news such as this is re-regurgitated.
Do you believe that the seriousness of the charge alone, is sufficient to warrant a conclusion of "Guilty"?
Even if we have no evidence of illegal activity, the revelation of these files gives grounds for a major investigation of the NSA.
That said, you can also count me as NOT being one of the people who goes running around waving his hands and screaming in panic when old news such as this is re-regurgitated.
Do you believe that the seriousness of the charge alone, is sufficient to warrant a conclusion of "Guilty"?
What in the world is "old news" about this recent revelation????
And yes, given the lies that have been told by Intelligence/NSA leadership, yes, it is sufficient to conclude that the NSA is "guilty" on all counts. If they weren't, there wouldn't be international outrage, Presidential action, lawsuits no longer dismissed for "national security" reasons, etc.
Again, count me as amazed that you are hedging on behalf of the NSA. Not sure where you all of a sudden trust those folks to be doing the right thing given known history.
BTW, on a slightly different but related subject....
We've heard volumes about the NSA and other agencies collecting tons of "metadata" on cell phone and other calls. "Metadata" comprises the time and date of the call, the calling number, the receiving number, and the length of the call. No content, no voice recordings etc.
I believe that any government agency collecting ONLY this metadata, is just as flagrant a violation of the 4th amendment if done without a warrant, as the stuff I described in my last few posts here. For that, if the NSA can be shown to collecting just this metadata without a warrant, as I believe they have, then the penalties I mentioned earlier apply just as strongly here: Some top people in these agencies, and their bosses, should go to prison for a long time. Whether they are actually USING that metadata for anyting, or not.
Interestingly, if a snippet I heard on the radio the other day is true, Barack Obama agrees with me. I heard that he gave a speech (last week?) saying that for the government to own the files containing this metadata, is over the line drawn by the 4th amendment. And that a private company not controlled by the government (good luck finding one like that) should have possession of those files. And the only way the govt can get ANY of it, is by a judge signing a warrant, specifying exactly what the govt people can access... to the exclusion of all else.
Perhaps AT&T, T-Mobile, and all the other cell phone companies should be the ones keeping this data... and the cost of keeping it should be paid by the gummint, since the data is there for use by the government in conformance with its legitimate constitutional role of proiding for the national Defense. With the proviso that paying for its upkeep does NOT thereby give the gummint any access to it at all. Again, they can only get what a judge signs a warrant for.
I actually did a doubletake when I heard that radio report. I'm still not sure I heard it correctly, because it was so unexpected. But if it was true, and if Obama really meant it (that's the biggest IF in his Presidency), then he and I agree.
Why would Best Buy know my sexual orientation, where I traveled this past weekend, the contacts in my phone, etc?
Point me to the provisions of the law that allow them to collect this information surreptitiously from my phone as the NSA is doing.
This is a challenge for you to back up your words....not rhetoric. Show me.
Can you not read? The article does not say the NSA is collecting this. It says the "Best Buys" are and the gov is just trying to come up with a way to tap in. NSA would like to get to the company data if we are to believe the Guardian story. Your beef is with the companies at this point, not the NSA. And YOU gave them permission when you downloaded their app and just glossed over the warnings about what access it gives them to things on your phone etc. You accepted their terms.
What in the world is "old news" about this recent revelation????
As I pointed out, our various agencies have wanted to collect such data for as long as it has existed, which is 70 years or more... and has made plans for what they would do if they had it, on and on ad infinitum.
The fact that they are still wanting it and still making such plans, is hardly "news".
Quote:
Again, count me as amazed that you are hedging on behalf of the NSA.
Sounds like you missed what I wrote about this being grounds for major investigations, and about many high-ups and their bosses going to prison for long periods of time.
Quit reading only what you wish was true, and read what I wrote instead. You should know by now that I always mean everything I write.
Quote:
Not sure where you all of a sudden trust those folks to be doing the right thing given known history.
Nothing sudden about it. They have a job to do, and they are doing it. If they are abusing their authority (as they are with the metadata), then heads must roll.
But what you put in this thread, is nothing new, nor has it been in your or my lifetime. What it is, is grounds for a major investigation. And if what you speculated turns out to be true, then even more heads must roll, all the way to the top.
Even the NSA is innocent until proven guilty. So stop screaming and start proving. You haven't, yet.
Ok, you're not a smart phone owner. Your phone data is still collected. Maybe the next Snowden disclosure will finally wake you from your apathetic slumber. For the good of the country, lets hope so.
OK, they know that my sons call me frequently.
they know that I call my wife now and then.
they know that I hold an A&P license
they know that I am a General Class Amateur radio Operator (therefore, they know where I live)
they know that I have a Montana drivers license.
they know that I am retired military.
they know that my voter registration says "Independent"
It is a safe bet they even know what vehicles I own.
Big deal.
Now, let's look at the family:
An uncle who was Naval Intelligence.
A son who holds a TS clearance.
A son who held a TS clearance (he served aboard a nuclear sub)
I held a secret clearance
A son who served in Iraq and Afghanistan (officer, clearance unknown)
A daughter who was a Navy Corpsman.
A son who was an Army truck driver.
"THEY" probably know more about me and my family than I do!
"Privacy" is an illusion. You only think it exists. Actually, it does not exist, and has not for many years!
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.
