NSA spies on EVERYONE by SignyM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
President George W. Bush on Thursday said intelligence activities he has authorized are lawful

http://today.reuters.com/news/home.aspx

How ?#!@&% stupid does he think we are? Yeah, I now what he's going to say (if he hasn't already) We didn't "listen in" and therefore it's not wiretapping and therefore it's legal and besides it was authorized under the Patriot Act and besides I'm the President and as Commander-in-Chief I can do anything. At this point, even the most die-hard Bush supporters must realize that the guy thinks he IS the law.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:02 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Pen registers are surveillance devices that capture the phone numbers dialed on outgoing telephone calls; trap and trace devices capture the numbers identifying incoming calls. They are not supposed to reveal the content of communications. They are not even supposed to identify the parties to a communication or whether a call was connected, only that one phone dialed another phone. Nonetheless, in an increasingly connected world, a recording of every telephone number dialed and the source of every call received can provide a very complete picture - a profile - of a person's associations, habits, contacts, interests and activities. For that reason, pen registers and trap and trace devices are very helpful to law enforcement and pose significant privacy concerns. Much of the current debate over surveillance standards relates to the collection of transactional data by these devices and by other means.

A 1986 federal law requires a court order for use of such devices, but the standard for approval is so low as to be nearly worthless - a prosecutor does not have to justify the request and judges are required to approve every request.

http://www.cdt.org/security/000404amending.shtml

Technically, they should have gotten court orders, since they are doing this on a massive scale, which is just doing it individually, multiplied.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
At this point, even the most die-hard Bush supporters must realize that the guy thinks he IS the law.

There's many right on this board who support and respect the man, and still will, even after he nukes an unpopulated target in Iran. They'll say "It had to be done, and see, no civilian casualties!"
Naw, just a radiation cloud. A few rads will be good for their bio-diversity.

It's good to be the King.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:16 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

No, it's good be be Supreme Leader. As Bush said "things would be so much easier if this were a dictatorship". And they thought he was joking! HA!

Anyway, Im surprised not to find the usual Bush apologists spinning their usual crap. I can't imagine that this actually shocked anyone in that camp into re-thinking their view of Bush, because OF COURSE it's required to spy on every single citizen in the USA who is suspected of absolutely NOTHING in order to catch terrorists.

They're just figuring out how to word-smith this so that they don't look like lickspittle jackboots.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:51 AM

How long before a similar 'program' if you will, is put into place in Canada, although terrorist attacks are not a problem, but Harper may want to try it.

I think a little chaos is in order.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:04 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

And so we get General Hayden nominated as head of CIA. Gnl Hayden was in charge of the NSA during this massive fishing expedition, and is closely allied with John "Death Squad" Negroponte, former Ambassador to Hundoras and Iraq and current National Intelligence Director.

How can I say this w/o going into Pirate News-style ranting? The Bush administration (not Bush himself, he's too stupid to find his own d*ck with help from Dick) engineered a coup. They fudged two elections, managed to lie us into a quagmire, sent young peole to die while charging them for food and body armor, are busily bankrupting the Treasury, made torture and indefinite detention acceptable, screwed the middle class and the poor with their so-called tax breaks, mangled the response to Katrina, and shovelled money and influence at their buds- the pharmas, credit card companies, war profiteers, energy companies and- oh yes- let's not forget the oil companies.

You know, I don't use this word very often but this Administration is EVIL. EVIL.
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:22 PM

GLUEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
=You know, I don't use this word very often but this Administration is EVIL. EVIL.
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

I agree with everything you said, but would like to add something.

It's BULLSHIT all of it, BULLSHIT!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

You know, I don't use this word very often but this Administration is EVIL. EVIL.

Phoney real-estate dudes used to sell newly freed slaves land that didn't exist; this mentality has always been here, but the scope it operates on now is mind-boggling.
Could the Bush administration be called one big conspiracy?

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:46 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

It's a kleptocracy - the rich and powerful stealing whatever they can.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 1:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
It's a kleptocracy

That's it- one eight year run at squeezing the world, and seeing what they can all retire on, or pass to their (hopefully) evil descendants.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 1:56 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
It's a kleptocracy - the rich and powerful stealing whatever they can.

They're not stealing it, they're entitled too it. They're better than you, get over it

...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 2:01 PM

KHYRON

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
It's a kleptocracy - the rich and powerful stealing whatever they can.

They're not stealing it, they're entitled too it. They're better than you, get over it ...

I agree. If anything, it's the poor that are stealing from the rich. With their pathetic demands for healthcare and education and well-balanced budgets and addressing national debt... sickening. How are the rich and powerful supposed to enjoy their riches and power when all that these plebs can do is demand stuff from them all the time?

Other people can occasionally be useful, especially as minions. I want lots of minions.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 3:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth telephone

Sounds like its the phone companies that are gathering this information of their own accord. NSA is merely making use of what these companies are doing. Good faith time of war kind of idea.

If I invented some technology that had an alternate use to a Federal Agency in its effort to curb terrorism, then I'd gladly provide it. Its really no different then law enforcement making use of something like a security camera located at an ATM or Quickie Mart for a law enforcement purpose.

I also note for the record that the Constitution does not prohibit domestic surveilance without a warrant...merely such activity by the government or its agents. So when PirateNews uses his video camera to spy on Jews and Commie Gangsta Police, he might be committing various crimes like tresspassing, stalking, and child endangering...but he is NOT violating the Constitution.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 4:19 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 4:25 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Zero,

If I invented some technology that had an alternate use to a Federal Agency in its effort to curb terrorism, then I'd gladly provide it.

What a crock. Go to law school some day. The Constitution doesn't provide protection from business, it provides protection from government. The government is not authorized to have this information without a warrant.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 5:43 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

Ever look at your phone bill? It details all of the calls from a phone number, the number dialed, time and date. They use it to calculate your bill. I suppose they need to archive it for a certain number of months (possibly even years) in case of bill disputes. It may even be required by law in case the FCC needs to investigate charges of overbilling or whatever. And the problems is that with computers and cheaper hard drives, databasing is so EASY. But I've said before that I think ANY organization- whether it is a credit card company, grocery store, FBI, health insurance, NSA, or one of those ad hoc skip trace databases- must

(1) inform their subjects that they are part of their database and detail the information they have collected
(2) provide an opportunity for the subject to correct information and
(3) notify the suject whenever their information is acquired or examined by another entity.

I think with thos requirements, many of the optional databases would be eliminated.

But why would you be "more" curious about the phone companies? Aren't you at all curious why the government would invade the privacy of tens of millions of people?

Oh that's right- of course not. You've just figured out a way to wordsmith your acquiesence to an evil government.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 11, 2006 5:48 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Sounds like its the phone companies that are gathering this information of their own accord. NSA is merely making use of what these companies are doing. Good faith time of war kind of idea.-Hero
What a crock. Go to law school some day. The Constitution doesn't provide protection from business, it provides protection from government. The government is not authorized to have this information without a warrant.-Rue

Thank you, Rue. Zero really is a lickspittle jackboot. ANYTHING for the government!

So Zero, I've got something for you. It's from the Prez. Bend over. Enjoy.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 3:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

If I invented some technology that had an alternate use to a Federal Agency in its effort to curb terrorism, then I'd gladly provide it.

Me too.
Because if i didn't, I'd be eating gourmet meals at Gitmo.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:03 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

Itimised phone bills?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Zero,

If I invented some technology that had an alternate use to a Federal Agency in its effort to curb terrorism, then I'd gladly provide it.

What a crock. Go to law school some day. The Constitution doesn't provide protection from business, it provides protection from government. The government is not authorized to have this information without a warrant.

I hate to disagree, well not really. Police can use, without warrants information that has been gathered by a third party provided that the third party was not acting as an agent of the police. If they gather the information of their own volition, then it can be used. Naturally this is a general rule and their are nuances, exceptions, and limitations. Also if the third party commits a crime the third party can be prosecuted.

So if PN breaks into your house to videotape your live video conferance with Osama...the police can use it.

As for the NSA Phone directory...the Supreme Court has specifically acknowledged that the Constitution authorizes these types of databases.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Because if i didn't, I'd be eating gourmet meals at Gitmo.

I doubt that. Your far more likely to end up in an unspecified foriegn country with Signy and PN enjoying some of the many alternate uses for cattle prods.

You'll talk...oh yes, you'll tell us everything...

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Zero really is a lickspittle jackboot. ANYTHING for the government!

Wow, someone needs a pill this morning.

As long as my taxes keep getting cut...they can have a copy of my phone bill.

I think your just embarrassed that the NSA knows about your '1-900-SPANK-ME' addiction.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
the Supreme Court has specifically acknowledged that the Constitution authorizes these types of databases.

I found that part in the Constitution:

Quote:
"...persuant to evidence of misconduct and future methods of information storage (referred to by Mr. Jefferson as 'Date-bases'), all date-bases will be open to all government agencies for full and unrestricted use, for at such time of said technology, Human evolution will have evolved beyond petty politics into the Utopian dream, and such restrictions will be rendered pointless..."

I didn't know they thought that far ahead....

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 5:35 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

Well geezer just pretends to be stupid so that we wind up talking about how stupid Geezer is instead of how evil the government is. You see, Geezer will even trade in his reputation as something of an intellect in order to protect the beast. He's be the one on the sidelines, wondering how the phone numbers of Stalin's internees were going to be redistributed.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 5:41 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh wow, Zero, I can see you standing next to Geezer, watching people being rousted in the middle of the night and saying... "You see, we're surrounded by enemies! ENEMIES I tell you! And those kulaks*, they're just part of the conspiracy! Along with those who talk about the ideals of our early government! Along with those intellectutals! ROUND THEM ALL UP!"

*kulaks- that means look it up and learn some history.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 5:46 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Meanwhile, armed forces will be deployed in the USA.

Quote:
Faced with growing pressure from southern states, the Bush administration wants the military to come up with ideas to help solve security problems along the U.S. border with Mexico.

OH PUHLEEZ! Why doesn't Bush just fund the Border Patrol instead of squeezing it to death? We don't need "the military" to do this job, we just need Bush to do HIS job by making sure Immigration has the resources and the mandate to do their job!

The pattern is that Bush uses every problem to extend his authority. High gas prices? Just give him the authority to set CAFE standards! (Nevermind that he would be legislating from the Oval Office.) Attack on the USA? Just gather up info on BILLIONS of phone calls of unsuspected- and unsuspecting- citizens! Problems at the southern border after squeezing the Border Patrol dry? Send in the troops!

It should make you nervous.

-------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 8:50 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

What the hell are you making Hero that you're excited for these tax cuts. Please don't tell me you're willing to whore away your freedom for the average of 150 dollars this bill is expected to save middle Americans in this country.

What can you even do with a 150 dollars?
Why don't you sign on for that hundred dollar gas rebate the Republicans were trying to sell you also?

Of course if you make over a milliion, the average tax break is something like 40,000. Now we'e talking...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 9:22 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Zero,

Quote:
Naturally this is a general rule and their are nuances, exceptions, and limitations. Also if the third party commits a crime the third party can be prosecuted.

No kidding. Such as right to privacy in the workplace in your personal effects and other areas normally considered private, etc. This isn't even related to a crime, just the RIGHT to PRIVACY. Though we all know that isn't in the Constitution.

Quote:
As for the NSA Phone directory...the Supreme Court has specifically acknowledged that the Constitution authorizes these types of databases.

Show me the reference, hot shot.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 10:41 AM

FIVVER

Here's the case reference you wanted. It was a 1979 6-3 decision by the Supreme Court...

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=442&invo
l=735

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:02 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Yep...it was used without a court order, as per the article, and the appeals court came down with a divided decision in favor of the conviction.

That wasn't exactly a win for liberty. And in my opinion was an unconstitutional ruling.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:03 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Re previous post - a new law in 1986 superceded the 1979 Supreme Court decision, and warrants are now required for pen registers and trap and trace.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:13 AM

FIVVER

Here's all the 86 law does:

Quote:
A 1986 federal law requires a court order for use of such devices, but the standard for approval is so low as to be nearly worthless - a prosecutor does not have to justify the request and judges are required to approve every request.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:24 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

so why can't the Bush administration muster up at least that low 'worthless' standard of approval?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:32 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Not only that, but the feds have 72 hours AFTER they wiretap to obtain a post facto court order. The hitch - they have to show probable cause. I've said it before, this is not about security. The administration wants its spying to NEVER be reviewed by ANY court. End of story.

BTW - TENS OF MILLIONS of US citizens have had their phone records searched. That is one in ten of everyone you pass on the street. Does ANYONE think there is 'reasonable cause' that all those USers have terrorist links?

Hero, Geezer, Auraptor, Fivver - time to shuck and jive.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:39 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

That particular ruling seems to have been superceded by a change in law. Federal Register Title 18

Quote:
General prohibition on pen register and trap and trace device use; exception
Release date: 2005-08-03 (a) In General.— Except as provided in this section, no person may install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order under section 3123 of this title or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).

So a "person" can't initiate a trap and trace w/o a warrant. However- and unfortunately- the provision provides an exception

Quote:
(b) Exception.— The prohibition of subsection (a) does not apply with respect to the use of a pen register or a trap and trace device by a provider of electronic or wire communication service—
(1) relating to the operation, maintenance, and testing of a wire or electronic communication service or to the protection of the rights or property of such provider, or to the protection of users of that service from abuse of service or unlawful use of service

www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00003121----000-.
html

This language has probably not been tested by the Supreme Court. If it was, they would most likely rule in its favor. What I find so very disturbing is the exceptionally fine parsing into a rationalization of why the government can invade privacy. The government is supposed to be protecting our privacy, not actively looking for excuses to violate it.

So what started out as a blazingly brilliant idea-The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects I would argue that "effects" includes phones 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. has turned - with the help of people like Zero and Geezer- into... Well except if can scavenge evidence from someone else... mumble mumble... reasonable expectation of privacy... room for disagreement..mumble mumble... good faith... And what I find creepy about the whole concept is how corporations are allowed to invade privacy in ways that neither governments nor individuals are allowed... and the government can use it. It's just two corrupt institutions leaning on each other.

The first question SHOULD be whether this trolling on a massive scale was even necessary. If it was all so necessary, since Qwest refused to turn over records why didn't the government pursue the information with a warant?

Secondly- and this is for another thread- why are corporations allowed to invade your privacy and inhibit your free expression in ways that neither government not individuals are allowed? Why do we allow corporations to be favored by law in all areas: taxation, theft, privacy, free speech- etc? Why have we vested corporations with the status of a "super person" and allowed them to run roughshod over everyone?

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:42 AM

FIVVER

All this data base is is a collection of phone numbers. Not recorded calls. The 86 law does not change the basic finding in the 79 Supreme Court ruling that you have no expectaion of privacy for the numbers you dial on a phone. As far as the NSA needing a warrent to collect the numbers, how do you know they didn't? Even if they didn't all that would mean is the information could not be used to prosecute someone.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 11:56 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Fiiver- are you ignoring the statutory requirements of 2005?

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 12:05 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Fivver -

Quote:
The 86 law does not change the basic finding in the 79 Supreme Court ruling that you have no expectaion of privacy for the numbers you dial on a phone.

Bullshit.

Quote:
no person may install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 3:52 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Secondly- and this is for another thread- why are corporations allowed to invade your privacy and inhibit your free expression in ways that neither government not individuals are allowed?

Or in other words:
"I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

BTW, I'll be out of the world for a couple of weeks. Se y'all later.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:10 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Secondly- and this is for another thread- why are corporations allowed to invade your privacy and inhibit your free expression in ways that neither government not individuals are allowed?

Or in other words:
"I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.

Itamised phone bills. They'd have to keep records for at least a month for that very reason.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 4:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I found that part in the Constitution:

Turns out its right next to the part that says abortion is ok.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 7:29 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Secondly- and this is for another thread- why are corporations allowed to invade your privacy and inhibit your free expression in ways that neither government not individuals are allowed?-SignyM
Or in other words: I'm really more curious as to why the phone companies are collecting and archiving this data in the first place.-Geezer

Oh, is THAT what you meant by that question? Hmmm, OK I'll take you at your word and we can discuss the evil of corporations when you get back. heh heh heh

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 12, 2006 9:57 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

OK Zero - your rescuer has gone off. Time for you to tap dance pretty now. Show us you really do have a law degree.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 13, 2006 11:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Fivver -
Quote:
The 86 law does not change the basic finding in the 79 Supreme Court ruling that you have no expectaion of privacy for the numbers you dial on a phone.

Bullshit

Its true. Until the issue is brought before the court under a new law, then the courts will continue to enforce prior rulings. Meanwhile the administration might begin enforcing the new law (or ignoring it) thus creating the conflict anew for the courts to resolve.

Take the gun free school zones. Shot down by the Supreme Court and reenacted in 1998. It has yet to be challenged and so is enforcible or not as the administration chooses.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 14, 2006 3:55 AM

REAVERMAN

I, too am curious as to why they feel the need to be doing this. I mean, regardless of whether it's right or wrong, doing this is completely redundant. The NSA already has the ability to access any call, e-mail, fff.net post, etc. through Project Echelon.

For those of you who don't know, Project Echelon is the NSA program where they use a bank of supercomputers that monitor ALL electronic transmissions within the US (and some places outside the US too). These computer banks sift through the transmissions searching for key words or phrases such as, "bomb", or "kill the president". If it finds enough that seems worthy of attention, it puts up a red flag and sends it to an NSA analyst who checks it over for content and context to determine if it is an actual threat. The NSA doesn't get in trouble for this because the computer system ensures that there is probable cause that they can then present to a judge within the 72 hour time period, making it completely legal.

You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 14, 2006 5:38 AM