Big Brother is reading USMB

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“The internet is a public place and what you post here is open to the public. There is no right of privacy on the internet and yes, the FBI is not the only agency monitoring the internet. Your local police could be doing the same thing.”

Correct, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when one willingly submits information to a third party via the internet, email, text, or wireless communications.

I disagree in regards to email, text, and wireless communications. When you post something publicly on Facebook or USMB it's expected that everybody can see it. When it comes to a private conversation on the phone people do expect a certain level of privacy. It's not a right, but it doesn't make violating that privacy right either.

You're at liberty to disagree, but until there's a way to send emails, text messages, and phone calls without an ISP or wireless company like Verizon, there's no reasonable expectation of privacy – you're still turning over personal information to a private third party.

Don't be all civil while I'm trying to disagree with you. What the fuck...

Seriously though, I support law enforcement going through the same channels they would to obtain any other search warrant. If there is enough evidence that a judge approves it, it's fair game. Unfortunately, in the case of the NSA, it looks like they have bypassed those channels many times over, without always getting approval from the third party provider. I consider that theft of private data. Not of the person whose conversation it was, but of the third party provider who holds that data.

Has the NSA bypassed the proper channels or were they simply not required to go through those channels if they had no intent of gathering information pursuant to a criminal prosecution?

The last thing the NSA and similar surveillance programs want to do is prosecute the average citizen for a relatively minor offense, as that would compromise the programs.

What sort of standard should the NSA be held to with regard to the gathering of information if that information is not used as evidence in a criminal proceeding, never to be subject to a 4th Amendment search and seizure challenge by someone's defense attorney?

 

[mudwhistle]

Yep, the liberals would be squealing like stuck pigs if it was a Republican in the White House doing all of this BS.

They figure they're safe of it's one of those communists in there. He wouldn't try to pull a fast one. Take our guns 'n stuff.

 

[Gracie]

Oh goody!

HEY! FBI!!! Tell that idiot Pelosi that her pick of Carson is a BAD IDEA!

 

[aaronleland]

“The internet is a public place and what you post here is open to the public. There is no right of privacy on the internet and yes, the FBI is not the only agency monitoring the internet. Your local police could be doing the same thing.”

Correct, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when one willingly submits information to a third party via the internet, email, text, or wireless communications.

I disagree in regards to email, text, and wireless communications. When you post something publicly on Facebook or USMB it's expected that everybody can see it. When it comes to a private conversation on the phone people do expect a certain level of privacy. It's not a right, but it doesn't make violating that privacy right either.

You're at liberty to disagree, but until there's a way to send emails, text messages, and phone calls without an ISP or wireless company like Verizon, there's no reasonable expectation of privacy – you're still turning over personal information to a private third party.

Don't be all civil while I'm trying to disagree with you. What the fuck...

Seriously though, I support law enforcement going through the same channels they would to obtain any other search warrant. If there is enough evidence that a judge approves it, it's fair game. Unfortunately, in the case of the NSA, it looks like they have bypassed those channels many times over, without always getting approval from the third party provider. I consider that theft of private data. Not of the person whose conversation it was, but of the third party provider who holds that data.

Has the NSA bypassed the proper channels or were they simply not required to go through those channels if they had no intent of gathering information pursuant to a criminal prosecution?

The last thing the NSA and similar surveillance programs want to do is prosecute the average citizen for a relatively minor offense, as that would compromise the programs.

What sort of standard should the NSA be held to with regard to the gathering of information if that information is not used as evidence in a criminal proceeding, never to be subject to a 4th Amendment search and seizure challenge by someone's defense attorney?

They actively tapped into private data, held by a private company, obtained from private citizens, without a warrant. They should be held to the same standards as any hacker who does the same thing.

 

[georgephillip]

Big brother lives on Wall Street.

"Rise of the National Security State..."

"February 21, 2012 "Information Clearing House" --- One of the most successful frauds ever perpetrated upon the American people is the notion that the CIA exists to provide intelligence to the president.

"In fact, the CIA’s intimate links to Wall Street strongly suggest that the CIA was created to serve the perceived interests of investment bankers. The well documented links to Wall Street can be traced to the founding of the agency.

"According to former CIA director Richard Helms, when Allen Dulles was tasked in 1946 to 'draft proposals for the shape and organization of what was to become the Central Intelligence Agency,' he recruited an advisory group of six men made up almost exclusively of Wall Street investment bankers and lawyers.

"Dulles himself was an attorney at the prominent Wall Street law firm, Sullivan and Cromwell. Two years later, Dulles became the chairman of a three-man committee which reviewed the young agency’s performance. The other two members of the committee were also New York lawyers.i For nearly a year, the committee met in the offices of J.H. Whitney, a Wall Street investment firm.ii

"According to Peter Dale Scott, over the next twenty years, all seven deputy directors of the agency were drawn from the Wall Street financial aristocracy; and six were listed in the New York social register.iii

"So we see that from the beginning the CIA was an exclusive Wall Street club.

"Allen Dulles himself became the first civilian Director of Central Intelligence in early 1953.

"The prevalent myth that the CIA exists to provide intelligence information to the president was the promotional vehicle used to persuade President Harry Truman to sign the 1947 National Security Act, the legislation which created the CIA.iv

"But the rationale about serving the president was never more than a partial and very imperfect truth.v"

The CIA 8217 s links to Wall Street Rise of the National Security State

 

[BULLDOG]

“The internet is a public place and what you post here is open to the public. There is no right of privacy on the internet and yes, the FBI is not the only agency monitoring the internet. Your local police could be doing the same thing.”

Correct, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when one willingly submits information to a third party via the internet, email, text, or wireless communications.

I disagree in regards to email, text, and wireless communications. When you post something publicly on Facebook or USMB it's expected that everybody can see it. When it comes to a private conversation on the phone people do expect a certain level of privacy. It's not a right, but it doesn't make violating that privacy right either.

You're at liberty to disagree, but until there's a way to send emails, text messages, and phone calls without an ISP or wireless company like Verizon, there's no reasonable expectation of privacy – you're still turning over personal information to a private third party.

Don't be all civil while I'm trying to disagree with you. What the fuck...

Seriously though, I support law enforcement going through the same channels they would to obtain any other search warrant. If there is enough evidence that a judge approves it, it's fair game. Unfortunately, in the case of the NSA, it looks like they have bypassed those channels many times over, without always getting approval from the third party provider. I consider that theft of private data. Not of the person whose conversation it was, but of the third party provider who holds that data.

Has the NSA bypassed the proper channels or were they simply not required to go through those channels if they had no intent of gathering information pursuant to a criminal prosecution?

The last thing the NSA and similar surveillance programs want to do is prosecute the average citizen for a relatively minor offense, as that would compromise the programs.

What sort of standard should the NSA be held to with regard to the gathering of information if that information is not used as evidence in a criminal proceeding, never to be subject to a 4th Amendment search and seizure challenge by someone's defense attorney?

Who's gonna know it even happened?

 

[Nutz]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

 

[WelfareQueen]

FBI App Social Media Scraping ASecureLife.com

FBI App: Social Media Scraping
Posted by: Kimberly Kurimski Updated: October 14, 2014

Social media isn’t just a tool for employers screening prospective workers anymore. Watch out for an FBI app designed for social media scraping. Social media can work as an early warning system for potential threats, criminal activity, or other risks. As of April 2013, the social media companies are still lobbying against this endeavor by the FBI. The companies who are listed among those actively resisting include Google, Facebook, and Yahoo.

A Possible Solution to Early Threats
According to sources, the FBI has been looking in to hiring a contracting company to put together an application to scrape social media sites for signs of domestic and global threats. While some indicate that the application could allow for early warning against threats to our country, others are quick to point out that such an endeavor could implicate trouble for freedom of speech. The request by the FBI for the scraping application was posted on the FBI’s Strategic Information and Operations Center website on January 19, 2012, when it caught the attention of a number of other groups including New Scientist Magazine.

Why Social Media?
Why is the FBI looking towards social media for the next step in national security? According to the request by the FBI’s Strategic Information and Operations Center, social networking is the premier first response system to key events and the “primal alert to possible developing situations.”

What does The Application Do Specifically?
Although the application has little information released to the public, the FBI claims that the application allows them to predict both domestic and global threats by being able to predict the actions of individuals deemed to be a threat, detect people who are misleading law enforcement through their online actions, and to track the actions of groups that are suspected of terrorist actions. According to a spokeswoman knowledgeable of the project, the application will not differ from other similar types of applications being utilized by other governmental agencies. There are still some concerns by many that the application will allow the FBI to zero in on specific individuals; however, the FBI spokeswoman insists that the application is simply designed to track the “words and activities constituting violations of federal criminal law or threats to national security.”​

The internet is a public place and what you post here is open to the public. There is no right of privacy on the internet and yes, the FBI is not the only agency monitoring the internet. Your local police could be doing the same thing.

From my perspective this is like having cops patrolling in your own home town. They aren't concerned about the average law abiding citizens. They are only interested in those whose intentions are illegal. It was by monitoring social media that the FBI caught the 3 men from Georgia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/us/georgia-men-held-in-plot-to-attack-government.html

So obviously this is an effective means of law enforcement. Do you have an opinion on this monitoring? Do you support it or oppose it?

It all depends on what the White House thinks is illegal. The FBI answers to Obama....so no.....this is bad.

He's already sticking his nose into every other part of our lives.....this is just one more.

Nothing worse than vindictive liberals spying on average citizens.

The FBI is neither liberal nor vindictive. It is a law enforcement agency doing it's job to protect you and your fellow Americans from lethal threats.

Yeah....just like the fucking IRS.

 

[Nutz]

Now that I think about it I think there are a few posters I should report.

 

[aaronleland]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

Of course they are watching USMB for exactly the reasons you mentioned. We have members promoting treason on a daily basis. They obviously don't like the electoral system our Founding Fathers setup. They will bitch and moan about anything they deem unconstitutional, but promote violence to anything justified under our Constitution.

 

[SAYIT]

I sure hope Big Bruva is watching the 2 slugs who voted "No" to the poll question.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

HEY G-MAN. FUCK OBAMA!!!

 

[Nutz]

Maybe the FBI has received complaints about USMB.

More likely they followed just followed the scum from Stormfront.

Maybe. Half the Nazis were queer though. Or are you trying to suggest there's some parallel attraction between USMB and Stormfront?

Yes, the racists don't like Stormfront anymore because they can't say or do nearly as much as they can on USMB.

 

[jasonnfree]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

Of course they are watching USMB for exactly the reasons you mentioned. We have members promoting treason on a daily basis. They obviously don't like the electoral system our Founding Fathers setup. They will bitch and moan about anything they deem unconstitutional, but promote violence to anything justified under our Constitution.

Any names of members promoting treason? If you don't want to name names, at least give some examples of how they promote treason. Thanks.

 

[Nutz]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

Of course they are watching USMB for exactly the reasons you mentioned. We have members promoting treason on a daily basis. They obviously don't like the electoral system our Founding Fathers setup. They will bitch and moan about anything they deem unconstitutional, but promote violence to anything justified under our Constitution.

Any names of members promoting treason? If you don't want to name names, at least give some examples of how they promote treason. Thanks.

Just pay attention, this forum is riddled with those who refuse to pay taxes, those who promote race wars, those who promote civil war and those who want to take Constitutional rights away from anyone who dares to disagree with them.

 

[jasonnfree]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

Of course they are watching USMB for exactly the reasons you mentioned. We have members promoting treason on a daily basis. They obviously don't like the electoral system our Founding Fathers setup. They will bitch and moan about anything they deem unconstitutional, but promote violence to anything justified under our Constitution.

Any names of members promoting treason? If you don't want to name names, at least give some examples of how they promote treason. Thanks.

Just pay attention, this forum is riddled with those who refuse to pay taxes, those who promote race wars, those who promote civil war and those who want to take Constitutional rights away from anyone who dares to disagree with them.

But we still have free speech. If unpopular speech and opinion is considered promoting treason, we're all in trouble.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Bill Maher is a fucking sanctimonious scumbag. But even that mutt sometimes say intelligent things and supports a point of view at odds with most of his own dumb-ass thinking. And as much as I find him a generally unfunny prick, he has also said a few things that made me laugh against my better judgment.

The cock-bite motherfucker still isn't a "traitor" nor should he get prosecuted for saying offensive shithead things.

 

[jasonnfree]

I sure hope Big Bruva is watching the 2 slugs who voted "No" to the poll question.

That's why I didn't vote in the poll. I know big brother is watching.

 

[aaronleland]

of course they are watching USMB...It is a premier hate site. It is only a matter of time before we read about one of the pussy hate mongers going on a shooting spree. Would you really be surprised to read about shitspeeders shooting up a post office...or Matthew wheeling into a NAACP meeting with a bomb strapped to his wheelchair? Yeah, USMB is being watched and rightfully so. You have hate group recruiters, leaders of the KKK, and people like 2nd Amendment constantly calling for a civil war...and not to mention the teapers asking for a race war. USMB is probably watched more than Stormfront.

Of course they are watching USMB for exactly the reasons you mentioned. We have members promoting treason on a daily basis. They obviously don't like the electoral system our Founding Fathers setup. They will bitch and moan about anything they deem unconstitutional, but promote violence to anything justified under our Constitution.

Any names of members promoting treason? If you don't want to name names, at least give some examples of how they promote treason. Thanks.

There are so many at USMB that I can't name many off the top of my head. Just today ShootSpeeders created a thread calling Lincoln treasonous for responding to the south's treason. This is a minor example of our "the South will rise again" posters. That's just one I took note of today. After about 3 years on this forum, imagine how many I've seen.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Well I voted "pineapple." The dumb-ass Presidunce and his cretin Attorney General might want to investigate me, I suppose.