The Death Of Privacy

[MarcATL]

Privacy is passe. You can forget about ever having privacy in this country ever again.

The government is using Google and phone companies to spy on us and nobody cares. After all Democrats are in the White House.

They're good people. They would never misuse all of the files they're collecting on us.

​

Course if you ever choose to speak out about what you see the government is doing you can expect to have stories surface about how you like web sites like "Chicks With Dicks". How about all of those phone calls to your GF in Guatamala.

How do you think they found out about Ted Nugent's little hunting infraction after he decided to speak publically about the corruption in the Obama Administration. They are spying on us.


It's pretty sad that Democrats in Washington consider normal Americans to be a greater threat than Iran. That's why they expend so much energy checking up on us. Why they want to take our guns. They want to make sure we can't do something about what they are doing to us.

Bush, after all, was infamous for starting a still-mysterious National Security Agency program to eavesdrop on phone calls, texts, and emails by U.S. citizens overseas after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

But that comparison misses a larger point: Bush never got permission from courts to listen in on those phone calls. Obama's administration, on the other hand, is working within an existing legal framework to get subpoenas, warrants, and orders to access these records. That represents a big difference in terms of constitutional checks and balances.

In a 2007 speech by then-Sen. Barack Obama, the presidential hopeful pledged to chase terrorists "without undermining our Constitution and our freedom." He promised to work with the legal system set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, in which court judges can secretly review the government's plans to track suspected terrorists in advance. "That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens," Obama added:

"No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary."




As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama pledged to reform the Patriot Act and rescind the FISA Amendments Act, but as president he reversed his position. The Obama administration has fought bipartisan efforts in Congress to bring the change he once championed.

The result is the "new normal": surveillance, often of questionable legality and sometimes clear illegality, against which Americans have little effective recourse, on the rare occasions that we even know that violations are taking place.

That was then......this is now.





Links

Is Verizongate Really a Scandal? Obama?s Phone Spying May Be Distasteful, But it?s Legal - ABC News

Opinion: The great privacy debate - CNN.com

Thank the Bush Administration for ushering these policies in under the guise of "Protecting us from the Turrissts" and the Republicans for promoting and pushing through these policies to the general population and making them law.

 

[hortysir]

Privacy is passe. You can forget about ever having privacy in this country ever again.

The government is using Google and phone companies to spy on us and nobody cares. After all Democrats are in the White House.

They're good people. They would never misuse all of the files they're collecting on us.

​

Course if you ever choose to speak out about what you see the government is doing you can expect to have stories surface about how you like web sites like "Chicks With Dicks". How about all of those phone calls to your GF in Guatamala.

How do you think they found out about Ted Nugent's little hunting infraction after he decided to speak publically about the corruption in the Obama Administration. They are spying on us.


It's pretty sad that Democrats in Washington consider normal Americans to be a greater threat than Iran. That's why they expend so much energy checking up on us. Why they want to take our guns. They want to make sure we can't do something about what they are doing to us.

Bush, after all, was infamous for starting a still-mysterious National Security Agency program to eavesdrop on phone calls, texts, and emails by U.S. citizens overseas after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

But that comparison misses a larger point: Bush never got permission from courts to listen in on those phone calls. Obama's administration, on the other hand, is working within an existing legal framework to get subpoenas, warrants, and orders to access these records. That represents a big difference in terms of constitutional checks and balances.

In a 2007 speech by then-Sen. Barack Obama, the presidential hopeful pledged to chase terrorists "without undermining our Constitution and our freedom." He promised to work with the legal system set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, in which court judges can secretly review the government's plans to track suspected terrorists in advance. "That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens," Obama added:

"No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary."




As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama pledged to reform the Patriot Act and rescind the FISA Amendments Act, but as president he reversed his position. The Obama administration has fought bipartisan efforts in Congress to bring the change he once championed.

The result is the "new normal": surveillance, often of questionable legality and sometimes clear illegality, against which Americans have little effective recourse, on the rare occasions that we even know that violations are taking place.

That was then......this is now.





Links

Is Verizongate Really a Scandal? Obama?s Phone Spying May Be Distasteful, But it?s Legal - ABC News

Opinion: The great privacy debate - CNN.com

Thank the Bush Administration for ushering these policies in under the guise of "Protecting us from the Turrissts" and the Republicans for promoting and pushing through these policies to the general population and making them law.

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

 

[MarcATL]

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

So are you suggesting that it was the Democrats that pushed these radical policies through?

Why don't you try being honest for once?

 

[Unkotare]

Listening in on little Tommy talk to his Gammy on the phone is stupid, unnecessary, and a violation of privacy. Listening to pothead #1 ask pothead #2 about how wasted they were last night is still a violation. Knowing who is making regular phone calls between Dearborn and Yemen is not a bad idea. I suspect that since we first started trying to pay attention to phone traffic, wire transfers, etc. between Sana'a and Chicago that some wise guys have found ways to work the system so that the calls all seem to be taking place domestically and between proxy numbers. Hence, the interest in gathering as much data as possible and looking for patterns via computer modeling and such. However, it doesn't take too much imagination to see how easily this goes too far and how inclined governments are to let it become so. It is incumbent upon us to be more vigilant than ever as citizens and to keep/get the corrupt and insidiously ambitious out of our representative government.

The easy part is being outraged. The hard part is keeping our collective eye on the ball over the long run and not falling back into a lazy stupor of entertainment and convenience.

 

[hortysir]

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

So are you suggesting that it was the Democrats that pushed these radical policies through?

Why don't you try being honest for once?

Mine really wasn't such a long post that you would have missed the line I bolded.

The House AND the Senate votes were virtually unanimous.

I've posted Senator Obama's floor speech where he bemoans the policy but, yet, here he is pumping that same program with steroids.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Privacy is passe. You can forget about ever having privacy in this country ever again.

The government is using Google and phone companies to spy on us and nobody cares. After all Democrats are in the White House.

They're good people. They would never misuse all of the files they're collecting on us.

​

Course if you ever choose to speak out about what you see the government is doing you can expect to have stories surface about how you like web sites like "Chicks With Dicks". How about all of those phone calls to your GF in Guatamala.

How do you think they found out about Ted Nugent's little hunting infraction after he decided to speak publically about the corruption in the Obama Administration. They are spying on us.


It's pretty sad that Democrats in Washington consider normal Americans to be a greater threat than Iran. That's why they expend so much energy checking up on us. Why they want to take our guns. They want to make sure we can't do something about what they are doing to us.




That was then......this is now.





Links

Is Verizongate Really a Scandal? Obama?s Phone Spying May Be Distasteful, But it?s Legal - ABC News

Opinion: The great privacy debate - CNN.com

Thank the Bush Administration for ushering these policies in under the guise of "Protecting us from the Turrissts" and the Republicans for promoting and pushing through these policies to the general population and making them law.

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

Can you name exactly what Obama passed, with no help from the house or senate, that "supercharged" it?

 

[Mustang]

You're being tracked, Mudwhistle. Even now, the gov't is probably putting the finishing touches on your FEMA camp accommodations. Would you prefer a top bunk, or a bottom bunk?

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Privacy is passe. You can forget about ever having privacy in this country ever again.

The government is using Google and phone companies to spy on us and nobody cares. After all Democrats are in the White House.

They're good people. They would never misuse all of the files they're collecting on us.

​

Course if you ever choose to speak out about what you see the government is doing you can expect to have stories surface about how you like web sites like "Chicks With Dicks". How about all of those phone calls to your GF in Guatamala.

How do you think they found out about Ted Nugent's little hunting infraction after he decided to speak publically about the corruption in the Obama Administration. They are spying on us.


It's pretty sad that Democrats in Washington consider normal Americans to be a greater threat than Iran. That's why they expend so much energy checking up on us. Why they want to take our guns. They want to make sure we can't do something about what they are doing to us.

Bush, after all, was infamous for starting a still-mysterious National Security Agency program to eavesdrop on phone calls, texts, and emails by U.S. citizens overseas after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

But that comparison misses a larger point: Bush never got permission from courts to listen in on those phone calls. Obama's administration, on the other hand, is working within an existing legal framework to get subpoenas, warrants, and orders to access these records. That represents a big difference in terms of constitutional checks and balances.

In a 2007 speech by then-Sen. Barack Obama, the presidential hopeful pledged to chase terrorists "without undermining our Constitution and our freedom." He promised to work with the legal system set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, in which court judges can secretly review the government's plans to track suspected terrorists in advance. "That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens," Obama added:

"No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary."




As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama pledged to reform the Patriot Act and rescind the FISA Amendments Act, but as president he reversed his position. The Obama administration has fought bipartisan efforts in Congress to bring the change he once championed.

The result is the "new normal": surveillance, often of questionable legality and sometimes clear illegality, against which Americans have little effective recourse, on the rare occasions that we even know that violations are taking place.

That was then......this is now.





Links

Is Verizongate Really a Scandal? Obama?s Phone Spying May Be Distasteful, But it?s Legal - ABC News

Opinion: The great privacy debate - CNN.com

Thank the Bush Administration for ushering these policies in under the guise of "Protecting us from the Turrissts" and the Republicans for promoting and pushing through these policies to the general population and making them law.

Republicans pass it. Democrats get caught abusing. Americans bitch at each other instead of holding politicians accountable.

Sounds like a good plan that idiots from both sides are falling for.

 

[boedicca]

Ptretty soon it'll be time to go back to smoke signals.

Well, I don't know. Sooner or later, they may not even let us fry the friendly skies with the truth.

We'll need a code that makes subversive messages sound like advertisement of consumer products...to the uninitiated.

 

[hortysir]

Thank the Bush Administration for ushering these policies in under the guise of "Protecting us from the Turrissts" and the Republicans for promoting and pushing through these policies to the general population and making them law.

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

Can you name exactly what Obama passed, with no help from the house or senate, that "supercharged" it?

Haven't claimed that he "passed" anything.

He is, however, giving the NSA the authority to do as they please

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Sometimes you can be a real partisan fuckwit, Marc.

If the policy is so damned bad maybe Obama shouldn't have extended it and, now, supercharging it.

Yes I know other people within the Republican party are just as responsible, but you come across so one-sided that it seems like no Democrat voted for the Patriot Act.

Can you name exactly what Obama passed, with no help from the house or senate, that "supercharged" it?

Haven't claimed that he "passed" anything.

He is, however, giving the NSA the authority to do as they please

Fair enough. Any evidence that he's giving unauthorized authority to the NSA?

Bear in mind, I'm not defending Obama. But republicans keep claiming Obama is drastically expanding the Patriot Act beyond its original intent, but can't show how he expanded it. Leading me to beleive the Patriot Act always gave government this power, republicans just don't want to admit it.

 

[freedombecki]

Ptretty soon it'll be time to go back to smoke signals.

Well, I don't know. Sooner or later, they may not even let us fry the friendly skies with the truth.

The Gestapo of the EPA would already skull fuck you for this.

Is that a guarantee.

 

[freedombecki]

Ptretty soon it'll be time to go back to smoke signals.

Well, I don't know. Sooner or later, they may not even let us fry the friendly skies with the truth.

We'll need a code that makes subversive messages sound like advertisement of consumer products...to the uninitiated.

Oh, we already have that. Why just a couple of months ago, Susan Rice put lipstick on a pig video as the cause of Benghazi.

 

[boedicca]

Well, some people still seem to protect their privacy:

 

[hortysir]

Can you name exactly what Obama passed, with no help from the house or senate, that "supercharged" it?

Haven't claimed that he "passed" anything.

He is, however, giving the NSA the authority to do as they please

Fair enough. Any evidence that he's giving unauthorized authority to the NSA?

Bear in mind, I'm not defending Obama. But republicans keep claiming Obama is drastically expanding the Patriot Act beyond its original intent, but can't show how he expanded it. Leading me to beleive the Patriot Act always gave government this power, republicans just don't want to admit it.

Ok, so ya got me curious and I had to go pull up the text of the Patriot Act (the 2006 version).

The way I read it, it already had the power to do what Obama stood in front of us and told us what he was doing.

Section 126 covers Data Mining
Section 128 covers Trap & Trace - which also includes name and address

So he hasn't authorized any new or further-reaching behavior.

Thanks for leading me there



But, I gotta wonder.....
If there is nothing new or more extreme, why the need to speak up and say anything?
Is he diverting attention?

 

[hortysir]

BTW

Text of H.R. 3199 (109th): USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Passed Congress/Enrolled Bill version) - GovTrack.us

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Haven't claimed that he "passed" anything.

He is, however, giving the NSA the authority to do as they please

Fair enough. Any evidence that he's giving unauthorized authority to the NSA?

Bear in mind, I'm not defending Obama. But republicans keep claiming Obama is drastically expanding the Patriot Act beyond its original intent, but can't show how he expanded it. Leading me to beleive the Patriot Act always gave government this power, republicans just don't want to admit it.

Ok, so ya got me curious and I had to go pull up the text of the Patriot Act (the 2006 version).

The way I read it, it already had the power to do what Obama stood in front of us and told us what he was doing.

Section 126 covers Data Mining
Section 128 covers Trap & Trace - which also includes name and address

So he hasn't authorized any new or further-reaching behavior.

Thanks for leading me there



But, I gotta wonder.....
If there is nothing new or more extreme, why the need to speak up and say anything?
Is he diverting attention?

Politicians are always diverting attention away from how shitty things are, this is nothing new. Add in the fact they get to play the blame game and create division for the upcoming election, and it's a win-win for them.