The outrageous behavior continues...

I don't have a problem with it. Gathering the data blind is fine as long as a warrant - signed by a judge with probable cause-is required to actually pull a particular phone call. This is just building the data bank.

I'd already assumed anything sent over the wires/online was out there forever. Did you think it wasn't?
 
They have the information. They only need a warrant if the evidence is going to be admissible in court. Whether or not they're "allowed" to look at whatever they want is irrelevant. Since no one will know except them, it won't matter until the evidence has to go to court and all they have to do use that evidence is gather enough OTHER evidence to justify a warrant for the evidence that they already obtained and it's magically admissible.

It's like when I worked at the bank. No one was "allowed" to look at any account without a specific reason but since no one knew or could possibly keep track of who did what/why/when, anybody could look at anything they wanted to look at whenever they wanted.
 
Thats all you're guaranteed under the Constitution.
Police can make a search. If that search violates the Constitution on one or more grounds that search and fruits therein can be thrown out.

Nothing says they can't spy on you. They just can't use it against you in a court of law unless they have a valid warrant.
 
ZincWarrior said:
Thats all you're guaranteed under the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Uh... no....

We're protected from unreasonable SEARCH and SEIZURE.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, 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.
Click to expand...

There is no reasonable interpretation of that paragraph that includes the idea that they can't search or seize and records they want but they need a warrant to use it against you.
 
Well, search away, Feds .......

I think we all ought to answer our Verizon phones with, "HelloJihadDetonatorBombPlotCellConstitutionTeaParty...."

....just to help them justify the further breakdown of the Country.
 
Can you hear me now?

"Yes" - NSA

csmsss said:
Now, I'm sure the wonderfully honest, open and transparent regime would never do such a thing...
Click to expand...

I am unable to work up outrage over this episode. We do not require the police to obtain a warrant for developing a mail matrix, i.e. a record of the pattern of mail deliveries. How is developing the pattern for telephone communications substantially different?

Is who you call and when you call them "private" information if AT&T and Verizon and 1 million of their most trusted employees are aware of it?

I dislike the size and scope of the modern state, but how can one be sufficiently surprised by this so that he is actually outraged?

The federal government regulates which telecom company can buy another, how much you pay your employees, whether and what kind of medical insurance you provide, compels an annual and rather detailed accounting of all of your financial affairs along with potential criminal penalties for failure to report, and perhaps most pertinent here, does not permit you to purchase a new firearm, the possession of which is explicitly constitutionally protected, unless you complete and sign an interview form and leave it with a government licensee.

What is out of character for that same government to note your use of a highly regulated communication apparatus?
 
Last edited:
how can one be sufficiently surprised by this so that he is actually outraged?
Click to expand...

One need not be surprised in order to be outraged. I am already outraged. This is just a continuation of outrageous behavior by an out of control Federal Government ..... I'm not surprised at all.



The federal government regulates which telecom company can buy another, how much you pay your employees, whether and what kind of medical insurance you provide, compels an annual and rather detailed accounting of all of your financial affairs along with potential criminal penalties for failure to report, and perhaps most pertinent here, does not permit you to purchase a new firearm, the possession of which is explicitly constitutionally protected, unless you complete and sign an interview form and leave it with a government licensee.
Click to expand...

How soon do you suppose they will require and indelible mark upon your person in order to be able to buy or sell?

JihadDetonatorBombPlotConstitutionTEAParty! That'll get their datamining engines spun up!
 
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.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what the 'probably cause' is for searching records of everything everyone has sent.

Obvious violation of civil rights.
 
I have to admit to being equally disturbed by the federal government's response to the revelation of the program: "it's just the renewal of a program we've had since 2006." That's another way of saying "It's OK, because we've been doing it for a while."
 
I have to admit to being equally disturbed by the federal government's response to the revelation of the program: "it's just the renewal of a program we've had since 2006." That's another way of saying "It's OK, because we've been doing it for a while."
Click to expand...

Indeed. Most concerning to me is that lack of outrage on the part of the American people. This stuff should have the numbers from the "Occupy" movement looking like a kindergarten parade but there's.... silence.

This is as fundamental as it gets and, from what I can tell, no one cares. At least in any numbers that matter.
 
This is as fundamental as it gets and, from what I can tell, no one cares. At least in any numbers that matter.
Click to expand...
Bingo!!!

Few people cared when the so called "patriot act" was passed and signed into law. Nearly all the conservatives supported it. Those of us who spoke out against the degradation of our Constitutional rights were called "traitors" and worse. Fewer yet cared when FISA became law. Almost no one noticed when these laws were extended and strenghtened.

Folks are afraid and fear sells. This stuff will only get worse with each new administration.
 
I think the sheer scope of the information gathering is truly frightening. The FISA Court ordered Verizon to release call metadata (phone numbers, trunk lines, duration, etc.) on calls between the U.S. and abroad and all calls wholly in the United States, including local calls. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order. This seems to make a mockery out of even the minimal protection that FISA might have because this court order makes it unnecessary to obtain any other court orders involving Verizon.

But wait, it's not just Verizon but also ATT and Sprint/Nextel according to reports from the Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324299104578529112289298922.html.

There is at least an indication that some members of the FISA court have found such orders to be unconstitutional -- at least we think so. The Department of Justice is fighting the release of the opinion which is being sought by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). http://www.motherjones.com/politics...tronic-frontier-foundation-fisa-court-opinion. Yes, I know its "Mother Jones" but you can get it a bit more fragmented manner straight from www.eff.org. EFF has been around for a number of years.Read their opinion on why privacy of metadata is important.

But wait, THERE'S MORE. The U.S.P.S. scans the front and back of each item of mail they handle and evidently store it for at least a short time period. A report at The Smoking Gun website indicates federal officials utilized this in tracking down the woman who mailed ricin laced letters recently. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/woman-arrested-for-obama-bloomberg-ricin-letters-687435. The affidavit in support of a criminal complaint is here -- http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/woman-arrested-for-obama-bloomberg-ricin-letters-687435.

Proud to say that one of my U.S. Senators, Rand Paul, actively worked against the last renewal of the Patriot Act and the FISA courts. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/05/rand-pauls-last-stand-against-patriot-act/38194/. Unfortunately, my other Senator (Mitch McConnell) did not.
 
I don't believe we have a right to privacy, or atleast thats what my old civics teacher used to tell me. Just speak in pig latin on your cell phone, problem solved.
 
This is an example of how a moral panic (we must do something to save even one life) operates.

We see three currently running in the USA.

1. The Patriot Act , 9/11 fallout. Lindsay Graham has nothing to hide so keep track of every phone, internet action.

2. The rush for stupid gun control laws that would have no effect, or the more draconian bans - that would have no effect.

3. The stigmatizing and forced reporting of people seeking mental health treatment.

All are justified to save 'one life'. Liberty means that you take some risks to preserve freedoms.

The comment that they don't know names is so stupid as to be amazing. Or that the info is only about terror threats.

Once the data base exists - one can come up with numerous abuses. Given the IRS mess, do you think that a President (of either party) would not use it for evil, blackmail, embarrassment, political advantage?

The efficacious use of such a program is doubtful (despite the hints that it caught an unknown number of evil doers). The Boston bombers were highlighted to the government and they did nothing with the info. That gives me confidence in their acumen.
 
Last edited:
The quotation from Maxine Waters is taken completely out of context. She and Mr. Martin are discussing the political concerns of minorities, and whether/how President Obama will address them in his second term. The "database" referred to is the one maintained by Organizing for America, the principal 501(4)(c) that supports Mr. Obama. Rep. Waters' point is that no matter who is the Democratic nominee for president in 2016, he or she will have to reckon with the interests represented by that database, which is composed of people who contributed to that organization.

The conversation has nothing whatever to do with intelligence-gathering by any federal agency.

The transcript of the original interview is here.

Typical Limbaugh. :mad:
 
I'd already assumed anything sent over the wires/online was out there forever. Did you think it wasn't?
Click to expand...

Since the eighties, called "Echelon", they have collected and analyzed all electronic data worldwide. I do not believe for one second that wiretap warrants are anything other than window dressing made to hide the truth.

If gov't wants to make someone into a criminal don't tell me they can't, or even that they won't, retrieve info from Echelon records to use against us.

What kind of morons do we live amongst that would ignore history so thoroughly that these things do not make them shudder.

The easiest society to establish and operate a conspiracy within is the one with ten thousand conspiracy theories rampant within at any given moment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vanya,

This will be yet another reason why I generally have no use for Limbaugh. Thanks for the correction.
 
It's amazing, what you can find if you fact-check his statements... that could be a whole cottage industry if only there were money in it.

I'd like to think he's not as influential as he used to be, but... :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top