US govt secretly collecting data on millions of Verizon user

Cliffy6745

Oh, Obama's comments are going to be fun

Paging Unsung, Unsung...

Cliffy6745

unsung wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

unsung wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?ref=opinion


"The administration has now lost all credibility..."

"...on this issue"

Yeah, the issue of being for the people.

Or that wasn't the context at all

It's almost as if you are a character

pjhawks

mikepegg44 wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

not defending what the gov't is doing here but can you give me one instance where your life on a daily basis is different today because of the Patriot Act than it was 10-12 years ago? the fact is for 99.99% of the US population it hasn't changed shit about their daily lives. so the government got my Verizon records, guess what some douche at Verizon already had access to them before the NSA did.

Every American is affected by this in one way or another. Am I in jail, no. But other Americans have had their lives affected by it. Other people around the world have had their lives affected by it. Do you think they are all terrorists?

I guess I could simply look at it and say these actions are a collective effort to keep you safe. I guess when you specifically have your freedom taken away because you talked to someone for years who ended up not being who they portrayed themselves to be then we can complain?

Stop and Frisk in New York City is a direct result of this 'patriot act' line of thinking. Have I been frisked, no, have other innocent citizens, absolutely. Swallowing the patriot act because it has not directly affected the majority of Americans is going to just make the next poison pill that much easier to swallow. It isn't about me, it is about a great country turning on itself because some extremists are dangerous. I don't want that.

As I have said many times, when you allow a 'little', they will keep taking more in 'little' increments so that it always feel like it is simply just a little intrusion.

so since you didn't give me one instance where your life has been affected i'll take that as a no.

and stop and frisk in NYC has worked.

sometimes the safety and freedom of the millions has to take precedence over the safety and freedoms of a few. policing isn't always pretty, but it's better than bitching after the fact when the policing wasn't done.

why do I suspect that many that openly complain about some of the tactics that have come out in the past few days are also the same who complain when we don't do enough like not keeping tabs on the Boston Bombers even after the Russians gave us the information, Benghazi and 9/11?

Cosmo

pjhawks wrote:

so since you didn't give me one instance where your life has been affected i'll take that as a no.

and stop and frisk in NYC has worked.

sometimes the safety and freedom of the millions has to take precedence over the safety and freedoms of a few. policing isn't always pretty, but it's better than bitching after the fact when the policing wasn't done.

why do I suspect that many that openly complain about some of the tactics that have come out in the past few days are also the same who complain when we don't do enough like not keeping tabs on the Boston Bombers even after the Russians gave us the information, Benghazi and 9/11?

...
This is the reality of where we are today... do we compromise our liberties in order to provide security, or do we grant our liberties to those who wish to do harm?
It is not an easy issue to address.

riotgrl

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

Our lives have changed whether we agree or acknowledge it. I have known my stockbroker for 15 years. Worked with him, on a daily basis as the only two people in this office for 5 years, he personally knows me, my parents, my in-laws, and my kids. Yet every single time I go to his office to change my investments, I have to show him proof of identification because of the provisions within the Patriot Act. I suppose that is to keep him/me safe and secure from terrorism?? Does it hurt me when I do it? No, but I don't feel it is necessary when there is an established personal and professional relationship. What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

norm

riotgrl wrote:

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

to me, this just shows how narcissistic people have become..."as long as it doesn't affect me, who cares" until it does affect them

pjhawks

riotgrl wrote:

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

Our lives have changed whether we agree or acknowledge it. I have known my stockbroker for 15 years. Worked with him, on a daily basis as the only two people in this office for 5 years, he personally knows me, my parents, my in-laws, and my kids. Yet every single time I go to his office to change my investments, I have to show him proof of identification because of the provisions within the Patriot Act. I suppose that is to keep him/me safe and secure from terrorism?? Does it hurt me when I do it? No, but I don't feel it is necessary when there is an established personal and professional relationship. What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

you can say that about any rule ever put into place. I guess we should live in a world with no rules or laws then. :fp:

I wonder if people complained about their civil liberties back in the day when we started requiring people to take driving tests and to get picture licenses. and forget about putting in stop signs and stop lights. the horror. I mean why should I have to stop for others? you are taking away my civil liberties.

unsung

Citizens should never give up liberties. We have the Constitution for a reason.

Cosmo

riotgrl wrote:

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

Our lives have changed whether we agree or acknowledge it. I have known my stockbroker for 15 years. Worked with him, on a daily basis as the only two people in this office for 5 years, he personally knows me, my parents, my in-laws, and my kids. Yet every single time I go to his office to change my investments, I have to show him proof of identification because of the provisions within the Patriot Act. I suppose that is to keep him/me safe and secure from terrorism?? Does it hurt me when I do it? No, but I don't feel it is necessary when there is an established personal and professional relationship. What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

...
I know... it is a big deal.
The thing we need to understand is that there are public and private spaces. We are losing or have already lost so-called 'privacy' the minute we step out our door. There are cameras everywhere that capture our images and there are face recognition techniques that can identify us.
The same thing goes to the use of cellular devices. A cell phone is basically a walkie-talkie that trasmits and receives an encrypted radio signal... it is not the same as hardened landline phone that requires a wiretap.
So, when you use your cell phone, you are broadcasting out radio signals across the open airwaves. Those signals are open for intercept. That is how the government is able to cheat the system... without cheating the system because a cell phone is not a phone... it is a radio.

Cosmo

unsung wrote:

Citizens should never give up liberties. We have the Constitution for a reason.

...
The Constitution never factored in technology. Our founding fathers never envisioned cellular technology or .50 caliber sniper rifles. They left those thing intentionally vague because they knew that things will change in the future. That is the sheer genius of our Constitution... it can adapt to change.

riotgrl

pjhawks wrote:

riotgrl wrote:

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

Our lives have changed whether we agree or acknowledge it. I have known my stockbroker for 15 years. Worked with him, on a daily basis as the only two people in this office for 5 years, he personally knows me, my parents, my in-laws, and my kids. Yet every single time I go to his office to change my investments, I have to show him proof of identification because of the provisions within the Patriot Act. I suppose that is to keep him/me safe and secure from terrorism?? Does it hurt me when I do it? No, but I don't feel it is necessary when there is an established personal and professional relationship. What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

you can say that about any rule ever put into place. I guess we should live in a world with no rules or laws then. :fp:

I wonder if people complained about their civil liberties back in the day when we started requiring people to take driving tests and to get picture licenses. and forget about putting in stop signs and stop lights. the horror. I mean why should I have to stop for others? you are taking away my civil liberties.

Well, I never said we should live in a world with no rules or laws :fp: Big difference between invasion of privacy and creating a system of laws which are not civil liberties.

You feel free to go along with allowing the government to keep you safe and secure.

Cliffy6745

unsung wrote:

Citizens should never give up liberties. We have the Constitution for a reason.

I agree with the concept, but what does this even mean?

pjhawks

riotgrl wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

riotgrl wrote:

Wake up people. It may not be a big deal today but it will be when we keep excusing away today's 'no big deal' in the name of safety and security.

Our lives have changed whether we agree or acknowledge it. I have known my stockbroker for 15 years. Worked with him, on a daily basis as the only two people in this office for 5 years, he personally knows me, my parents, my in-laws, and my kids. Yet every single time I go to his office to change my investments, I have to show him proof of identification because of the provisions within the Patriot Act. I suppose that is to keep him/me safe and secure from terrorism?? Does it hurt me when I do it? No, but I don't feel it is necessary when there is an established personal and professional relationship. What's next? And will we excuse that away? What happens when the government infringes on some civil liberty/right/belief that you disagree with? Will you continue to say its no big deal?

you can say that about any rule ever put into place. I guess we should live in a world with no rules or laws then. :fp:

I wonder if people complained about their civil liberties back in the day when we started requiring people to take driving tests and to get picture licenses. and forget about putting in stop signs and stop lights. the horror. I mean why should I have to stop for others? you are taking away my civil liberties.

Well, I never said we should live in a world with no rules or laws :fp: Big difference between invasion of privacy and creating a system of laws which are not civil liberties.

You feel free to go along with allowing the government to keep you safe and secure.

the thing is Verizon phone records and google searches have NEVER been private. there have always been records of those things.

JimmyV

Jason P wrote:

unsung wrote:

"No more illegal wiretapping of American citizens, no more ignoring the law when it is an inconvenience, this administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no shortcuts to protecting America."

----Barack Obama 2007

Things become different when you are handed the big stick and have to deal with reality.

Things also become different once you start receiving a daily intelligence briefing.

mikepegg44

pjhawks wrote:

so since you didn't give me one instance where your life has been affected i'll take that as a no.

ok, that is what you should take away from what I and others have said...

and stop and frisk in NYC has worked.

So would a curfew at 8:00 pm until 8:00 am the next morning, you willing to do it? I assume you think it has worked in NYC because you weren't stopped and frisked for no reason...

sometimes the safety and freedom of the millions has to take precedence over the safety and freedoms of a few. policing isn't always pretty, but it's better than bitching after the fact when the policing wasn't done.

I will remember that. that is a novel idea, fuck over a few so that a bunch can be "safe". bullshit way of looking at civil liberty. I guess I think that when the one person is fucked over the many are fucked over too. But I guess if it doesn't happen to you then it was a good thing.

why do I suspect that many that openly complain about some of the tactics] that have come out in the past few days are also the same who complain when we don't do enough like not keeping tabs on the Boston Bombers even after the Russians gave us the information, Benghazi and 9/11?

why do I suspect that the same people who excuse these types of databases and info grabs are the same ones who refer to defendants getting off because due process wasn't followed as "getting off on a technicality?" The constitution and the bill of rights is so much more than a technicality.

I hope your life is never affected by the actions of the gov't. Mine hasn't been affected yet in a direct way, but I think everyone's has in an indirect way with the erosion of 4th amendment protections and the current terror first climate that makes it easy to swallow anything the gov't wants to do. Don't worry, they won't do anything that hurts innocent people. The gov't never hurts innocent people.

I for one am forever grateful for the ACLU and other organizations that are there to keep the gov't honest. To fight for the rights of ALL people, even the ones who haven't/won't be affected directly by certain behaviors...


So many people being willing to swallow this type of shit just shows me the terrorists have truly won.

unsung

Cosmo wrote:

unsung wrote:

Citizens should never give up liberties. We have the Constitution for a reason.

...
The Constitution never factored in technology. Our founding fathers never envisioned cellular technology or .50 caliber sniper rifles. They left those thing intentionally vague because they knew that things will change in the future. That is the sheer genius of our Constitution... it can adapt to change.

Technology is irrelevant.

unsung

If you criticized Bush but support Obama you are a hypocrite.

Dems hated Bush for these things, where's Cindy Sheehan? Now the Dems are mostly ok with it. Look at the comments from Dem leaders in Congress. Now the GOP is criticizing. But when Bush was POTUS it was ok.

Meanwhile the entire time us Liberarians and Constitutionslists have been critical.

norm

mikepegg44 wrote:

So many people being willing to swallow this type of shit just shows me the terrorists have truly won.

"drilling for fear makes the job simple"

Cosmo

unsung wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

unsung wrote:

Citizens should never give up liberties. We have the Constitution for a reason.

...
The Constitution never factored in technology. Our founding fathers never envisioned cellular technology or .50 caliber sniper rifles. They left those thing intentionally vague because they knew that things will change in the future. That is the sheer genius of our Constitution... it can adapt to change.

Technology is irrelevant.

...
No. Because if you broadcast out across open public airwaves, you cannot presume your right to privacy.
The Founding Fathers had no concept of radios in 1776.. did they?

unsung

Yes because we know government can be trusted with the data they've mined.