The hits keep coming...

[piratey 6]

Well then you should've kept reading, because everything that was written after that was based on the assumption that you were referring to social media selling your information to the govt.----not the private sector....

 

As for your conspiracy theory, I can't help you there. If you think anyone is after that information for any reason beyond increasing the chances of making money, you're wrong. And I hate to put a damper on your outlook, but your cellphone, tv, car, computer, etc. dont track anything. The network that is hosting the items does. The items are simply the vehicle used. I guess the only safe bet is to disregard the progression of modern technology and hide under your bed.

 

No...my assumption is that now all that information is getting housed in one centralized location to be categorized and sorted. Even if you turn your cell phone off, your provider can still track you, you have to actually pull the battery out...

 

Look, your argument is akin to Iran's argument to be allowed to build a nuclear powerplant. I mean, sure it could be used to produce weapons grade nuclear material...but they are just gonna do it for energy! Trust them. It's for the good of the people!

 

I'm sorry but keeping that much power in one place will always lead to disaster. You don't have to be a conspiracist, you need only look to the past.

 

We know that no one ever seized power with the intention of relinquishing it

-George Orwell

 

Though I think we're heading for a Brave New World...

http://abetterkuwait.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/orwell-huxley.jpg?w=652

Edited August 7, 2013 by piratey

[echo88 74]

Well, the cellular realm happens to be my forte and your assertion that providers can "track" you even after you power down your phone is somewhat misguided.

 

When you push your power button, it sends a request to the network to detach from the network so it knows not to send you incoming alerts like for texts or calls. It takes network resources to do so, so the network wants to know when you're leaving.

 

That being said, the network would have no reason to deny that request and I've never seen any network, in any country, do so. And I've seen a lot of them.

 

This really goes back to just because an entity can do something doesn't mean that it does. In fact this ability for the network to deny the power down request is simply a requirement for the technology standard set forth by ETSI and 3GPP and not some backdoor capability that the nefarious came up with. It's resource management.

[ND3 0]

We've already had this discussion and I'm not sure there's a point to rehashing what's already been said in the other thread.

 

The new information- that the NSA is illegally working hand-in-hand with the DEA- that the DEA uses this information to make arrests, then backtracks and makes up a story to legitimize the arrest- that this is very commonplace- shows that the NSA has overstepped their bounds. Why are they allowed to do this? Because, for all intents and purposes, there are no checks to their power.

 

I understand that the PATRIOT Act makes the NSA's wiretapping/spying work "legal", but not this. There is no defense for completely disregarding the 6th Amendment.

 

History shows very few instances where those in power are willing to step down rather than pursue more (Cincinnatus and Washington come to mind). Why is this any different?

 

The United States used to have a government by the people, for the people, and of the people. The government should be afraid of it's populace. Today, it's completely backwards. I'm very much afraid of the government. It's the most powerful entity the world has ever seen, and it doesn't even follow it's own rules.

[echo88 74]

We've already had this discussion and I'm not sure there's a point to rehashing what's already been said in the other thread.

 

The new information- that the NSA is illegally working hand-in-hand with the DEA- that the DEA uses this information to make arrests, then backtracks and makes up a story to legitimize the arrest- that this is very commonplace- shows that the NSA has overstepped their bounds. Why are they allowed to do this? Because, for all intents and purposes, there are no checks to their power.

 

I understand that the PATRIOT Act makes the NSA's wiretapping/spying work "legal", but not this. There is no defense for completely disregarding the 6th Amendment.

 

History shows very few instances where those in power are willing to step down rather than pursue more (Cincinnatus and Washington come to mind). Why is this any different?

 

The United States used to have a government by the people, for the people, and of the people. The government should be afraid of it's populace. Today, it's completely backwards. I'm very much afraid of the government. It's the most powerful entity the world has ever seen, and it doesn't even follow it's own rules.

 

Yeah that makes sense. So the NSA, while legally (debate that all you want) conducting itself to discover persons with ties to terrorism, stumbles across information about drug smuggling and they shouldn't share it with the DEA? Your opinion is mind-boggling. You understand that terrorists and drug smugglers share the same communication/behavioral patters that would lead to scrutiny, right? When you're conducting illegal activity, your day to day patterns leap out at analysts because they don't match anything close to those belonging to innocent civilians.

 

I hope the NSA tips off DEA about drug smuggling, I hope the NSA tips off the Marshals about fugitives on the lam, I hope the NSA tips off the ATF when weapons are being smuggled by gangs, and I hope the NSA tips off the FBI when someone tries to buy a huge amount of fertilizer. In all of these cases, the behavioral profile of the perpetrators will be obvious. I consider it a healthy byproduct of the good that is already being done by the NSA in their efforts to weed out terrorists.

[ND3 0]

Yeah that makes sense. So the NSA, while legally (debate that all you want) conducting itself to discover persons with ties to terrorism, stumbles across information about drug smuggling and they shouldn't share it with the DEA? Your opinion is mind-boggling. You understand that terrorists and drug smugglers share the same communication/behavioral patters that would lead to scrutiny, right? When you're conducting illegal activity, your day to day patterns leap out at analysts because they don't match anything close to those belonging to innocent civilians.

 

I hope the NSA tips off DEA about drug smuggling, I hope the NSA tips off the Marshals about fugitives on the lam, I hope the NSA tips off the ATF when weapons are being smuggled by gangs, and I hope the NSA tips off the FBI when someone tries to buy a huge amount of fertilizer. In all of these cases, the behavioral profile of the perpetrators will be obvious. I consider it a healthy byproduct of the good that is already being done by the NSA in their efforts to weed out terrorists.

 

I've already stated in this thread that catching drug smugglers is a good thing. I also agree that government agencies should be working together (In fact, if the CIA had shared their information with the FBI before 9/11, the attacks could have been prevented). So I'm glad we're on the same page there.

 

6th Amendment:

 

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence

 

Fabricating arrest stories defiles one of our basic human rights- to be informed of why we are being arrested.

 

It shouldn't be hard to get a warrant with information from the NSA. Fabricating stories for a quick drug bust is unethical. The ends don't justify the means.

Edited August 7, 2013 by ND3

[echo88 74]

I've already stated in this thread that catching drug smugglers is a good thing. I also agree that government agencies should be working together (In fact, if the CIA had shared their information with the FBI before 9/11, the attacks could have been prevented). So I'm glad we're on the same page there.

 

6th Amendment:

 

 

 

Fabricating arrest stories defiles one of our basic human rights- to be informed of why we are being arrested.

 

It shouldn't be hard to get a warrant with information from the NSA. Fabricating stories for a quick drug bust is unethical. The ends don't justify the means.

 

Well i won't try to argue that fabricating the stories is right because it isn't. I guess it just doesn't bother me because it's being done to prosecute drug dealers.

[jessemoore97 1,291]

Well i won't try to argue that fabricating the stories is right because it isn't. I guess it just doesn't bother me because it's being done to prosecute drug dealers.

 

I agree as well. If its drug smugglers who also happen to be illegals and or with ties to terror(opium/heroin, K2, Ecstacy suppliers from ME) I could give two sh*ts if their "American Civil Rights" are violated. They aren't a citizen, so they don't apply, F'em.

[jon33dn 0]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/uk-dea-irs-idUKBRE9761B620130807

 

It's not just illegals...

 

The point is that people like you think they laws should only apply to people you like, people you 'deserve' to be treated fairly... I'm sorry, I disagree.

[echo88 74]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/uk-dea-irs-idUKBRE9761B620130807

 

It's not just illegals...

 

The point is that people like you think they laws should only apply to people you like, people you 'deserve' to be treated fairly... I'm sorry, I disagree.

 

No. It's just that *******s doing their best to jack this country up shouldn't be afforded the same rights. Not an American citizen? Eat ****.

[piratey 6]

Well i won't try to argue that fabricating the stories is right because it isn't. I guess it just doesn't bother me because it's being done to prosecute drug dealers.

 

For now. -_-

[echo88 74]

For now. -_-

 

And even with a ridiculous amount of resources and funding, they still only manage to catch a very small percentage of these guys. Not sure what makes you think the general population could be targeted even if they wanted to....

[jon33dn 0]

Probably because we just saw the government use the IRS to act punitively against citizens based on their political leanings and activities. I'm sure those people who broke the law and abused their offices like that would never be tempted to violate political opponents right in any other way though... Le sigh...

[echo88 74]

Probably because we just saw the government use the IRS to act punitively against citizens based on their political leanings and activities. I'm sure those people who broke the law and abused their offices like that would never be tempted to violate political opponents right in any other way though... Le sigh...

 

Well, it's a scandal. They happen. I can tell you that it's much easier to abuse the resources of the IRS than it is to abuse the powers of the NSA. I about fell out of my chair laughing when the "tech guy" Snowden said that operators at the agency could pull whatever data they want on whomever they chose. That is ridiculously incorrect.

[jon33dn 0]

Well, it's a scandal. They happen. I can tell you that it's much easier to abuse the resources of the IRS than it is to abuse the powers of the NSA. I about fell out of my chair laughing when the "tech guy" Snowden said that operators at the agency could pull whatever data they want on whomever they chose. That is ridiculously incorrect.

 

And yet he had access... Strange. Also see Manning, Bradley

[echo88 74]

And yet he had access... Strange. Also see Manning, Bradley

 

LOL you realize he is a tech guy right? Someone has to maintain those networks. That just means he had access to information about the programs---not access to the tasking databases or collection information. So basically he knew about the programs and formulated his own conclusion about how they are used and who can do what.....bad idea.

 

As for Manning, the stuff he leaked was all Secret level. That stuff isn't compartmentalized and it is offered to anyone with secret level clearance because, well, it doesn't have anything to do with sources and methods. Mostly videos, photos, and reports.

[piratey 6]

Well, it's a scandal. They happen. I can tell you that it's much easier to abuse the resources of the IRS than it is to abuse the powers of the NSA. I about fell out of my chair laughing when the "tech guy" Snowden said that operators at the agency could pull whatever data they want on whomever they chose. That is ridiculously incorrect.

 

I run SQL queries to sort hundreds of thousands of lines of information daily... You don't think there are people writing scripts to categorize and sort this ****? Maybe we can't do it today but in 2/5/10 years? The database needs to be blown up, it shouldn't be legal to store everything like that in one place, under one umbrella agency.

[echo88 74]

I run SQL queries to sort hundreds of thousands of lines of information daily... You don't think there are people writing scripts to categorize and sort this ****? Maybe we can't do it today but in 2/5/10 years? The database needs to be blown up, it shouldn't be legal to store everything like that in one place, under one umbrella agency.

 

Cmon man. It's just numbers. Not identities. Only network providers can cough up names associated to accounts and that requires case approval by a FISA court. To get the approval, they've have gotta be in contact with some pretty notorious groups/individuals. They're not bringing cases in front of them unless they're sure it's someone up to no good.

[piratey 6]

Cmon man. It's just numbers. Not identities. Only network providers can cough up names associated to accounts and that requires case approval by a FISA court. To get the approval, they've have gotta be in contact with some pretty notorious groups/individuals. They're not bringing cases in front of them unless they're sure it's someone up to no good.

 

That's the problem though echo, where is the over-site on the FISA court? This is essentially a 21st century Star Chamber. It's a rubber stamp that let's the NSA do whatever they want. As a Verizon customer, they stamped the pulling of my phone records from May to July this year. Awesome.

[jon33dn 0]

Cmon man. It's just numbers. Not identities. Only network providers can cough up names associated to accounts and that requires case approval by a FISA court. To get the approval, they've have gotta be in contact with some pretty notorious groups/individuals. They're not bringing cases in front of them unless they're sure it's someone up to no good.

 

That is exactly what they circumvented with the whole 'parallel construction' approach.

 

I understand you wont come down off your point, but you are actively arguing for a violation of the constitutional rights of your countrymen... it's hard to understand for the rest of us.

[echo88 74]

That's the problem though echo, where is the over-site on the FISA court? This is essentially a 21st century Star Chamber. It's a rubber stamp that let's the NSA do whatever they want. As a Verizon customer, they stamped the pulling of my phone records from May to July this year. Awesome.

 

Well I guess I'm interested in hearing about your oversight recommendations. So certain judges are assigned to serve on the FISA court, right? They are read in on the capability so they can better understand how the information was gleaned.

 

They look at the case that the NSA has built against certain suspected terrorists and the NSA is requesting personal information on these people (identities, approval to monitor, etc.) Does that sound right so far?

 

Ok, so when you say oversight, who are you recommending for the job? These are judges who understand the legal system. Are you saying that you think the judges are selected using some criteria that gives the agency some leeway on the law or what? I guess Im just confused on where u think the system is flawed....and who u think should review their decisions.....