Nsa And Your Phone....

[mark the shoeshine boy]

Well it looks like the NSA is checking our calling records and and our e-mails.

Actually I don't have a problem with that considering what is going on in the world at this time. I believe the info can be helpful, if they can see if certain patterns or certain numbers being called.

What would have happened if this was used and utilized prior to 9/11 ???

What do you guys think ????

Of course in my sick mind...we need to find out the right numbers of the Iraq embassy or North Korean or any other terrorists type orginization.

If a bunch of us would start calling Osama Bin Laden's brother or something like that, wouldn't that screw everyone up at the NSA !!!!

"Sir...there has been a spike in the calls today"
"Who are the calls going to ?"
"Terrorists groups, sir"
"Who is making these calls"
" a 87 year old grandmother from Alpine Georgia...17 year high school student in Minnesota, sir, there are hundreds of them like these every minute..what should we do"
"don't tell the president"
"why not"
"his feeling will be hurt because nobody is calling him !!!"


tell me what you think of this...

mark the shoeshine boy

 

[JMT]

It would not have happened prior to 9/11 because there was no Patriot Act. Actually there was but it had always been rejected by congress. It took 9/11 to get that legislation passed. The problem I have with people who say that there is nothing wrong with this is that most of them do not realize how far this could go. Our current President is a strict constructionist, he believes if it is in the constitution it is law, and if it is not in the constitution it is not law. Nowhere in the constitution does it mention privacy. Americans did not actually have a legal right to privacy until 1965 when the Supreme Court ruled that the bill of rights contained non specific privacy rights. This ruling basically made it legal for people to buy birth control. (Griswold V. Connecticutt) This created the idea of public and private spheres it kept the Gov't out of your private affairs unless they had a reason to believe you were engaged in illegal activities. The worst case scenario with strict constructionists involved is that they would turn the U.S. into a big brother society where all of our activities are monitored. I know this is a little far fetched but with the two new justices on the Supreme Court there is a slight possibility that if the wrong legislation were passed it would be seen as constitutional. Fortunately, congressmans are elected and they would never pass legislation that voters would find too invasive (hopefully).

Sorry, I got off on a rant there. It is just something I have strong feelings about.

 

[guenron]

I fear that there is no article of the constitution that this adminstration respects. Starting with Ashcroft, there has been a concerted attack on the principles of our democracy. Now Ganzales, speak of situational law, forget the Bill of Rights. Neocons? Perhaps when the American People awaken from the nightmare created by the absence of checks and balances and we no longer have a rubberstamp national legislature, neocon will mean newly convicted?

 

[mark the shoeshine boy]

jim...

this is the barbershop....this is what we are suppose to do in here....let's be gentlemen and discuss our views and state your opinions on the matter...

get a haircut and a shoeshine, too.

I encourage all of us to comment about these ideas....


mark the shoeshine boy

 

[vox_rox]

Okay,

The NSA is NOT recording my phone calls (probably) because I doubt the outstretched ear of the American Government quite reaches this far, nor do I think they really care - that much - yet.

Still, I feel the pain that you guys to the south are feeling. There is so much falling off the rails, and so many questions that you people are just not getting answers for, and I really think that, contrary to assertions that you're headed for a Big Brother society, that you are already all suspects in the eyes of your governement.

Maybe I have it all wrong, I live in a different country after all. But we border each other, we get a ton of American television up here, we read your news every day. We're in the loop as much as we can be. And, even worse, now with our new Conservastive government, headed by the ultimately spineless Stephen Harper who, really, would be Brokeback Mountain buddies with G.W. if they weren't both so homophobic, that I can see our country just blindly following the example and going down the same path.

There, just my $0.02 worth (or $0.027 US and falling!).

Peace,

Pierre

 

[PoshRichM]

Sorry, I just don't see the horrendous erosion of rights or other signs of Hell-in-a-handbasket "falling off the rails" movement that keep being brought up--from where I'm sitting, the economy is still going gangbusters (notice how $3.00-per-gallon gas has barely made a dent in prosperity?); people still grouse and complain publicly about the administration and President without disappearing or getting flogged on street corners; and people are still risking death and incarceration to get here, both illegally and legally.

That said, Jim's exactly right about there not being a right to privacy. "Unreasonable search and seizure" is the closest the Constitution gets, and in time of war, scanning phone conversations for mentions of known terrorists and calls for destinations in the Middle East seems pretty reasonable to me.

Ron, care to elucidate exactly which parts of the Bill of Rights have been used as toilet paper by this Presidency? Last I checked, freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, etc., etc., were all in force.

The nation survived the Clinton years, it'll survive the W presidency just as well (better, if you believe in numbers like GNP and unemployment statistics).

-Rich

 

[guenron]

Sorry, I just don't see the horrendous erosion of rights or other signs of Hell-in-a-handbasket "falling off the rails" movement that keep being brought up--from where I'm sitting, the economy is still going gangbusters (notice how $3.00-per-gallon gas has barely made a dent in prosperity?); people still grouse and complain publicly about the administration and President without disappearing or getting flogged on street corners; and people are still risking death and incarceration to get here, both illegally and legally.

That said, Jim's exactly right about there not being a right to privacy. "Unreasonable search and seizure" is the closest the Constitution gets, and in time of war, scanning phone conversations for mentions of known terrorists and calls for destinations in the Middle East seems pretty reasonable to me.

Ron, care to elucidate exactly which parts of the Bill of Rights have been used as toilet paper by this Presidency? Last I checked, freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, etc., etc., were all in force.

The nation survived the Clinton years, it'll survive the W presidency just as well (better, if you believe in numbers like GNP and unemployment statistics).

-Rich

I shant even broach the establishment clause because it is buried, but for your amusement have your senator (Isn't that Jeff Sessions?) get you copies of the 700 presidential signings directling the executive branches agencies to disregard the laws passed by congress. Is that a good enough start? Here's a thought provoker for you, when an agency of the of the executive is doing pattern analysis of millions of citizens phone calls within the US, you see nothing questionable?
Just an afterthought, when Clinton lied, nobody died.

 

[PoshRichM]

I shant even broach the establishment clause because it is buried, but for your amusement have your senator (Isn't that Jeff Sessions?) get you copies of the 700 presidential signings directling the executive branches agencies to disregard the laws passed by congress. Is that a good enough start? Here's a thought provoker for you, when an agency of the of the executive is doing pattern analysis of millions of citizens phone calls within the US, you see nothing questionable?

700 Presidential signings. As in executive orders? Or are we talking about the myriad provisions of the PATRIOT act? Seriously, I want to know which we're discussing.

And for the record, how many pattern-analyzed phone calls are enough to protect the U.S.? What fraction less than all of them will make a sufficient safety net? Are you one, Ron, who howled bloody murder that the Bush administration Should Have Known ahead of September 11, and yet, when the administration makes efforts to catch the next perps before they strike, sues to hamstring their efforts? For that matter, is Lincoln likewise excoriable for having suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War?

And in case you're tempted to quote Franklin on "sacrificing liberty to purchase safety," he never said it.

Just an afterthought, when Clinton lied, nobody died.

Ah, BushLied[sup](R)(C)TM[/sup]. How short people's memories are. For what it's worth, the intel agencies of the world were convinced of the existence of WMDs, and Clinton-era policy announcements, Congressional action (all of whom were apprised of the intel beforehand) and the entire UN (who have their own intel sources, thanks) voiced their convictions on the matter before the war kicked off. Or were 17 brazenly flouted UN resolutions not enough?

-Rich

 

[Austin]

You guys are deep.

 

[Rik]

OK. I'll stir up the pot. I've been very happy with our current administration and feel it's doing an excellent job.

I do however have a problem with unelected judges who have taken it upon themselves to create law rather than enforce it. It would appear they feel they are members of our legislative branch rather than the judicial branch.

Yup, you guessed it. I'm as conservative as they come.

 

[PoshRichM]

Preach it, Rik.

-Rich

 

[JMT]

jim...

this is the barbershop....this is what we are suppose to do in here....let's be gentlemen and discuss our views and state your opinions on the matter...


mark the shoeshine boy

If I offended anyone I am sorry. I was simply offering my opinion. I realize that it is just that, an opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own and part of what is great about forums like this is that not everyone has to agree.

 

[Austin]

Jim, you offended no one.

 

[Scotto]

The wire-tapping "scandal", such as it is, reflected the targeted listening of phone calls exiting the US to known terrorist agents, locations, etc. Members of Congress were informed of this activity (though they seem to have conveniently "forgotten"), and the program was reviewed and renewed by the federal court system every 90 days. What more do you want?

For me, 9/11 changed everything. We are either going to get smart and beat these bastards, or we are going to let them beat us.

Personally, I think the current administration is doing a fine job on security matters, but a terrible job domestically and fiscally. That being said, I won't be voting for a Gore, Kerry, or (Heaven Forbid) Hillary any time soon.

Rik, you can add me to the "B&B Conservatives Club"

 

[PoshRichM]

For me, 9/11 changed everything. We are either going to get smart and beat these bastards, or we are going to let them beat us.

Personally, I think the current administration is doing a fine job on security matters, but a terrible job domestically and fiscally. That being said, I won't be voting for a Gore, Kerry, or (Heaven Forbid) Hillary any time soon.

Amen. The only fiscal bright spot is that W did get some tax cuts passed, and meager though they were, they've proven to have a real, beneficial effect.

What boils my oil is that our pantywaist 40-years-in-the-making GOP Congress can't seem to muster itself to make the cuts permanent, or better yet, beef them up. News flash: if, amid the $3.00 gas situation ($0.45 of which is taxes, but that's another post), the tax cuts are revoked/allowed to expire, that amounts to a double-whammy on the taxpayer!

And Jim, great topic. That's what the Barbershop is for.

-Rich

 

[Scotto]

Word, Rich. And don't even get me started on the freakin' AMT, which screws us poor New Yawkers badly. Our politicians on both sides of the aisle are largely a bunch of pathetic slack-jawed mouth breathers with barely an ounce of sense or an iota of courage.

 

[Austin]

Word, Rich. And don't even get me started on the freakin' AMT, which screws us poor New Yawkers badly. Our politicians on both sides of the aisle are largely a bunch of pathetic slack-jawed mouth breathers with barely an ounce of sense or an iota of courage.

Scotto, how do you really feel?

 

[Rik]

It's a shame we're too timid to speak our mind.

 

[zaphf]

This program isn't illegal, and the people grousing about it "overstepping authority" are the usual suspects. There isn't even a question about it being legal, The NSA asked for (and received) pen register logs from PRIVATE corporations that own that data. The companies that provided it weren’t ordered to. Even the Patriot act isn’t required.

<tinfoil-hat>
The problem is that technology makes that data incredibly intrusive. The NSA's exclamations that they only received numbers and not names/address' isn't much of a comfort. Even something as primitive as a phonebook can provide the data correlation. What the NSA has now, in the form of a database that they own and control, is a complete map of of the “social terrain”. Data mining can provide insight into everyone you know, things you are interested in. Scary right? They can also compare your pattern to other’s. Who knows what your 15 calls a week to toiletry suppliers might indicate!

Is that technology useful for breaking up terrorists? Of course it is! But without any oversight in place, how do we know (or more to the point, people we elect know) what this bureaucracy is doing with that data? Social circle traces could be used to discredit political foes, or maybe someone in the NSA just has a grudge against someone with the larger shaving brush collection than he does.

Knowledge is power and once given power, government does not relinquish it. All of these types of programs may be tactical wins in the war on terror, but they are strategic loses for the war of Western Civilization. Government should never be trusted, history has shown that no government has ever deserved it.
</tinfoil-hat>

 

[PoshRichM]

Knowledge is power and once given power, government does not relinquish it. All of these types of programs may be tactical wins in the war on terror, but they are strategic loses for the war of Western Civilization. Government should never be trusted, history has shown that no government has ever deserved it.

Excellently said, and this gets at the heart of my one real qualm with restrictions like these for this sort of war, very much like it did with the Cold War. Habeas corpus was reinstated after the Civil War, and war powers were rescinded after WWI and WWII (though some fun, like higher income taxes, remained). The problem is that conflicts that go on for decades (more than a generation in the case of the Cold War, probably at least as long in the case of the GWOT, provided American testicular fortitude hasn't completely atrophied) accustom people to wartime restrictions, making them appear to be normal, and making their repeal afterward all the more difficult.

Government, whose purpose is to guard and guide a civilization, should be as small as possible--but no smaller. This means I have no problem with our military budget (bump it up!) and few with our legal system (activist judges aside), but immense problems with most entitlement programs.

We really need to resurrect the debate over Congressional term limits. I think lots of the problems above self-regulate when there's no such thing as a career Congressman.

-Rich