If a mistake is made (which apparently happens pretty often), and a phone number
is tapped by accident and later this is realized, then the data is
"destroyed"Wow! Thank you for being so honest and straight
forward with us.C'mon, how naive do you think we really are? Do you honestly think these jokers destroy that data?Any
rational person knows better.The more information they have, the
more information that they have to stop a "terrorist attack"
As more information about these NSA programs comes forward, it's apparent
that critics who speak first and think later should now realize that personal
privacy concerns should be very minimal. Zero calls or emails made and received
within the US (99.9%) are not monitored or saved. Only very specific
international communications are targeted. Even at that, we should
be willing to give up a very small amount of privacy for enhanced national
security. It's a small price to pay. Too many people obsess about what
could possibly happen negatively with gathered info, but realistically never
will. Until there is a better basis for criticizing, it's pointless to do
so.Is the program perfect and does it catch every threat? No,
nothing will do that. But it has been shown to catch and thwart many of them.
I'm grateful.Though I've been criticized in similar
article comments for defending these programs, no one has yet explained to me
exactly and specifically how and why this monitoring is illegal according the
the Constitution and/or the Bill of Rights... and/or how they personally have
suffered any specific negative consequences from this program.
@TatorsDid you watch the same USHR21 Select Committee on
Intelligence meeting that I watched?Let me assure you that the
privacy concerns are not minimal.We should not be willing to give up
one ounce of privacy for security!
@Tators"I've been criticized in similar article comments for
defending these programs, no one has yet explained to me exactly and
specifically how and why this monitoring is illegal according the the
Constitution and/or the Bill of Rights"The 4th amendment states
that "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"It's important to note that
the 4th amendment is in part a response to the Writs of Assistance used by the
British, which the American colonists thought were far too general. Now think
about how many millions of customers had their phone records looked at by the
federal government. Although they may have had a warrant (from a secret court),
how did they fulfill the "probable cause" requirement? Is being an
American citizen and using a phone now probable cause to believe someone is a
terrorist? Until they can give probable cause, this is clearly a 4th amendment
@ tim the tool man taylor:The point isn't whether or not
privacy concerns are minimal. Obviously they are not. It's whether or not
they are valid. As more and more information comes out concerning the exact
scope and limits of this particular program of the NSA, it's becoming more
and more evident that the initial paranoia of the public is not valid.
Nevertheless (and obviously), some of that paranoia still lingers.Also, you should understand you've already given up privacy for security,
but apparently without realizing it. It happens quite often whenever you list
your social security number on a form. It happens whenever anyone registers a
firearm purchase. It happens whenever you use your passport when traveling. It
also happens in many other day-to-day ways that people (and obviously you)
seldom think about. The reality is that we don't live in a perfect and
idealistic world, and so sometimes small compromises are made to accommodate
that reality. Nevertheless, we still have one of the best lifestyles and forms
of government in the world. And yes, we do need to continue being vigilant in
guarding that lifestyle and never losing it.
@ David King:Think about what the 4th amendment really says. Through
this NSA program, nothing has been seized from any citizens. There have been no
unreasonable search and property seizures made. Granted that the term
"unreasonable" is a subjective term and there will always be some
disagreement concerning what the limits of that would entail. There's no
getting around that.To keep this program in context, it's also
important to remember that over 99% of calls are never looked at and nothing
kept. There is no evidence to the contrary inspite of what paranoid people
contend. The only calls effected are international and they are only monitored
for key words such as bomb or terrorist. That truly does not sound like an
unreasonable seizure of any citizens property to me. And given that 9/11 and the
Boston bombing did happen with international connections... and given that over
50 other attempts at similar acts of terrorism are documented to have been
thwarted... then yes, I would definitely say there is probable cause to proceed
to monitor this extremely small and very select type of communication. How have
you personally suffered because of this?
Remember the 1963 movie the Manchurian Candidate? A senator was running around
claiming there are 57 communists in the American government. He got that number
by reading a ketchup bottle. I wonder what brand the NSA director uses.
It was actually 500...I saw it on Drudge.
A lot of us don't trust the government much anymore. No, its not a
"R" or "D" issue.How about taking
"oversight" including, but not limited to, the "FISA" court OUT
of the hands of the government?How about appointing 3-7 people who
are NOT in the government to monitor the monitors?Clergy, laypersons,
ex-military, (but retired), etc.Why not? People like the above
named have no vested interest in continuing nonsensical eavesdropping(if in fact
that has happened).We NEED someone we can trust if we plan to
continue the program.
@TatorsSo I am going to assume that you did not watch or read the
transcript from this morning's USHR21 Select Committee on Intelligence
meeting. Let's be completely clear about this, FA 702 and FA
215 are the two sections of the Patriot Act that were discussed in the meeting.
Under these two sections, your statement is true: "To keep this program in
context, it's also important to remember that over 99% of calls are never
looked at and nothing kept".Well, kind of--because you see in
the meeting (the one you didn't watch or listen to), they brought up other
scenarios like "accidentally" tapping the wrong phone line. They said
this happens quite often, and when it does they just purge the data. When
questioned on this purging, the answer was something to the effect of--it's
a complex process.I am not paranoid, but someone who does their
homework. If you think I am paranoid, just do any small amount of research on
CALEA and soon you too will be paranoid!
There You Go Again500 terriorist attacks, or 500 communists?
Yesterday it was twenty plots.One thing I have learned well.
Political leaders with the press, will lie to get what they want.The
question is. How many times will the public fall for it?Education,
bridges/roads, & helping the poor/sick have been effective means of getting
Funny how they couldn't stop the Boston attack.Even the
slightest research into the two bombers should have raised red flags.Someone is not telling the truth. (and it is those that desire more power)Giving someone more power over you for empty promises of security or
protection is a serious and grievous mistake.
No answers for guns to Mexican cartels, Benghazi, IRS targeting, AP seizure,
troops dying in wars, or a seventeen trillion dollar debt. We've been lied
to, and scammed.Is there one reason we should trust our political
leaders to spy on us?Is foiling 50 terrorist plots a truthful thing,
or a lie like the video starting the Benghazi attack. Or our taxes not going up
a single dime? Remember our commander saying he would not sign any legislation
that would add a single dime to the debt?How can we believe,
surveillance programs have foiled 50 terrorist plots worldwide? Are we spying
in other countries too?
"Some fifty" Hmmm. So you really don't know specifically how many
foiled?Seems to me the the NSA is simply attempting to justify
it's expensive, invasive existence.
And we are to trust these individuals, even with uniforms on? Data can't
lie? What are they doing with the information other than what they say? Do
they correlate it with the IRS and HIPPA?
Foiled 50 plots? Really? Could you point to just one where people have been
prosecuted for these terrorist plots? Another point for "Tators"
The fact that the Gvt is storing this personal information is cause for concern.
At some point in the future the government will be able to constuct any scenario
they need to prosecute you as a terrorist or enemy of the state. If you dont
believe that read "1984", study Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. The
same tactics were used with the existing technology of the day.
I'd like to see some evidence of this. Like a hard document. Because I
really think they're exaggerating this number.
their own site tells you they are spying on dometic only. go look at it. nsa
utah county. they are going to spy on all electronic info. credit cad, debi,
medical records. here the thing private contractors are doing some of the work.
what would stop them from using it for profit.
The Utah site is the gathering and storing site. The analysts that do the work
with the data are in other locations, mainly back east.