 AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | Big deal... Who cares? Who did this hurt? Where is the victim here?
You've got everyone yelling and screaming about how their privacy rights were invaded even though it's virtually guaranteed that not a single one of those people was actually monitored.
There's obviously a privacy question here, but if you want to go after someone for it, go talk to the government. I tell you what - if the NSA shows up at my door with a National Security Letter in hand, I'm going to do what they say. If there's fault here, it's the government's.
I love how the Democrats who want the government to run everything at the expense of private business are the ones decrying government interference in everything, including privacy. Seems a bit hypocritical to me...
Adam |
|
| Gee, you've never studied history have you. How do you KNOW you weren't caught in their web? How is the us any different than Stalinist Russia? We have the constitution for a REASON. And the 4th REASON is quite simple.
"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."
Hmm.. let's see now.. Did they have probable cause to listen to your private conversation? Did they GET A WARRANT?
Today, you may not be affected, but what if the other states decide that everyone from GA is a potential 'terrist'. Now, you are a 'person of interest' to all the other states. Now, everything you do, everything you say, CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law.
The right to be FREE of government spying is one of our FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. Our rights have been violated, not only by the megacorps, but also by our elected officials. The only solution is to throw the lot of them out, bankrupt the megacorps, and start anew. Until we do that, we will all be sugject to the whims of not only our facist sieg leader, but WHOMEVER we put in power.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. |
|
1 edit | reply to Alpine
said by Alpine:Who cares? Who did this hurt? Where is the victim here? I agree.
Why would anyone be surprised by this. The Dems know as well as anyone that if/when they get in the White House they will have to monitor the phones the same as the Bush admin did(and every single admin before that since the telephone system existed). They can't piss off the telephone companies. In an emergency they will need their cooperation. So after all the political posturing for the mindless masses, they will give the telcos what they want.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
| reply to Alpine
Naive All governments, by nature, are not trust worthy and they only protect governments' own interest, not yours. That's why we have constitution to protect us, private citizens, from our government. |
|
|
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to karlmarx
Re: Big deal... said by karlmarx:How is the us any different than Stalinist Russia? Why would you think this is a bad thing?
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
 kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | reply to fAcEtIOUs
This is not a democratic or republican issue. This is a matter of national importance. The government broke the law and is retroactively making its actions legal. This is unprecedented.
The telcos are irrelevant. No one gives a damn about them...the current administration is trying to cover its own behind by giving them legal cover.
--
»PropertyMaps.com - Real-time, map based, nationwide MLS property search! |
|
OwlSaverOwlSaverPremium
join:2005-01-30
Berwyn, PA Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Alpine
From what I have read, the NSA did not come with letters in hand. AT&T and Verizon knew that this was wrong. They were probably pressured to do it for patriotic reasons and as a favor to their political allies. On the face of it, this violates the fourth amendment. Not only that, it is so close to the reason that the US broke from Britain that it is scary.
What real scares me is why did the Bush government do this? The FISA court has only rejected one request in their history. The FISA court can be convened after the fact to get a retroactive warrant. Clearly, the administration is hiding something. Now that is scary.
The whole Government falling in behind this is not good. We cannot and should not let the Government do whatever it wants in the name of secrecy. Scary. |
|
AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | reply to kapil
This is my point - why the huge push to kill immunity for the telcos? It's the government's actions in question here...
Adam |
|
kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | said by Alpine:This is my point - why the huge push to kill immunity for the telcos? ...because they complied. Corporations need to have a conscience...and the only way to get them to behave as responsible members of society is to hit them where it hurts...their pockets!
They did something which is illegal by most accounts...and should have raised enough red flags. But they did it anyway. Now they must repent.
--
»PropertyMaps.com - Real-time, map based, nationwide MLS property search! |
|
AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | Maybe they thought they were actually helping national security? I guess that doesn't qualify as "having a conscience?"
I know they should have called the ACLU first before making that kind of decision, but... |
|
kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | reply to Alpine
Re: Big deal... It has nothing to do with ACLU. The news was broken by a 22-year kool-aid drinking veteran employee of AT&T. He could tell right from wrong.
...and as the appeals judge wrote: "AT&T cannot seriously contend that a reasonable entity in its position could have believed that the alleged domestic dragnet was legal."
Judge Walker also flatly rejected the government's secrecy argument: "The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one. But dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security."
So clearly, more than just the ACLU types thought this was illegal and wrong.
--
»PropertyMaps.com - Real-time, map based, nationwide MLS property search! |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | reply to karlmarx
Re: Big deal... Immunity from lawsuit on the part of a corporate entity is totally different from the government being able to use said information against you in an actual prosecution.
While you wouldn't have the right to sue one of these entities in connection with said surveillance, the information would not be able to be used against you in a Court of law. It's called "relief".
Information or evidence obtained outside the 4th amendment are "the fruit of the poisonous tree" and therefore, are subject to "exclusion".
Your relief from the government for said violation of your rights is the exclusion of said evidence from any prosecutorial proceedings brought against you.
As much as people like to think it is, the sky isn't falling because you can't sue the death star or Verizon....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
 sitrix
join:2002-04-15
Tacoma, WA | reply to Alpine
said by Alpine:Maybe they thought they were actually helping national security? No, they clearly went along with government to get their mergers approved smoothly. Qwest had no mergers in the works, so they had no incentive to comply. |
|
| reply to OwlSaver
said by OwlSaver:From what I have read, the NSA did not come with letters in hand. AT&T and Verizon knew that this was wrong. They were probably pressured to do it for patriotic reasons and as a favor to their political allies. The only company that said no,Qwest , was not given government contracts and have cases filed against them.
Lesson - follow the law and suffer ? |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to N3OGH
Quite the opposite. Since the information that has been obtained via the illegal surveillance, has been upheld by the courts as admissible evidence, this is not considered 'the fruit of the poisonous tree'.
The fact that a private corporations were allowed to violate your 4th amendment rights based upon an unlawful order, should not exempt them from criminal or civil penalty (as upheld by numerous cases against companies by state and federal courts).
The exclusion of the bells from their legal responsibilities is just the tip of the iceberg. What next excluding cellphone makers from liability because they have gps chips and could be used to track people, whenever or where ever the government wants?
Jim
--
There are no stupid questions, only stupid people with questions -- Albert Einstein 1947 |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to Alpine
It is the precedence that is set. They take a little of your freedoms away every day, then one day you have none.
Second it will not be the NSA showing up at your door, it will be the FBI with a warrant for your arrest.
Lastly, what to prevent the bells from taking those illegal recordings and reselling them to information brokers to deny you credit or jobs?
This has all sorts of implications down the road for individuals. Don't blow it off as a minor issue, because a bunch of little issues, become big issues in a heart beat.
Jim
--
There are no stupid questions, only stupid people with questions -- Albert Einstein 1947 |
|
