'modest encroachments'

[Danzig]

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-staunchl...164030963.html

The Washington Post reported late on Thursday that federal authorities have been tapping into the central servers of companies including Google, Apple and Facebook to gain access to emails, photos and other files allowing analysts to track a person's movements and contacts.

That added to privacy concerns sparked by a report in Britain's Guardian newspaper that the National Security Agency (NSA) had been mining phone records from millions of customers of a subsidiary of Verizon Communications.



“If tyranny and oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
― James Madison

[Danzig]

http://news.yahoo.com/-why-does-obam...201343244.html

The court order allowing the government to inspect all Verizon phone records was slated to be declassified on April 12, 2038, when today’s political leaders had passed from the stage and were beyond political accountability. Until then, American citizens were supposed to have no way of knowing that the NSA knew when they were good (phoning Grandma for six minutes on her birthday) and when they were bad (arranging an adulterous rendezvous with a 19-minute call to an ex-girlfriend from the office).

Instead, in a major rebuke to Obama’s reputation as a purported defender of civil liberties, the Guardian, the British newspaper, published a top-secret court order Wednesday night that requires Verizon to provide the NSA with access to all of its phone logs. In one of the more chilling passages in the four-page document, Verizon is not allowed “to disclose to any other person that the FBI or NSA has sought or obtained tangible things under this Order.”

[Danzig]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/s...221024826.html

Did Director of National Intelligence James Clapper mislead Congress in March when he denied that the National Security Agency intentionally collects any type of data at all on millions of Americans? Judge for yourself.

It certainly looks bad. The revelation that the NSA secretly vacuumed up the telephone records of millions of Verizon customers would seem to fit the definition of "data" and "millions of Americans."

Clapper is denying that he misled anyone, telling the National Journal in a telephone interview: "What I said was, the NSA does not voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens' e-mails. I stand by that."

[Honu]

All in the name of protecting us....yeah right, it BS.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Honu

All in the name of protecting us....yeah right, it BS.

But take my gun(s).

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

But take my gun(s).

based on your posts the other day in the thread about the dna, i'm surprised you're not applauding these illegal searches.

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...overnment.html

“The people who set up this program didn’t intend to be malevolent,” he said. “It’s capacity-driven. We have this enormous capacity to collect and sort data. We do this because we can, and because it’s the one area where the government can really overmatch its terrorist adversaries.”

The problem is what happens incrementally. “What now seems extraordinary is soon accepted as normal, and becomes the baseline for the future,” Jenkins said. “Over a period of time, this baseline shifts, and these new intrusions accumulate and reinforce one another—and that fundamentally changes things.”

This dynamic has taken hold in many liberal democracies during crises and wars. “In the past, at the end of the emergency, the balance has shifted back and a lot of those powers were ended,” he said. “But we’re in a situation now that doesn’t have a finite ending. If there isn’t an end, then these powers accumulate and accumulate and accumulate. This is a fundamental difference. What we put in place becomes a permanent part of the landscape.

“We are driven,” he continued, “by fears of what might happen, not by things that have happened.” He noted that since Sept. 11, 2001, there have been 42 terrorist plots in the United States. All but four of them were halted. Three of those succeeded and killed a total of 17 people. “Not that this isn’t a tragedy,” he said, “but, really, in a society that has 15–16,000 homicides every year, it isn’t a lot.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

based on your posts the other day in the thread about the dna, i'm surprised you're not applauding these illegal searches.

This one's for dell..

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

based on your posts the other day in the thread about the dna, i'm surprised you're not applauding these illegal searches.

Arrest equals taking DNA/fingerprints not just being alive. Small difference I know

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by bigrun

This one's for dell..

Wouldn't let me open. Virus/malware? LMAO

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Wouldn't let me open. Virus/malware? LMAO

Dang, thought i had ya..


How bout this one...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Arrest equals taking DNA/fingerprints not just being alive. Small difference I know

you're wrong. making a mass search to find suspicious activity is no different from checking one person, without probable cause, for the same thing. you are not being consistent. you either have to have cause, or you don't. a judge did not sign off on king, but did on the phone records. is king a criminal? yes. are some verizon customers probably criminal? yes.

[Danzig]

the obama admin. may start a criminal probe about these phone record searches...
not into who ordered it, or who gathered all the evidence, but into who leaked the existence of the search.

obama has prosecuted more 'leakers' than all previous presidents combined.
yeah, land of the free, with an unfettered freedom of the press. freedom from illegal search and seizure....

[bigrun]

Here's another for dell..

'George W. Obama'....That's an insult to Obama..







http://now.msn.com/george-w-obama-vi...from-the-left/

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you're wrong. making a mass search to find suspicious activity is no different from checking one person, without probable cause, for the same thing. you are not being consistent. you either have to have cause, or you don't. a judge did not sign off on king, but did on the phone records. is king a criminal? yes. are some verizon customers probably criminal? yes.

Except for the fact King was under arrest for a felony and verizon customers were/are not.

If he left a finger print at the scene of the rape, instead of DNA that was entered into IAFIS and came up as a match to the crime when his prints were run be OK? Or would printing him be a violation of his 4rth amendment?

DNA is just a more precise fingerprint IMO.

Had he been arrested on trumped up charges solely in order to get a DNA swab, that would be a violation of his 4rth amendment rights but that wasn't the case.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by bigrun

Here's another for dell..

'George W. Obama'....That's an insult to Obama..









http://now.msn.com/george-w-obama-vi...from-the-left/

America's first half-Black President

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the obama admin. may start a criminal probe about these phone record searches...
not into who ordered it, or who gathered all the evidence, but into who leaked the existence of the search.

obama has prosecuted more 'leakers' than all previous presidents combined.
yeah, land of the free, with an unfettered freedom of the press. freedom from illegal search and seizure....

I just wish the President would realize the Patriot Act wasn't put in place to listen/watch/harass Patriots but instead to keep them safe. Obviously the Boston bombers weren't part of the public being monitored but then again they weren't Patriots either.

[bigrun]

Now tell me you don't like this one..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Except for the fact King was under arrest for a felony and verizon customers were/are not.

If he left a finger print at the scene of the rape, instead of DNA that was entered into IAFIS and came up as a match to the crime when his prints were run be OK? Or would printing him be a violation of his 4rth amendment?

DNA is just a more precise fingerprint IMO.

Had he been arrested on trumped up charges solely in order to get a DNA swab, that would be a violation of his 4rth amendment rights but that wasn't the case.

i'm sorry you're choosing to ignore the fact that his dna was NOT USED FOR ID. an arrest does NOT equal guilty. looking at one man's dna in a dna pool with NO names isn't making sure he's who he says he is. it is looking at all unsolved crimes as a way to create suspicion. much like looking thru phone records is a way to create suspicion, not confirm. searches are supposed to be performed on people if you have reasonable suspicion they have committed a specific crime.
and kings arrest when they did the dna-resulted in a misdemeanor conviction, not a felony. many states do dna swabs on convicts, not arrestees. that is what it should be in all states.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i'm sorry you're choosing to ignore the fact that his dna was NOT USED FOR ID. an arrest does NOT equal guilty. looking at one man's dna in a dna pool with NO names isn't making sure he's who he says he is. it is looking at all unsolved crimes as a way to create suspicion. much like looking thru phone records is a way to create suspicion, not confirm. searches are supposed to be performed on people if you have reasonable suspicion they have committed a specific crime.
and kings arrest when they did the dna-resulted in a misdemeanor conviction, not a felony. many states do dna swabs on convicts, not arrestees. that is what it should be in all states.

And you choose to ignore the fact when one is printed it is run through IAFIS not only to see if it matches a previous print on file but also latent prints taken from crimes. If the arrestee is coming through the system for the first time there is no print match on file but it is still run for unknown suspects from a crime. I'm sure when the latent print is obtained and ran it comes back no hit. Otherwise a warrant would all ready exist for the arrestee. I believe there is even an award given by the FBI for latent print hit of the year. This guy's original charge was classified as a felony and he pled down for a reason I suspect.

Fingerprinting started with no data base to confirm identity but it did create an identifier besides a name for arrestees/convicts. The same can be said of DNA especially taken in a swab only it's a much more precise identifier.

The comparing of Verizon customers to this felon I just don't get.