Printable View
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...w=wn_tophead_1
Quote:
Under the Patriot Act, the FBI can acquire bank records and Internet or phone logs simply by issuing itself a so-called national security letter saying the records are relevant to an investigation into terrorism. The FBI doesn't need to show probable cause or consult a judge. What's more, the target institution is issued a gag order and kept from revealing the subpoena's existence to anyone, including the subject of the investigation.
Good... if it stops one terrorist from taking one life, than its worth all my privacy and all of yours.
'less you're a criminal, and value your privacy greatly...
:mrt: < I pity the fool that doesn't support patriot act
Awesome...I can't wait to see what rights/personal liberties I'll still have in 10 years as an American.
Ed
hmmm the war on drugs and the war on terrorism are more and more the same.
of course most of the tools never complained about the infringement on our rights from the war on drugs.
are you calling me a tool?Quote:
Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
hmmm the war on drugs and the war on terrorism are more and more the same.
of course most of the tools never complained about the infringement on our rights from the war on drugs.
Nah, you are to young to be in the tool lot ;).Quote:
Originally posted by cougrhky20
are you calling me a tool?
all this has been going on legally for about 20 years or so. Illegally for over 50. The patriot act will sunset in a few years, the DEA will live on for a long long while after.
Sorry, you don't get to decide what my privacy is worth. If you want to give yours up, be my guest. I'll defend mine as hard as I can.Quote:
Originally posted by marknovak
Good... if it stops one terrorist from taking one life, than its worth all my privacy and all of yours.
To dredge up an often used quote by Ben Franklin, 'They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.' And coming from a man with the profundity to say 'Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy' (the only proof that has ever almost swayed me back to a religious life) I have to agree.
I'm seriously impressed it can be done without having to actually tell the person who is being investigated! Is this to give the FBI a headstart in the case?
I agree with TGLC on this one. I mean, privacy for the most part is a non-issue. It can be infringed upon with a simple statement "suspicion" and poof. Your rights are pushed aside for the most part.
And for the record, the biggest e-mail/telephone snooping machine ever devised resides in the UK.
Hello Echelon.
Get on a messenger type application, you. :pQuote:
Originally posted by gerbick
I agree with TGLC on this one. I mean, privacy for the most part is a non-issue. It can be infringed upon with a simple statement "suspicion" and poof. Your rights are pushed aside for the most part.
And for the record, the biggest e-mail/telephone snooping machine ever devised resides in the UK.
Hello Echelon.
john hoover must be laughing in his grave.
I don't mind breaking someone's privacy rights if there is strong evidence, actual evidence not suspicion, of their involvement in any serious crime, but that snooping should be sanctioned by a judge not by the fbi, that's ridiculous in imho, it's going to abused.
Can we agree human live is worth more than your privacy?Quote:
Originally posted by japangreg
Sorry, you don't get to decide what my privacy is worth. If you want to give yours up, be my guest. I'll defend mine as hard as I can.
The Patriot act was passed to stop terrorists, the FBI isn't out to keep tabs on every american citizen, they are there to protect them.
Terrorists swap information on the internet... the FBI is looking to stop this by means of interruption... why? The terrorists use this information to kill in mass numbers.
Put it into perspective. I forfit my privacy to protect others, I have nothing to hide.
Although I appreciate your patriotism, and even more your service to our nation through the most honorable USMC, the FBI has a long history of keeping tabs on american citizens. Hoover ran a blackmail empire, I believe it was for the good of the nation at the time, it was still blackmail.Quote:
Originally posted by marknovak
Can we agree human live is worth more than your privacy?
The Patriot act was passed to stop terrorists, the FBI isn't out to keep tabs on every american citizen, they are there to protect them.
Hoover was a looney, he thought it was for the good of his position in the system rather than for the nation... but anyway, i hope the FBI has come some way since then, but still, i agree, allowing the FBI to use powers like these indiscriminately, without having to reference an outside source, like a senate group or judge, is just asking for abuse.Quote:
Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
the FBI has a long history of keeping tabs on american citizens. Hoover ran a blackmail empire, I believe it was for the good of the nation at the time, it was still blackmail.
anyone else read 'the cold six thousand'? Great book
I heard hoover measured people's heads to find out how intelligent they were for his appointed positions....
TRUE?!? FALSE?!?
Anyway, if that rule was still in effect, I'd be secretary of state.
(got a huge head)
hadn't heard that but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true, he was a loon.
a lot of people compare him to howard hughes, a paranoid loner.
what do you expect from a paranoid cross-dresser?
just had this very same discussion via IM with novak, and my statements still stand. I have no problems with a system that's out there sampling for key words and occurences. It's a widely known "rumor" that books you check out are subject to FBI scrutiny.
so be it. I don't think "3 little pigs" or James Gleick's Chaos will land me on any list of any concern.
however, if all of my information is subject to retrieval, then what happens if you get some looney toon that thinks that anybody researching spiders is secretly planning to take over the world with some new "spider bomb" or something idiotic.
I'm also not afraid of what information is out there about me. only illegal thing I've done was drink a beer before 21.
terrorist indeed.
but I don't want all of my information made available without my knowledge. sorta like... why have walls?
yeah but what happens if an evil english guy paid by a evil organistion tries to frame you and destroy your life by deletign all your records from government databases.Quote:
Originally posted by gerbick
I'm also not afraid of what information is out there about me. only illegal thing I've done was drink a beer before 21.
it could happen, look at sandra bullock in 'the net'
scary.
No one should have a problem with this new law.. why? Because unless you are a terrorist or do something to make the FBI think you are, they won't be invading your privacy at all..
It's not like they are going to see Joe Schmoe driving his Kia Sedona down a 2 lane highway 3 mph over the speed limit wearing a blue shirt and decide they have to run a complete background check, bank record listing and family tree..
If you keep it clean, then you're fine.. People get pissed off because of stricter laws and tougher penalties, well guess what.. until it goes back to 1950 and I can leave for work all day long without having to worry about locking my door, I say pass as many laws as you can.. Sorry if I no longer feel like wondering if today is the day some random guy is going to shoot me for my $1.40..
Well, first off you are assuming that my privacy doesn't in some way protect another's life; witness protection, private investigation, potential legal challenges to gov. authority suddenly become meaningless if they can't be kept under raps. Doesn't take an entire failure of the system either, just one guy who realizes he can make a fortune selling this info under the table.Quote:
Originally posted by marknovak
Can we agree human live is worth more than your privacy?
The Patriot act was passed to stop terrorists, the FBI isn't out to keep tabs on every american citizen, they are there to protect them.
Terrorists swap information on the internet... the FBI is looking to stop this by means of interruption... why? The terrorists use this information to kill in mass numbers.
Put it into perspective. I forfit my privacy to protect others, I have nothing to hide.
Unlike you, my friend, I don't have blind faith in a government organization just because; remember Hansen? Remember the laptops and weapons that couldn't be accounted for? The FBI is far from perfect (as is every gov. agency) and to give them unlimited powers like this is a bad, bad idea.
I have no problem with the FBI scouring the internet for keywords like 'jihad' and 'sour milk'; there is no resonable assumption of privacy when you post something on the net. But when they have the ability to tap phones without warrents and conduct searches without telling you (before or after) it's crossing a pretty clear line.
people get pissed off because the system is always abused, and removing such checks like authorising these actions internally is only going to increase that.Quote:
Originally posted by 1337designs
No one should have a problem with this new law.. why? Because unless you are a terrorist or do something to make the FBI think you are, they won't be invading your privacy at all..
mr joe schmo driving down the freeway might not be effected by this, but mr joe abdul going about his business might, you don't think racial profiling will a part of the 'probably cause'?
I see no reason to remove the need to sanctions like these with 3rd parties. People regularly get judges out of bed for warrants and authorisations.
In theory, with today's technology the time it takes to get a warrant could take to long.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
I see no reason to remove the need to sanctions like these with 3rd parties. People regularly get judges out of bed for warrants and authorisations.
However, the FBI had numerous occasions, with intelligence gathered in a more constitutional manner, to stop the 9-11 attacks. But those attacks still happened...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGG53925E1.DTL
If you're not with us, you're against us.Quote:
Washington -- The FBI has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money, and gas masks to defend against tear gas.
*cough* Cointelpro *cough*
...and there's no reason to believe that any other information obtained illegally would have helped either.Quote:
Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
However, the FBI had numerous occasions, with intelligence gathered in a more constitutional manner, to stop the 9-11 attacks. But those attacks still happened...
With all of the internal bro-ha-ha in the FBI/CIA, and their little territorial squabbles, I doubt much short of a fully detailed plan of attack signed by Bin Laden addressed to both agencies would have had much effect.
talk about fundamentalism.Quote:
Originally posted by CNO
If you're not with us, you're against us.
tecjnology can be made to work on both sides, to get warrants faster.Quote:
Originally posted by TallGuyLittleCar
In theory, with today's technology the time it takes to get a warrant could take to long.
like in minority report... or something.
;)
more like myopic sensationalism.
if you basically "give" your rights to the government that all of your conversation will be scrutinized 100%, then when will it start to be censored?
and yeah. for you people that think that racial profiling is not a problem, then think again.
or the matrix!Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
tecjnology can be made to work on both sides, to get warrants faster.
like in minority report... or something.
;)
:D
Racial profiling is just an efficient way to catch terrorists and criminals...
If a bunch of blonde haired blue eyed 6'2" 230 lbs white males started suicide bombing, I'd certainly allow myself to be subject to scrutiny.
:eek:
Again, nothing to hide!
I think before this conversation heats up a bit, all parties involved should define what they believe racial profiling is.
very true...I was pondering it myself...
funny. people like you hide behind terms like that in clubs with the same three letters usually.
..... this is immature and childish...Quote:
Originally posted by gerbick
funny. people like you hide behind terms like that in clubs with the same three letters usually.
http://www.jds-high-performance.com/...AAA%20logo.gif
But how you knew that I belong to AAA and my car is a piece of crap is beyond me.
I believe racial profiling is deceptive. here is why... Terrorists are always going to throw you a curve ball, that is a given, so you might be preparing for a past event - not a future one...next thing is, who is going to do the profiling. I know of few people who can tell the difference in between a Saudi, Lebanese, Egyptian or a Greek...But, in truth, there are vast differences in their appearances. Most people are too ignorant of the vast cultures out there and youll get Indians, Pakistanis and Sikhs being prosecuted left and right...So in theory, yes I find it to be a useful tool when dealing with volumes of people, but I distrust it highly in practice...
america has it's share of white bread terrorists too, I'm sure there's 'anti-govt loony' profiling going on too.
my sister's a fed.Quote:
Originally posted by marknovak
But how you knew that I belong to AAA and my car is a piece of crap is beyond me.
Did you hear about the connection between McVeigh and AlQaeda? Apparently McV was married to Filipino woman and visited her hometown a number of times. It was ascertained from Filipino Police that were tailing Ramsi Youssef and McV kept coming up being seen with him..Yousef was the mastermind of the 94 WTC Bombing and is believed to be behind the 911 attacks... McV had basic (infantry based demolitions knowledge while he was in the Army) which is not at all like the bomb(very large ordnance) from Oklahoma...Ramsi Yousef is widely beleived to have given him that extra bombmaking knowledge.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
america has it's share of white bread terrorists too, I'm sure there's 'anti-govt loony' profiling going on too.
Sorry for going off topic, but thought it was relevant somehow...
Some very good posts here, very knowledgeable you lot are :)
my little add:
The government can get anything out and from you. There's been people going to prison for over 30 years, then having DNA research come up saying that they weren't guilty. All they get is a "sorry".
The DEA, FBI, and the CIA have been illegally conducting research for the past 60 years, ever since pot was banned in the States. This document just makes their research legal.
actually most of america's terrorist, or at least america's most effective terrorist, are leftists or environmental groups. That is if you don't count cia folks.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
america has it's share of white bread terrorists too, I'm sure there's 'anti-govt loony' profiling going on too.
so I guess that should be granola terrorists...
granola terrorists. that's the name of my next band.
my stage name... Bran Assassin.