Judges OK warrantless monitoring of Web use

And did any of us expect anything else from our government ? This has been going on for years . Microsoft , Aol. Google etc is part and parcel with the governments spying program on all of us ! They have been compiling data on all of us with impunity and without regards to our constitutional and civil rights ,all because ol' King George wrote executive inclusions into his presidential powers without anyone challenging him ! This rogue has become nothing more than a dictator and the rest of his cabinet is no better . It's time for all americans to stand up and demand that this little Hitler be brought up on charges and impeached and stripped of his presidential powers as well as his henchman Chaney and Rumsfeld and that Witch Condi Rice !! If not then we have just seen the tip of the iceberg my friends !

Originally posted by Agent47
I agree with the arguments that this is unconstitutional but I just have to wonder at what point do we stop falling back on a 200+ year old document as our nation moves on in age. Are we going to be able to apply the same narrow interpretations of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th etc amendments 500 years from now? Times change and so do nations.

The Constitution does allow itself to be "updated" through the procedure of Amendments...However, The Constitution itself was designed to put specific limitations on Government & its Powers. The concepts described in the Constitution are still a brand new idea; It demands that The People should always be sovereign over the Government...Name any other nation that was successful in doing so, as long as the "root ideals" remained intact against corruption.

The argument that "its outdated/obsolete," simply does not hold water, because that's the same argument that "those in Power" want everyone to believe so that they can grab total Power over the People. When you mentioned that "times change and so do governments," would you like to hear what change America's had?--Why do you think the US Government practices "Democracy" when the Constitution demands a Republic? Because a Democracratic government can be easily corrupted & always degenerates into Tyranny. The Greeks of the Classical Age is the only historical example of a Democracy that didn't actually devolve into Tyranny (although they were on that path); This is simply because Greece was invaded before its Democracy fully fell. The changes in America have already taken place...Through corruption against its Constitution.

In short, the Constitutional Republic of America was the True New World Order that was designed to create a Government that would protect individual Citizens' Rights, not constantly violate them...A Nation that was the first of its kind in the history of human civilization.

Originally posted by TheLoony
I have a question. I think I read something a while back that said someone, not sure who, worked hand in hand with Microsoft to develop Vista. Some government agency.

You may be able to find something at Microsuck; Then again, you're likely to find out a whole lot about Microsoft there too...

Originally posted by Tranceopticalinclined
...they can find most if not all of your deleted files once you empty them from the recycling bin, Harddrive record and do not fully delete unless you electromagnetize them, or burn em. ( smashy smashy ) ( Zappy zappy ).

Yep, it would take multiple deguasses & then a sledgehammer before incineration to make your harddrive "safe" from file-recovery...And even then, I wouldn't be 100% positive of that.

But as far as Microsoft goes, even when you've given the command to erase your Internet History & empty your Recycle Bin, Windows keeps an entirely seperate copy in hidden files...You may peruse the Microsuck link I provided above to learn more.

Originally posted by lightseeker
...but to see what I have on my hard drive, for instance personal diary notes and files that are distinctly private;

Microsoft already does this...Every time you link up to their server to downloads the Windows Updates; Please take note that I've already mentioned that Windows deliberately copies & hides your files...More info at the Microsuck link I've provided. Yes, Microsoft deliberately incorporates spyware into all of their OS's.

But when it's the government that wants to access your files, it is in violation of the 4th Amendment...And there is no one & no Branch of the Government who can be "authorized" to violate your Rights, regardless of subsequent legislation after the writing of the Constitution: Any legislation, any Executive Acts, any Judicial ruling that is not "in pursuance" of the Constitution is null & unenforcable because there is no law that can "trump" the Constitution.

Originally posted by Saturn
Our freedoms are in a fragile state, and no-one is putting up a fight for them.

I can't agree with that: There are plenty of politically active groups out there, already fighting the NWO as it worms its way into the US government. It's just that ATS, by policy, is non-activist. If you really want to do something, you gotta get out there & find them yourself.

However, ATS is a wonderful place to dicuss/debate the issues, but if you want to go further than that, you have to take it somewhere else.

Originally posted by DisabledVet
There is one....his name is Ron Paul..he's a presidential candidate and if you do any research on him, you will find he is the ONLY candidate with a true voting record that adheres soly to the Constitution.

In the interests of providing more specific info about Ron Paul, here's a link to his campaign website. Also, several threads about Ron Paul are already here among the ATS Community--Just use the Boolean Search function & use his name as your keywords.
In short, he's for Limited Government & Enforcement of Citizens' Rights. A lot more info is posted at his website.

Originally posted by danx
Of course an email (or any other form of electronic communication) passes through alot of servers until it reaches it's destination. But doesn't also a letter?

True...Not every State has a Regional Processing Center (for the snail mail). I know that my State doesn't; This basically means that, if I were to send a letter to myself through snail-mail, it would leave my State before it got back to me. And everybody wonders why the cost of snail mail keeps increasing while remaining so inefficient in operation...

Originally posted by johnsky
You've let them get away with it for too long. The advantage is theirs now. If they keep this control trend up, the ONLY way to take the country back now is through bloodshed. And it's all the Bush parties fault...

Ummm, not exactly. The corruption for total control has only started kicking up in speed since the end of WW 2, the creation of the United Nations & the Cold War Era. Bully Boy Bush & his Corporate Cronie Conspirators have only kicked up the speed of corruption faster than any other previous Administration.

Originally posted by SHADOW WALKER
It's time for all americans to stand up and demand that this little Hitler be brought up on charges and impeached and stripped of his presidential powers as well as his henchman Chaney and Rumsfeld and that Witch Condi Rice !!

Well, it's already begun...There are more & more people (& there's a few threads here at ATS that talk about it) starting to demand accountability from the Government. I just hope it's not too little, too late.

As for the way you describe "little Hitler," I take it that you're already aware how accurate you are. Have you researched anything about Project Paperclip (right after the end of WW 2) & it's long-term effects within the USSR & USA governments?; If not, start researching.

Originally posted by Agent47
I agree with the arguments that this is unconstitutional but I just have to wonder at what point do we stop falling back on a 200+ year old document as our nation moves on in age. Are we going to be able to apply the same narrow interpretations of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th etc amendments 500 years from now? Times change and so do nations.

That 200+ year old document is NOT what it used to be. We make amendments to it as our country changes. The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) were added to the orginal Constitution, hence the word amendment, a change or addition to the orginal. We are merely keeping the tradition of the Constitution as the "law of the land".

Everything in the Constitution is still a law that is upheld, or should be, as this thread is pointing out that they are stepping on our fouth amendment right.

-Reform America

Originally posted by johnsky
They don't have to.

Communications to and from a Linux machine are identical to communications to and from a Windows machine.

The government has no need to get into your machine, they just have to watch the information coming in and out of it.

It's called packet sniffing.[...]

I already covered that in this post.

The infiltration I was talking about is regarding Windows cryptography routines, also covered in that same post.
For that sort of control you would need to modify the source code without the users knowing. And in the specific case of Windows NSA keys, even without the knowledge of most of Microsoft's programmers apparently.

Originally posted by jsobecky
This ruling does not give the gov't the freedom to read the contents of your emails.

When you send an email you connect to an SMTP server (assuming you're not using webmail), and all the information - destination addresse(s), subject and body of the email - goes to the server. That SMTP server then relays the message until it reaches the destination's own ISP's SMTP server and then stores it in it's POP server.

Even if you use SSL to connect to your SMTP server, the message will be relayed to the destination's SMTP server in plain text. When someone intercepts an email it doesn't get only the email addresses, they get everything on it.

If we agree that they're listening to internet traffic (packet sniffing) what prevents them from reading the contents of the emails? Their own judgment?

So, monitoring electronic communications is a bit different than monitoring someone's (snail) mail. Just by looking at a letter you can't read the contents, but when intercepting an email you can.

What are they going to do? Ignore the contents of the emails and just take note of the addresses? And if they suspect something strange going on they're gonna ask for a warrant to go get the information that already passed through them in the first place?

Sorry for not trusting the government, but you know that if abuse is possible it will happen. It already does and it's happening as we speak.

What are they going to do? Ignore the contents of the emails and just take note of the addresses? And if they suspect something strange going on they're gonna ask for a warrant to go get the information that already passed through them in the first place?

Sorry for not trusting the government, but you know that if abuse is possible it will happen. It already does and it's happening as we speak.

Exactly. Likely, they will have a search algorithm looking out for key things. Go signals they've come across, and other usual words like 'bomb' 'infidel' etc...

(By the way, that means this has just been intercepted, hello boys, if you check this one)


Why should you be sorry for not trusting your government? You were never supposed to trust them, you are supposed to keep them in line.
Trusting your government enough to stop watching them is the worst thing anyone can do... unfortunately it's a trend that seems to have caught on.

Originally posted by johnsky
Exactly. Likely, they will have a search algorithm looking out for key things. Go signals they've come across, and other usual words like 'bomb' 'infidel' etc...

Yes, they likely have search algorithms but the argument here is that they don't have access to the content, so what exactly are they searching on?
Do you honestly believe they are filtering just the addresses or subject lines?

Let's hope the 'terrorists' are using addresses like [email protected] or [email protected] and type in 'lets make a bomb' on the subject line.

I don't see a difference between searching for keywords in email or searching for keywords in a letter. The difference apparently is that 4th amendment doesn't apply to electronic communications.

Originally posted by Saturn
I'm assuming it also means that the gov't can moniter anyone's internet activities... not just criminals.

what bothers me about this article and this response is the assumption that the monitored are criminals. wasn't our court system founded on the theory that a person is innocent until proven guilty. our ENTIRE infrastructure was screwed after 9/11/01. everyone lives in fear and we're now moving from the Information Age into the Security Age. It's kinda like planned release of technology - with bigger and better terror being announced every week. we're being cooed into fearing the world and in turn we'll gladly give up every bit of our freedom for another ounce of safety.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by tyranny22]

Originally posted by tyranny22
what bothers me about this article and this responds is the assumption that the monitored are criminals.

This is what rubs me the wrong way as well. How hard is it to get a court order to tap someone? This is making an assumption of guilt IMHO. At some point we have to stop to the erosion of personal freedoms we take for granted. I have negotiated several union contracts. Once you give up a benifit, you loose it and are unlikely to get it back.

Originally posted by danx
Yes, they likely have search algorithms but the argument here is that they don't have access to the content, so what exactly are they searching on?
Do you honestly believe they are filtering just the addresses or subject lines?

To paraphrase Mr. Rogers, " Can you say, Data Mining"?; "I knew you could"!

We all know that the NSA and other government agencies are downloading truckloads ( metaphirically speaking) of e-mail and other electronic contributions to the internet; forum postings, blog entries, whatever, panning for gold & fishing for information. They don't have to install search algorythyms to find out what you are writing and posting.

The private business sector got on the data mining wagon train years ago and now it's a billion dollar a year enterprise. It's only stating the obvious to say that odds are everyone has probably had at least one email or other item scanned by a government data analyst, at some point.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
2) The government is so incompetent they can't even get intelligence right on WMDs in Iraq, let alone get an address change completed in a timely manner on a Social Security account. Even if they were logging everyone's info, they just won't be able to do much with it.

Some ppl are so blind. You use this example as a point that theres no need to be concerned, when its one the BEST EXAMPLES EVER for being VERY concerned.

Yeah the Intelligence community did not properly determine what was going on in the WMD situation... which lead to IMPROPER ACTION, not LACK of action.

This is exactly the sort of thing the concerned individuals are concerned ABOUT; That the bumbleheads using this info will ASSUME guilt, whilst not properly piecing together the evidence, and be judge, jury, and executioner on those false assumptions, JUST LIKE the WMD scenario.

Christ man, wake UP.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by Alex Krycek]

Originally posted by danx
When you send an email you connect to an SMTP server (assuming you're not using webmail), and all the information - destination addresse(s), subject and body of the email - goes to the server. That SMTP server then relays the message until it reaches the destination's own ISP's SMTP server and then stores it in it's POP server.

Even if you use SSL to connect to your SMTP server, the message will be relayed to the destination's SMTP server in plain text. When someone intercepts an email it doesn't get only the email addresses, they get everything on it.

And the USPS gets the letter as well as the envelope when you send snail mail...

The source and destination IP are part of the internet message header. The actual data is stored in a separate section of the packet; it is not necessary to reveal the data in order to look at the source and destination. And data can be encrypted so that it is not transmitted in "plain text".

As far as the gov't reading the contents of the message, well, I see some here speaking of innocent until proven guilty. It applies to both sides, doesn't it? You'll just have to rely on watchdog organizations to keep the gov't honest.

Originally posted by FredT
How hard is it to get a court order to tap someone? This is making an assumption of guilt IMHO.

Well, if the Judicial procedure is faithfully adhered to, it means there should be a least a certain amount of evidence to "warrant" the issuing of a Warrant in the first place...The Warrant merely provides that there's something bad going on & deserves further investigation.

Therefore, there should be no reason whatsoever for any Law Enforcment Agency (ie: the Executive Branch) to be stepping all over the "checks & balances" system in order to remove the Court's (ie: Judicial Branch) Authority in order to illegally violate Constitutional Rights of the Citizens. Just the fact that the Bush Administration "sidesteps" Judicial Authority is a Federal Offense in the first place.

Originally posted by jsobecky
You'll just have to rely on watchdog organizations to keep the gov't honest.

Which means The People are the best watchdogs that the Government will ever have looking at them.

"The People...are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."--Thomas Jefferson

Microsoft wrote a law in the state of Oklahoma called Voles law. I posted the article back in 2006. Someone mentioned that it would be imposible for the government to monitor things. Well thats what outsourcing is for baby! Cheap labor. Search filters can help speed things up even more. Companies like Microsoft can be contracted to handle this type of thing and in turn they can subcontract out to foreign laborers.

They proposed that they could in the future report illegal online gambling transactions, illegal software installations (And remove them) and they can even give access to other software companies to access your computer as well. The new Vista is keeping an eye on you! No wonder why its so damn slow. Its busy collecting data.

But could Microsoft turn the data it has collected against you? Of course, what did you think? "Microsoft may disclose personal information about you if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to: (a) comply with the law or legal process served on Microsoft; (b) protect and defend the rights of Microsoft (including enforcement of our agreements); or (c) act in urgent circumstances to protect the personal safety of Microsoft employees, users of Microsoft software or services, or members of the public," reveals another excerpt.

news.softpedia.com...

my post here regarding Voles law
www.abovetopsecret.com...