U.S. Weighs Wider Wiretap Laws to Cover Online Activity

Originally posted by Maluhia
All I can think f when I read stuff like this

if you could change the saying to, "change I believe in." would be hilarious!! I just read about this rather shocking, honestly it boils down to Facebook, the fed wants to be able to read your messages, chats, look at all your stuff even if its set to private.

Also heard that they are trying to pass this so no new kind of website could be created were people could have complete privacy from this kind of thing. How long until I can't even go outside and speak my mind? Oh wait......

The nazi takeover of Germany didn't happen over night. It was in slow incremental steps. Same # is happening here in America, and most Americans are still unaware it is happening.

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by rockintitz
Why shouldn't your Internet activity be monitored? If you don't have anything to hide.. Then give your freedoms up.

Sorry just wanted to be the troll on this one

Why do you lock your doors and c;lose your blinds? Why do you shut the doors at all?

Perhaps a weekly or daily visit from "the authorities" just to check things out would be okay with you?

well idk about you but I look my doors so criminals don't take my possession's. I close my blinds so criminals don't scoop my things out.

but I do close my door for privacy so you got me there.

Originally posted by MaxSteiner
Quite scary considering they can now use internet history as grounds for ordering a drone strike anywhere in the world - dangerous time to be a whistleblower!


Consider also, that the Obama administration considers "whistleblowers" to be threats and has intimidated and prosecuted them in unprecedented numbers.

jw

sheez -- seems the government is the most paranoid, biggest conspiracy theorists of all.

... as they should be.... cuz we're coming after you, government!!!!!!

reply to post by timewarpedbrain7

well idk about you but I look my doors so criminals don't take my possession's. I close my blinds so criminals don't scoop my things out.

but I do close my door for privacy so you got me there.

You might want to consider your local law. Last year, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that citizens have NO RIGHT to defend themselves from the unlawful entry of their homes by law enforcement.

jw

reply to post by Hopechest


Erm...the courts upheld the right for LEO's to put GPS trackers on your car without a warrant. The court case I remember had them going on to private property and slapping it on the vehicle.

From what i remember the submarine cables as they enter the USA are not considered to be under US law until they reach a certain point so all you need to do is have the isp's route the data out to sea (and out of US jurisdiction) and back again with some taps on the data out at sea and job done as the data was harvested outside the USA its not subject to review the same way as if it was collected inside the US's borders

reply to post by Maxatoria


In a nutshell, the U.S and Britain have signed many agreements since world war two and all the way to the present day, they share signal intelligence and nothing is truly safe it does not even matter if you are outside the U.S., Interpol and other agencies can collaborate and as you know in this day and time, the U.S. will come looking for you no matter where you are.

With storage technology now it is possible to record everything and require very small physical space to house it and warehouse so it can be mined..

Think about all of the satellites in orbit, a great deal of that data we generate here, even using landlines in many cases winds up going up, through a microwave link or to some central office or ISP, it can be captured, ports can be mirrored etc (your connection is split so there is a parallel capture of your activities at the ISP.)

Like I said in an earlier post I think too many people do not realize the level of how you can be monitored and tracked, already.

Everything you say is being recorded whether you like it or not, I would bet everything you post and say is also in the same boat, it just has not been distilled into a nice little article warning you about what you do on the internet.

Am I being recored?Am I really being recorded ?

ECHELON

Excerpted from the above article and cited, giving credit to the Wikipedia authors..

"In 2001 the Temporary Committee on the ECHELON Interception System recommended to the European Parliament that citizens of member states routinely use cryptography in their communications to protect their privacy, because economic espionage with ECHELON has been conducted by the US intelligence agencies."

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by timewarpedbrain7

 

well idk about you but I look my doors so criminals don't take my possession's. I close my blinds so criminals don't scoop my things out.

but I do close my door for privacy so you got me there.

You might want to consider your local law. Last year, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that citizens have NO RIGHT to defend themselves from the unlawful entry of their homes by law enforcement.

jw

Man, the citizen's rights are determined by the citizen's action, not by the opinion of the servants of the law hired by said citizens.

Here's the slogan I believe in...

"We the people are the law, we make the law by our actions. It is we the people who decide to accept or reject any man made law put down on paper somewhere by someone. The people who write down these laws, interpret them, and enforce them, are just hired help. They work for us. We the people do not do anything illegal. Not withstanding the fact that this is so, in the implementation of social order, we submit ourselves, upon occasion, to the judgement of others who may disagree with us, to keep the peace."

The importance of this "We the People" doctrine, is that it is we who tell the government what the law is, not the other way around.

Throughout history, many nation states have repeatedly had revolutions, as the people rose up against unjust rulers and unjust laws.

Men sat down and examined the problem, and came to the conclusion that the "separation of powers" was the solution.

The three powers "[1] power to make the law", "[2] power to interpret the law", and "[3] power to enforce the law", needed to be kept separate. Any fusing of these powers into one body, would lead mankind back to the early days when unscrupulous rulers could impose injustice on the people, forcing them to eventually revolt to remove the ruler.

The Founding Fathers put this requirement of separation of the three powers into the US Constitution.

Each citizen has the three powers vested in him. Each citizen has the power to make law, interpret law, and enforce law. Yes, you can make a citizen's arrest. You can even arrest a cop, whom you deem is breaking the law.

If the citizen did not already have these three powers, he couldn't hire servants and empower them to act on his behalf. The cop gets his powers of arrest from the citizen. The citizen gives the cop these powers, and can take them back at any time.

The citizen gives the judge the power to interpret the law, and can take back that power at any time.

The citizen gives the legislators the power to make and write the law, and can take back that power at any time.

When the citizen "hires" these servants of the law to make, interpret, and enforce, the laws, he does not give up his rights to do so. The only difference between the citizen and the servant, is that the servant is "obligated" to make, interpret, and enforce, the laws. But, the citizen has complete "discretion" when and if to do so. The citizen has the right, but not the obligation. The servants have the obligation.

A policeman seeing a crime, must enforce the law. But an ordinary citizen seeing a crime can walk away, and not get involved. The police do not have the right to look the other way. But, the citizen does. The citizen pays people to take risks, that he may not want to take. But, if the citizen feels up to it, he has the right to get involved and make arrests, just like the cop.

The importance of this, is that any cop breaking the law can be arrested by the citizen who witnesses the crime. This includes a cop illegally attempting to arrest or harassing the citizen himself. If citizens enforced their rights more often, all the problems we see of the servants overstepping their bounds would disappear. It is because the citizens do not typically enforce their rights, that the servants have come to believe that they have more powers than they really do.

If you have a right, that you don't practice exercising, then over time, the effectiveness of that right diminishes, because everybody adjusts their attitudes and beliefs by the practice of social behavior, and by habit, people come to believe in things that are not so. You never lose the right. But, there's always difficulty getting people to accept that you have that right, because they can always point to tradition -- when have you ever seen someone exercise this right?...etc...Yet, the right is inherent in the Constitution itself, implicit in the "granting of powers" to the servants. You cannot grant a power to someone else if you don't have that power. So, for the legislature, judiciary, and executive branches of government to exist, the citizen must have the three powers to grant to them. People just need to exercise their powers more often.