You name it... they have been collecting it and analysing it... no holds barred.
Collecting data on every call made in America? Even the 900 area code calls? :VeryScared:
Well, with the rise of the internet, those calls are probably not as common these days. But I remember back in the day the company I worked for had a night time "rental" security guard who made over $10,000 worth of those calls on the company phone.
Too bad we didn't have Obama monitoring the calls back then. It might of saved my company some money. lol
"Anyone have any illusions the right wouldn't be fine with this as long as Uncle Mitten was doing it. Government has been put in an impossible solution what with the weanies on the right, who think we shouldn't have any terrorism-" deport all the Muslims", they say, but when it comes to something like this, that the government is using to find terrorism, they hate it- even though they'd love it under a wing nut. In a truly free country, there's be terrorism all the time. It would be the "cost" of freedom. But the wingnuts piss their pants over even relatively small acts of terror.
The more the right screams about things, the more I figure maybe I should like them... Can I learn to love phone privacy invasion?
I'm getting kind of fond of the IRS. Anything that makes the wingnuts that angry, has to be at least a little bit good
BB, good point to consider. Should we give up civil liberties and privacy to not even eliminate terrorism, but just decrease it?
Maybe for a country like Israel, it makes sense. Or the UK when the IRA was active. It doesn't seem like it has been worth it, but maybe many attacks have been stopped and we just don't know about it.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Now, I might be mistaken here, but the data the government is collecting is who is calling whom and how long the calls last. How is that an invasion of anyone's privacy? The content of the calls isn't being collected - unless the calls establish that a pattern which is suspicious is occurring, at which point a warrant to monitor the content of the calls is sought.
What the federal government is doing is really not that much different from your credit card company monitoring your buying habits and looking for something amiss, is it? That's a similar invasion of your privacy, isn't it? Only we like that one, because it helps save us money because fraudulent purchases are lessened, right?
PrintSmith wrote: Now, I might be mistaken here, but the data the government is collecting is who is calling whom and how long the calls last. How is that an invasion of anyone's privacy? The content of the calls isn't being collected - unless the calls establish that a pattern which is suspicious is occurring, at which point a warrant to monitor the content of the calls is sought.
What the federal government is doing is really not that much different from your credit card company monitoring your buying habits and looking for something amiss, is it? That's a similar invasion of your privacy, isn't it? Only we like that one, because it helps save us money because fraudulent purchases are lessened, right?
Do you know if the content is being stored but not listened to? It took a leak to find out they were gathering and storing this information so how do we know the content isn't being stored as well? This reminds me of different types of commercial fishing I've done. I worked a few years on a dragger which involves dragging a huge funnel shaped net on the bottom of the ocean and it catches anything and everything but only certain fish can be kept and lots will be killed and wasted - plus it tears up the ocean floor. Then theres targetted fishing that only catches what is legal to sell at the time and no other species are affected. In my opinion the government is using a destructive dragger approach to finding terrorists when they should be using a targetted approach. Theres way to many good fish to sort through in order to find a few bad ones.
PrintSmith wrote: Now, I might be mistaken here, but the data the government is collecting is who is calling whom and how long the calls last. How is that an invasion of anyone's privacy? The content of the calls isn't being collected - unless the calls establish that a pattern which is suspicious is occurring, at which point a warrant to monitor the content of the calls is sought.
What the federal government is doing is really not that much different from your credit card company monitoring your buying habits and looking for something amiss, is it? That's a similar invasion of your privacy, isn't it? Only we like that one, because it helps save us money because fraudulent purchases are lessened, right?
Wrong. I submit that your eloquent arguments regarding the difference between private charity and public assistance essentially apply here as well.
PrintSmith wrote: Now, I might be mistaken here, but the data the government is collecting is who is calling whom and how long the calls last. How is that an invasion of anyone's privacy? The content of the calls isn't being collected - unless the calls establish that a pattern which is suspicious is occurring, at which point a warrant to monitor the content of the calls is sought.
What the federal government is doing is really not that much different from your credit card company monitoring your buying habits and looking for something amiss, is it? That's a similar invasion of your privacy, isn't it? Only we like that one, because it helps save us money because fraudulent purchases are lessened, right?
Do you know if the content is being stored but not listened to? It took a leak to find out they were gathering and storing this information so how do we know the content isn't being stored as well? This reminds me of different types of commercial fishing I've done. I worked a few years on a dragger which involves dragging a huge funnel shaped net on the bottom of the ocean and it catches anything and everything but only certain fish can be kept and lots will be killed and wasted - plus it tears up the ocean floor. Then theres targetted fishing that only catches what is legal to sell at the time and no other species are affected. In my opinion the government is using a destructive dragger approach to finding terrorists when they should be using a targetted approach. Theres way to many good fish to sort through in order to find a few bad ones.
Do you know that it is? If so, please add to the available body of knowledge on the issue and stop keeping it a secret. I want you to think about this logically for a minute Kodiak. The federal government is going to the providers to obtain the records of who called whom and how long the conversations lasted, correct? If they are also obtaining the content of all of the calls, that would mean that your provider is recording all of your conversations and storing them. Do you think that is what Verizon, AT&T, CenturyLink, T-Mobile, Sprint and all the rest of them are doing? And if you do think that this is what they are doing, then you have an even bigger problem than you imagine you have to begin with, don't you?
PrintSmith wrote: Now, I might be mistaken here, but the data the government is collecting is who is calling whom and how long the calls last. How is that an invasion of anyone's privacy? The content of the calls isn't being collected - unless the calls establish that a pattern which is suspicious is occurring, at which point a warrant to monitor the content of the calls is sought.
What the federal government is doing is really not that much different from your credit card company monitoring your buying habits and looking for something amiss, is it? That's a similar invasion of your privacy, isn't it? Only we like that one, because it helps save us money because fraudulent purchases are lessened, right?
Wrong. I submit that your eloquent arguments regarding the difference between private charity and public assistance essentially apply here as well.
Meaning it's OK for AmEx to collect data on my purchasing habits and use that information to establish a pattern of purchasing that they can monitor for anomalies, or Verizon can keep the records of your calls and examine them for a pattern which might suggest to them a better plan to try and sell you on, but the government shouldn't involve itself in looking for patterns which suggest that something is oddly out of place so that it can investigate further to fulfill its constitutionally delegated responsibility to provide for the common defense of the States that belong to the Union. Have I summed up your argument appropriately?
lol
