• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"I don't care if they tap our line. I am a law abiding citizen!"

A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
All too often do I hear this comment when the topic of brought up. So many people who support the patriot act, or people who are indifferent, often make that statement. "What's the big deal if they tap our lines? If we have nothing to hide, then we have nothing to worry about, right?"

Do these people not realize that statements like this - a blatant statement if apathy, shows the government that people are just going to roll over as they take rights away, one by one? They'll develop the attitude of "Well there was certainly no fuss there, so let's see how far we can push it!"

They've already infringed on a number of the amendments, and they will continue to do so unless people continue to fight and support it. Just because there are a few amendments that you personally don't feel bothered by, it still shows that you're apathetic. You either support the constitution, or you don't. There's no picking and choosing which part of the constitution you want to support. If we want to be a country that goes by the rule of law, then the country needs to follow the law of the land that was initially laid out for it.

This is a VERY good episode on "Big Brother" and how modern technology is being used (and abused) to keep covert surveillance on you and I. Whether you're a believer in "Conspiracy Theories" (as they call it) or not, this is a good watch. There are interviews conducted with engineers who develop this cutting edge technology, and will sell it to just about anyone; government agencies, private firms, etc, if the price is right. It's actually very disturbing.

I'll post the link to the first video for informative purposes, if you're interested in checking it out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSea0EcCW6M
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I don't give a rat's patootie if they tap the phones of suspected terrorists overseas calling into the US. Heck, I want them to do this. In a war, you spy on the enemy. When that enemy interacts with US citizens, those interactions will be spied upon.

I don't intend to interact with international terrorists, so I don't expect to be eavesdropped on. If for some reason, one of my Danish friends is thought to be a terrorist, I guess the government is going to find out that I despise Gamel Dansk, but enjoy Carlsberg. meh.
 
A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
They're doing a bit more than that. I know you're not a fan of Ventura, but I'd highly suggest you watch that episode. Government agencies are outsourcing their surveillance to the private sector.
 
T

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
eye95 said:
I don't give a rat's patootie if they tap the phones of suspected terrorists overseas calling into the US. Heck, I want them to do this. In a war, you spy on the enemy. When that enemy interacts with US citizens, those interactions will be spied upon.

I don't intend to interact with international terrorists, so I don't expect to be eavesdropped on. If for some reason, one of my Danish friends is thought to be a terrorist, I guess the government is going to find out that I despise Gamel Dansk, but enjoy Carlsberg. meh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, screw the fourth amendment. Who needs a warrant anyway, there are terrorists to catch!
 
oak1971

oak1971

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
1,937
Location
Wisconsin, USA
I don't like the warrant-less phone tap idea. Warrants are easy to get anyway if you have probable cause.
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Aaron1124 said:
They're doing a bit more than that. I know you're not a fan of Ventura, but I'd highly suggest you watch that episode. Government agencies are outsourcing their surveillance to the private sector.
Click to expand...

I was just responding to your thread title which seemed to be a strawman of the argument opposing yours.

I would have an objection for a law enforcement effort to listen in on domestic conversations without a court authorizing it. I have no objection to a national security effort to spy on those overseas who would make war on us. The latter is not a Fourth Amendment issue.

It is important that we make a distinction between law enforcement actions directed at residents of the US and national security actions directed at enemies overseas. As long as they are monitoring terrorists overseas or (monitoring purely domestic calls with the proper permission received from a court), I don't have a problem with them listening in.

Now, if you can cite a case where the government has been overstepping those bounds, I'll jump in and complain with you.

And, no, I have no interest in listening to Jesse Ventura. I'd prefer a more trusted source or a primary source.
 
A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
eye95 said:
I was just responding to your thread title which seemed to be a strawman of the argument opposing yours.

I would have an objection for a law enforcement effort to listen in on domestic conversations without a court authorizing it. I have no objection to a national security effort to spy on those overseas who would make war on us. The latter is not a Fourth Amendment issue.

It is important that we make a distinction between law enforcement actions directed at residents of the US and national security actions directed at enemies overseas. As long as they are monitoring terrorists overseas or (monitoring purely domestic calls with the proper permission received from a court), I don't have a problem with them listening in.

Now, if you can cite a case where the government has been overstepping those bounds, I'll jump in and complain with you.

And, no, I have no interest in listening to Jesse Ventura. I'd prefer a more trusted source or a primary source.
Click to expand...


Well now you're just putting whatever issues you have with Ventura into the mix. If you were to watch the video, you'll find plenty of credible sources, including the Director of InfraGard and many employees of InfraGard. Have you heard of InfraGard? InfraGard is a private business that does business with the FBI to conduct surveillance on the general public.

There are 32,000 members of this group, working directly with the FBI, exchanging information back and fourth. Remember, these individuals are regular CITIZENS who have no security clearance. Back in November of 2001, Gov. Gray Davis announced a terror threat to California bridges. Davis' information came from his brother - a member of InfraGard. A member of InfraGard had obtained this information before any elected official in the entire state of California. Now how do you figure that?

The Government does MUCH more than simply listen to phone calls coming in from suspected terrorist countries. If you want to deny that, then ask former Air Force Lieutenant Jeff Dahlstrom. When he was calling his bank at Wells Fargo, he had warned his Wells Fargo banker not go to downtown in Portland next week, because there was going to be a drill where the government was going to simulate setting off a nuclear bomb. When he said the trigger word, it activated the system, which notified the Secret Service, who actually came out and interviewed him. They had a transcript of every word said on the telephone, inquiring to him about what he was talking about. He later confirmed with the bank that they did not report this to any agency. I would say that's sufficient enough to show that everyday phone conversations ARE being recorded. Now THIS time of interference with our 4th Amendment right is exactly what I am standing out against. This is a blatant violation. The worst thing is, the spy work is being turned over to private corporations, not our government. Many are run by companies like SAIC or CACI.

Our intelligence community is turning into a profit business. 70% of intelligence goes to the private sector. Now these businesses do not have to abide by the same rules as the government. Do you not believe that this type of activity will ever be abused? Regardless, even if you say, "Well, ok. I'm fine with the government listening to certain key words on the telephone to check for terrorism activity." Well my question is, where does it stop? Where is the line drawn? Where's the icing on the cake that says "It's gone too far?"

Have you ever heard the phrase of "Never let the camel get his nose under the tent, because rest assured, you will eventually have the whole camel in the tent."?
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Aaron1124 said:
Well now you're just putting whatever issues you have with Ventura into the mix. If you were to watch the video, you'll find plenty of credible sources, including the Director of InfraGard and many employees of InfraGard. Have you heard of InfraGard? InfraGard is a private business that does business with the FBI to conduct surveillance on the general public.

There are 32,000 members of this group, working directly with the FBI, exchanging information back and fourth. Remember, these individuals are regular CITIZENS who have no security clearance. Back in November of 2001, Gov. Gray Davis announced a terror threat to California bridges. Davis' information came from his brother - a member of InfraGard. A member of InfraGard had obtained this information before any elected official in the entire state of California. Now how do you figure that?

The Government does MUCH more than simply listen to phone calls coming in from suspected terrorist countries. If you want to deny that, then ask former Air Force Lieutenant Jeff Dahlstrom. When he was calling his bank at Wells Fargo, he had warned his Wells Fargo banker not go to downtown in Portland next week, because there was going to be a drill where the government was going to simulate setting off a nuclear bomb. When he said the trigger word, it activated the system, which notified the Secret Service, who actually came out and interviewed him. They had a transcript of every word said on the telephone, inquiring to him about what he was talking about. He later confirmed with the bank that they did not report this to any agency. I would say that's sufficient enough to show that everyday phone conversations ARE being recorded. Now THIS time of interference with our 4th Amendment right is exactly what I am standing out against. This is a blatant violation. The worst thing is, the spy work is being turned over to private corporations, not our government. Many are run by companies like SAIC or CACI.

Our intelligence community is turning into a profit business. 70% of intelligence goes to the private sector. Now these businesses do not have to abide by the same rules as the government. Do you not believe that this type of activity will ever be abused? Regardless, even if you say, "Well, ok. I'm fine with the government listening to certain key words on the telephone to check for terrorism activity." Well my question is, where does it stop? Where is the line drawn? Where's the icing on the cake that says "It's gone too far?"

Have you ever heard the phrase of "Never let the camel get his nose under the tent, because rest assured, you will eventually have the whole camel in the tent."?
Click to expand...

He probably has sources why we should believe our government had something to do with the Towers coming down.

Give me a scholarly piece or a (relatively) unbiased new article with sources. Otherwise, I'll just treat claims that government agents are bugging purely domestic calls without permission from a judge as just so much tin with which to make foil and move on.
 
A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
Last edited:
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Aaron1124 said:
All you're doing is using your bias against Jesse Ventura to dismiss the facts.
Answer this at least: Have you ever heard of InfraGard? Do you know what they do?

How about the man who first claimed the world was round, and not flat? That guy was a raging idiot, huh? Talk about lunacy!

And while I'm at it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html
Click to expand...

No, I am going to dismiss what he claims are facts. If the source is not credible, neither are his "facts."

On edit: I am ignoring wikipedia also. It is not a credible source when it comes to controversy. It's wonderful for information that is not in dispute, but downright unreliable on contentious stuff.

Based on the NYT article: Great, The court struck down the tapping of purely domestic calls without proper court authorization. System worked. Moving on.
 
Last edited:
A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
eye95 said:
No, I am going to dismiss what he claims are facts. If the source is not credible, neither are his "facts."

On edit: I am ignoring wikipedia also. It is not a credible source when it comes to controversy. It's wonderful for information that is not in dispute, but downright unreliable on contentious stuff.

Based on the NYT article: Great, it struck down the tapping of purely domestic calls without proper court authorization. System worked. Moving on.
Click to expand...

I'm going to stop talking about whatever evidence he presents on the show, because it's obviously going no where with you. You asked for specific, unbiased sources, so I posted them. Now tell me, are you arguing because you really want to debate? Or are you just going to defend your point to the grave, regardless of what evidence of facts are brought up? I will admit that I will concede to you being correct if I truly felt you were, but I do not. I believe the evidence is substantial enough to show that the Government is CLEARLY misusing it's authority, especially when it comes to outsourcing their surveillance to the private sector.

On your edit:

So you see that it HAS happened, right? If it's happened once, who is to say it's not happening ALL of the time? Especially with the private sector conducting 75% of the surveillance. My question is, WHO is governing these agencies to make sure they don't step out of line? Themselves?

Here's an article that talks about George Bush even admitting to giving this operation the green light.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/politics/23cnd-wiretap.html?_r=1

And this is exactly the thing. If it hasn't been brought to the attention of the media or the court, you're not going to hear about it! You're only going to hear about the events that have already been brought to mainstream attention!
 
Last edited:
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
It has happened, and the court ruled against the practice. The system worked.

I don't have a problem with spying (a national security action) on overseas calls to/from suspected terrorists.

I don't have a problem with tapping (a law enforcement action) on purely domestic calls with the approval of a court.

I have no problem with courts correcting oversteps in law-enforcement action.

If domestic calls are being tapped without court approval and the courts don't fix it, now I have a problem.

At the moment, I have no problem.

Moving on.
 
A

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
You may want to move on, and that's fine. I, however, feel that the government and it's civilian counterparts in the private sector are continuing to abuse the system to this day. That's where it ends. Of course, I can only speculate, but given the previous evidence and history of what has already occurred, I lean toward the thought that it's still happening, and that our rights are being violated on a regular basis. If cases have already been brought in front of the court, who is to say how many cases that have not even made it to the court, or the media?

That's really all I can say on this issue.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
blackmarine said:
I care a whole the keeps track of us/me. Everyone should.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Click to expand...

I care too, But statists want us to believe it's ok because it's for our safety.

Yet I hear stupid right wing arguments and stupid left wing arguments who support it for what they think are different reasons.

I know of someone who's house was searched because he ordered a beer making catalog, I guess to homeland security that was enough justification.
 
XD40coyote

XD40coyote

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
706
Location
woman stuck in Maryland, ,
Back in the good ol days when the gooberment via FBI and that crossdressing director of there's, tapped a phone, you could tell by the crackling and junk on the line. Let's go back to around 1970 in Baltimore. Baltimore had it's own group of the Black Panthers. My mother was working as a journalist-of-sorts for a hippy newspaper, though she wasn't a "real" hippy. She liked writing and it was a fun job with alot of interesting charactors. Well she was so good that the Baltimore Black Panthers trained her to use some sort of machine so she could put together their newsletters. My, was her ( and my dad's) phone line one crackling hissy noise maker during this period! Her father ( my granddad) used to call and he would always say hello to the FBI agents, as in a " hello there FBI guys! hows it going?" kind of thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top