Besides, who gives a rat’s ass what Russia did with the SORM?
Last time I checked, this was not Russia.
Comment by veritas — June 17, 2007 @ 10:07 am

No it’s not. As the articles tell you this is the US which already had the same program with a different name.
Way to not read.

“providing work which no one has yet acknowledged” – when that data is irrelevant to the dialogue going on within this country, it’s clear that no one gives a crap about it. What Russia does or doesn’t do is of no consequence to us. It’s their problem.

Sure. And I bet there’s a reason why that’s still the case when they copy their problem from yours.

If we don’t clean this mess up soon, we may be forever damaged.

Great post’s by all but the troll….Glad I slept through it and can now scroll past “it”….Blessings All

This is clearly OUR PROBLEM and the people will do what needs to be done, once again, in 08 to solve that problem. OUT WITH EVERY REPUBLICAN THUG IN OFFICE! That’s how.

Kilo: I hate to rub this one in but….your use of the term “stationary”….ahem…..well, it’s clear that you failed 4th grade English, bro! A good way to remember it is that the “paper” has an “e”….as I’ve said – your posts are inarticulate and imbecilic.

English 101 might be a good place for you to begin your remedial education, Kilo.

Last time I checked, this was not Russia.

Maybe some day you’ll wake up.

Amen, Kay! I wish that Kilo would understand one very simple concept and that is: “The shortest distance between two points has NEVER been reached via conversation (or the written word)”.
Comment by veritas — June 17, 2007 @ 7:55 am

So in summary:

1. Good work Kay on proposing congress take action on info they have not yet acknowledged acknowledged.

2. Bad work Kilo on providing info nobody has yet acknowledged and proposing that this is the first step to taking action against it.

Great work.

What a game of mental masturbation! The bottom line, as I read these doubletalk posts this morning is: Who gives a $hit about any of it?

1999 – Barr, a former CIA analyst, said no one in Congress has asked the NSA hard questions about electronic surveillance since 1975, when a committee … revealed that the government had improperly intercepted Americans’ telegrams for 30 years and had unlawfully eavesdropped on domestic dissidents in the 1960s.

Of course when these talk about capturing the world’s internet communications during the 1990s this would have involved about 7 people who weren’t US citizens.

And here’s the redundant revalation that FISA is nothing but a rubber-stamp, non-oversight review even when it is used, that when asked by congress about even having guidelines for not surveilling US citizens under Clinton they claimed attorney client priveledge. And most importantly, that when nobody calls for oversight that’s exactly how much oversight you get.

And just for fun, here’s some similar FBI mistakes from 2000 while using this never-existed program on on CT case…
2000

Well maybe not that similar. Here in 2007 it tells you the majority of these breaches involve telcos supplying too much info in response to FBI requests. Back then it was a case of the FBI scooping up everyone’s communications for use in an OBL case.

1999 – Barr, a former CIA analyst, said no one in Congress has asked the NSA hard questions about electronic surveillance since 1975, when a committee … revealed that the government had improperly intercepted Americans’ telegrams for 30 years and had unlawfully eavesdropped on domestic dissidents in the 1960s.

Of course when these talk about capturing the world’s internet communications during the 1990s this would have involved about 7 people who weren’t US citizens.

And here’s the redundant revalation that FISA is nothing but a rubber-stamp, non-oversight review even when it is used, that when asked by congress about even having guidelines for not surveilling US citizens under Clinton they claimed attorney client priveledge. And most importantly, that when nobody calls for oversight that’s exactly how much oversight you get.

And just for fun, here’s some similar FBI mistakes from 2000 while using this never-existed program on on CT case…
2000

Well maybe not that similar. Here in 2007 it tells you the majority of these breaches involve telcos supplying too much info in response to FBI requests. Back then it was a case of the FBI scooping up everyone’s communications for use in a OBL case.

2000
The new SORM technology, opponents charge, allows security agencies to bypass the legal requirement to obtain a warrant before monitoring private correspondence, and will put an end to privacy and to the Internet as an instrument of democracy.

These are Russian human rights organisations being outraged at what an unthinkable step this was for Russia to implement such a program in regard to it’s citizen’s privacy.

The US government does indeed have an email-monitoring program — and one that also circumvents the courts. The US National Security Agency’s Echelon project, though still highly secretive, is reportedly used to monitor and store email and other electronic communications around the world.

Except SORM isn’t all that similar to the first US program mentioned there which bypasses FISA courts. Instead it’s practically identical to this second US program mentioned below which also bypasses the courts.

This involved the forced installation of switch boxes in all telecom carriers so that all emails could be copied for law enforcement without warrant and without anyone being informed.
Hang on a minute, that sounds a lot like the current case with AT&T under Bush doesn’t it ? My, how times don’t change.

2000 – Russia’s Supreme Court has taken aim at that government’s infamous surveillance program SORM (similar to the FBI’s controversial “Carnivore” technology),

What do they mean “controversial” ? Pffft. There’s nothing controversial about such domestic spying programs once you equate them with dragons and pretend they never existed.

2000
The new SORM technology, opponents charge, allows security agencies to bypass the legal requirement to obtain a warrant before monitoring private correspondence, and will put an end to privacy and to the Internet as an instrument of democracy.

These are Russian human rights organisations being outraged at what an unthinkable step this was for Russia to implement such a program in regard to it’s citizen’s privacy.

The US government does indeed have an email-monitoring program — and one that also circumvents the courts. The US National Security Agency’s Echelon project, though still highly secretive, is reportedly used to monitor and store email and other electronic communications around the world.

Except SORM isn’t all that similar to the first US program mentioned there which bypasses FISA courts. Instead it’s practically identical to this second US program mentioned below which bypasses the courts.

This involved the forced installation of switch boxes in all telecom carriers so that all emails could be copied for law enforcement without warrant and without anyone being informed.

Hang on a minute, that sounds a lot like the current case with AT&T under Bush doesn’t it ? My, how times don’t change.

2000 – Russia’s Supreme Court has taken aim at that government’s infamous surveillance program SORM (similar to the FBI’s controversial “Carnivore” technology),

What do they mean “controversial” ? Pffft. There’s nothing controversial about such domestic spying programs once you equate them with dragons and pretend they never existed.

And what happens when you play dumb about such programs existing and therefor there is no need for them to stop…

1999 – Barr, a former CIA analyst, said no one in Congress has asked the NSA hard questions about electronic surveillance since 1975, when a committee … revealed that the government had improperly intercepted Americans’ telegrams for 30 years and had unlawfully eavesdropped on domestic dissidents in the 1960s.

Of course when these talk about capturing the world’s internet communications during the 1990s this would have involved about 7 people who weren’t US citizens.

And just for fun, here’s some similar FBI mistakes from 2000 while using this never-existed program on on CT case…
2000

Well maybe not that similar. Here in 2007 it tells you the majority of these breaches involve telcos supplying too much info in response to FBI requests. Back then it was a case of the FBI scooping up everyone’s communications for use in a OBL case.

If they are gonna break into your house to plant a root kit on your computer, they will have drugs to plant if something goes wrong!