The same NSA was intercepting all your phone calls just the same under Clinton. The same splitter boxes were installed in ISPs under Clinton to capture all your emails and internet use.

Comment by Kilo — July 30, 2007 @ 7:52 am

lol.

“Splitter boxes”? lol.

This isn’t cable television Marconi. We’re talking about capturing digitial communications, which is NOT done with “splitter-boxes”. Its done with a technology called “SPAN”, and it wasn’t in place nationwide, until 2000.

Until then, nothings going to be done.

We need people talking about it. We need people vocalizing whats really going on. We don’t need conspiracy theorists just declaring, “oh they’ve always been spying on us”. That diminishes the reality and moves the information into the realm of the kooks.

Comment by Moderation — July 30, 2007 @ 2:04 am

As I have said repeatedly now, by TALKING ABOUT IT.

No one is talking about it.

Guys like Kilo just help to push any discussion into a typical paranoid anti government big brother catagory, and others just don’t get it. Thats because people don’t understand the technology involved, or the infrastructure that technology relies on. Saying its “old news” is incorrect, and just diffuses any real discussion on the topic. Saying its unstoppable is wrong too. The 4th Ammendment of the United States Constitution prohibits this program from being employed against the American people, and thats just all there is too it.

Unless the Constitution is changed to remove the 4th Ammendment, then this program CAN be stopped, and MUST be stopped.

Comment by Kilo — July 30, 2007 @ 7:47 am

You clearly don’t understand the role of NSA or the history of this.

NSA is not chartered for Domestic surveillance. NSA spys overseas, not in the US. It takes executive order to initiate the use of NSA on the homeland, which except in rare, FISA and other warran authorized cases, has not been done.

Bush changed all that, with a signing statement in 2001, authorizing NSA to begin domestic surveillance using the new national systems in place.

Conspiracy theorists and other anti government individuals for years have been claiming that, but if you had ever worked at a telecom, or had any real understanding of the technology, you’d know that they did not have the capability to do what they can do now. Only once the capability was in place could they begin grabbing ALL US calls, and only once a man like Bush took office, did they ever consider turning it all on.

It is a violation of the 4th Ammendment of the consitution to permit the unwarranted eavedropping on all Americans and no President has the authority to just sign it into law, which is why Mueller and Comey and the rest told Bush’s lawyer, Gonzales, that they could not do it, and why Mueller threatened to resign. Its why Gonzo went to Ashcrofts hospital bed, and tried to circumvent the acting Attorney General and get Aschcroft to sign a document that he didn’t have the legal authority to sign, even if he was the AG at the time, which he wasn’t. Comey knew the program was contrary to the 4th Ammendment and therefore was unconstitutional.

The only issue is oversight. Either we have it, or we don.t. The system was in place under Bill Clinton for years, and he never turned it on.

Comment by BARTLEBEE — July 30, 2007 @ 1:37 am

Clinton never turned what on ?

The same NSA was intercepting all your phone calls just the same under Clinton. The same splitter boxes were installed in ISPs under Clinton to capture all your emails and internet use.
And the same FISA court had the same ~100% approval record for taps, none of which concerned those blanket surveillence programs.

So what didn’t Clinton “turn on” or merit ?

The real story here is just what exactly the “data mining” issue was.

What about data mining would be so egregious as to cause the FBI director and others to threaten to resign?

Read a better blog.

Could it be that something predicted in here a long time ago, was accurate?

Could it be that “predicting” things that are well known to already have been happening for decades usually turns out to be accurate ?
I predict mobile phones will become popular!

Could it be that the president ordered the recording of ALL US phone calls into huge data warehousing facilities where key word searches could be ran against any phone call in the country?

Comment by BARTLEBEE — July 29, 2007 @ 12:09 pm

No. It is impossible Bush ordered that. In the same way that it is impossible he ordered US meat inspectors to start inspecting meat.
This is what the has been the primarily job of the NSA for several decades.

Bradblog.com had a video of his tv news interviews but bush would not give congress the clearance to listen to his report on bush’s spying on millions of Americans and something even worse which was probably the harrassment and rendition of law abiding Americans for their opposition to the wars and the police state.

http://vision.moundalexis.com/pipermail/saic/2006
-February/000644.html

Apparently, TIA was folded into the NSA, hidden behind the “black budget” wall.

Could this be the NSA program, the latest incarnation of the highly illegal TIA, that the Bush administration is trying to hide?

Is this “warrantless,” FISA-skirting domestic data-collection program what top Justice Department officials objected to and wouldn’t reauthorize unless changes were made?

I’m not fooled.

This is very likely exactly what happened to TIA. And if this can be shown to be the genesis of TSP, there will be hell to pay.

You are right, I shouldn’t give up. Dammit all.

I ardently support our Constitutional protections. I certainly have put my support behind every piece of legislation designed to protect our privacy rights thus far. I hope you don’t have the impression that I haven’t supported such. I will continue to do so, as well.

I still wish I could see a long-term out, though. You know? But as everything becomes more integrated, as processors sort though data at unprecedented speed, as data becomes storable anywhere thanks to integrated circuitry, I think we are in for quite a time.

But you are right, giving up isn’t the answer.

And until then, how the hell do we stop the people who are breaking the law and violating our privacy? How do we even track them all down, if they record things indiscriminately and let software do most of the work of sorting out the mess?

We have to first TALK about it. We haven’t even done that yet.

WRONG.

The security is already in place. You don’t understand the technology, nor do you understand the facilities that house the technology, and the infrastructure required to do this.

The only issue is oversight. Either we have it, or we don.t. The system was in place under Bill Clinton for years, and he never turned it on.

You are absolutely right, we can maintain privacy for a while provided we pump massive resources into it. Again, especially as we move to more and more wireless infrastructure. Eventually, however, it will be as enforceable as preventing people from recording music they didn’t buy. Sorry if you don’t think so, but I think you are 110% wrong on that count.

I am not giving up, sir. But I do think this level of, and type of technology has and will continue to change our species and how it interacts with itself fundamentally.

I have no doubt whatsoever that open access will not happen for a long, long time, if ever. Why the hell do you think so many futurists have written about things like this? It is not nearly so cut-and-dry as you would like. All without even considering how much more it all changes when “jacking in” becomes reality, and when material everywhere is being made with circuitry in it, able to store information. All of this is coming, and it is coming pretty damned soon, too. Imbedded circuitry in everyday objects is already in development, as is man-machine interface.

I’m not trying to be confrontational, and in case you don’t realize, I agree with most of your posts. Look at my post history, my stance is not much different from yours. But on this matter? I happen to think you are wrong.

It only happened because Bush cheated, and went around the law. Now thats coming to light, which will put an end to the practice.

Giving up and saying “good luck fighting it” is a losers lament, and a miserable one at that. We can fight it, assuming everyones not as defeatist as you are.

Tell me more, don’t just say, “laws”. How the hell are you going to assure that such a conversation is any more private than speaking to another person in the proximity of a third party is? That is the thing you are not getting. Once that signal is broadcast, it can be intercepted by massive numbers of people, eventually with great ease. That is no more private than someone hearing what you are saying to the person next to you. You gave up that privacy when you physically placed yourself in such proximity to that person and began to speak.

Saying, “laws” without anything that can reasonably enforce those laws is crap. Those laws are barely enforceable NOW, much less as the technology gets smaller, faster and cheaper.

Yea, its called data encryption and MAC Layer Authentication. Available on most wireless accept points sold in the US.

Comment by Moderation — July 30, 2007 @ 12:36 am

Yea Benedict.

They’re called laws.

Comment by Confederation — July 30, 2007 @ 12:38 am

Want it?

You’re practically begging for it.

Seriously, Bart. I don’t want my privacy invaded. This one avenue of privacy (transmitted communications) is impossible to maintain. I truly wish it were possible, sir. :( Don’t you dare think otherwise.