17
   

We Have No Privacy, We Are Always Being Watched.

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 04:45 pm
@hawkeye10,
technology was of very little use in getting either Saddam or Osama...we should take the claim that watching voice and data traffic has been hugely important to our Safety! with a cup of salt. most terror cases that we do hear about are about idiots who are set up for charges by the government to boost their numbers, very seldom is a case "foiled" where I think "the government found a stopped a bad guy who would have hurt people"
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 05:16 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I would like to hear some experts talk about how likely it is that trained terrorists would get caught in this surveillance...it sounds like they would have to be country bumpkins. if this is the case then my theory that SAFETY! is being used as an excuse to build a police state just got more evidence for it.


I tend to agree with you that governments including ours are using a terrorism threat and to a lesser degree the idea of stopping child porn as an excuse to set up wide spread spying on their populations and filtering of the internet.

The only one thing that I know about the terrorists that somewhat reduce my respect for their intelligent is their used of their own roll their own encryption software by the name of Mujahideen Secrets.

Open source and peer review is the way to go with encryption software to make sure there is no back doors or errors that could make the software worthless.

In other word they would had been far wiser to be using such programs as pgp and truecrypt then to count that they had programmers that could do an error free encryption package and as it is not open source the program could have back doors put into it by the NSA or M16 agents/programmers.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  3  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 05:33 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

But being more efficient IS working for us.

Are you saying that the Gov. collecting info. about us is inefficient?

Of course, it's efficient. There's no crime in a police state. It's simply undesirable. It would be even more efficient if the government had computers reading everyone's mind 24 hours a day and alerting them when someone had a criminal thought. It would enable all kinds of reductions in crime. It's simply an undesirable invasion of privacy and not the proper role of government. There are many things which would help the police solve crimes which they ought not to have.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 06:49 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
, very seldom is a case "foiled" where I think "the government found a stopped a bad guy who would have hurt people

They've foiled foreign terrorist plots with electronic surveillance, I don't think there is much question about that, and I don't think it bothers most people to have surveillance used that way. I think the current issue is about using the electronic surveillance on Americans--all Americans--because a few Americans might be involved in terrorist activities against the U.S..

According to Sen. Feinstein, they did foil one plot which involved an American.
Quote:
Ms. Feinstein, a Democrat of California who defends the surveillance programs, cited two declassified cases in which electronic surveillance data had been used – that of David C. Headley, an American who conducted several missions to Mumbai, India, in preparation for a deadly terror attack there, and that of Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan-American who was convicted of seeking to set off backpacks full of explosives in the New York subway. The Mumbai attack was carried out and killed more than 160 people; the subway attack was foiled.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/lawmaker-calls-for-renewed-debate-over-patriot-act/?hp


Even if they can foil some terrorist plots involving Americans, I still don't see where that justifies using the same surveillance on all Americans to find those few.

BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 08:01 pm
@firefly,
We should all 300 millions of us trade our privacy and our constitution rights in order to maybe stop a few terrorist attacks?

We had fought wars with powerful nation states and had loss hundreds of thousands of our people doing so and we still have kept the constitution intact for the most part but a few non nation state groups are so powerful and such a danger to us we should have a bonfire on the white house lawn of the bill of rights?

An out of control government is far more of a long term threat to our freedoms then all the terrorist groups in the middle east in my opinion.

Quote:
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
― Benjamin Franklin, Memoirs of the life & writings of Benjamin Franklin

hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 08:14 pm
@BillRM,
I want to see a cost/benefit analysis on this, and I will tell you right now that if I am going to trade in my freedom and my kids freedom I damn well better be seeing something on the other side of the ledger like "saving the earth from nuclear annihilation".
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 08:26 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

spendius wrote:

But being more efficient IS working for us.

Are you saying that the Gov. collecting info. about us is inefficient?

Of course, it's efficient. There's no crime in a police state. It's simply undesirable. It would be even more efficient if the government had computers reading everyone's mind 24 hours a day and alerting them when someone had a criminal thought. It would enable all kinds of reductions in crime. It's simply an undesirable invasion of privacy and not the proper role of government. There are many things which would help the police solve crimes which they ought not to have.

it is the people who matter, not the government. the government only exists so long as it serves us and remembers who the boss is. once it refuses to be submissive to the people it is off with its head. "SAFETY! SAFETY! SAFETY!" is not going to keep the rebellion down for long.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 08:36 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
We should all 300 millions of us trade our privacy and our constitution rights in order to maybe stop a few terrorist attacks?

That depends on whether the American people are knowingly doing that, and that's what they want done.

The issue in this situation is that its been going on secretly, without the consent or knowledge of the American people, and, apparently without the knowledge of most of Congress, even though they've been providing bi-partisan support for these policies since Bush/Cheney and not really demanding more disclosure about what's actually going on, as long as it's in the interests of "national security" or "homeland security". And, when they've tried to get more information, they haven't gotten it.
Quote:
When James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, was asked during a Congressional hearing in March whether the N.S.A. was collecting any information on “millions or hundreds of millions of Americans,” Clapper replied “No, sir,” adding, “not wittingly.” That denial undermines our faith in the forthrightness of those scooping up every little bit of our lives to feed into government computers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/opinion/sunday/dowd-peeping-president-obama.html?ref=opinion
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 08:45 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
t is the people who matter, not the government. the government only exists so long as it serves us and remembers who the boss is. once it refuses to be submissive to the people it is off with its head. "SAFETY! SAFETY! SAFETY!" is not going to keep the rebellion down for long.


LOL Hawkeye below is one possible way to deal with the paid for politicians within the beltway even if it a little old fashion.

http://www.theguillotine.info/assets/images/630x480xhow_gui.jpg.pagespeed.ic._DTCLckkFW.jpg
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 10:05 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
I don't disagree with you that the U.S. will criticize actions in other countries that we are also guilty of--we do engage in hypocrisy at times,


At times??!! That's nonsense, FF. The US constantly berates others, even their own brutal right wing dictators, though no too much - it's all for show.

Quote:
or we assume we have loftier motives for what we're doing.


History points clearly to the US never caring about helping the oppressed. Sure they mouth platitudes when others are doing bad stuff, but, again, it's all for show.

There have never been any lofty motives. It's all been a huge charade.

Look at how badly you got used wrt Afghanistan, altho' it was nothing compared to how you allowed the Bush war criminals to bomb the **** out of Afghanistan and Iraq when those people did absolutely nothing to you.

Quote:
I don't feel any less "free" because of these revelations about government surveillance, precisely because this sort of spying was made possible by the 'government by the people'--the people handed the government this power with the Patriot Act.


The Patriot Act - what a sickening, propaganda filled name that is - was written before 9-11 and then it was rushed thru with virtually no one reading it.

It's not surprising that you don't feel any less "free". You've shown that you don't much care about anything your "governments" do. It'll be too late when it's your turn.



firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 10:30 pm
@JTT,
http://image10.spreadshirt.com/image-server/v1/compositions/20519810/views/1,width=178,height=178,appearanceId=417/Same-old-****---different-day-%7C-create-your-own-funshirt--T-Shirts.jpg
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 11:25 pm
Quote:
Transparency and Open Government

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government


My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.

Government should be transparent.
Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.

Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the Government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions. Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public input on how we can increase and improve opportunities for public participation in Government.

Government should be collaborative.
Collaboration actively engages Americans in the work of their Government. Executive departments and agencies should use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperateamong themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector. Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.

I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive.

This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA


HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA











HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA











The joke is on us... Shocked
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 11:41 pm
@hawkeye10,
If the NSA Trusted Edward Snowden With Our Data, Why Should We Trust the NSA?

By Farhad Manjoo

Quote:
Edward Snowden sounds like a thoughtful, patriotic young man, and I’m sure glad he blew the whistle on the NSA’s surveillance programs. But the more I learned about him this afternoon, the angrier I became. Wait, him? The NSA trusted its most sensitive documents to this guy? And now, after it has just proven itself so inept at handling its own information, the agency still wants us to believe that it can securely hold on to all of our data? Oy vey!

According to the Guardian, Snowden is a 29-year-old high-school dropout who trained for the Army Special Forces before an injury forced him to leave the military. His IT credentials are apparently limited to a few “computer” classes he took at a community college in order to get his high-school equivalency degree—courses that he did not complete. His first job at the NSA was as a security guard. Then, amazingly, he moved up the ranks of the United States’ national security infrastructure: The CIA gave him a job in IT security. He was given diplomatic cover in Geneva. He was hired by Booz Allen Hamilton, the government contractor, which paid him $200,000 a year to work on the NSA’s computer systems.

Let’s note what Snowden is not: He isn’t a seasoned FBI or CIA investigator. He isn’t a State Department analyst. He’s not an attorney with a specialty in national security or privacy law.

Instead, he’s the IT guy, and not a very accomplished, experienced one at that. If Snowden had sent his résumé to any of the tech companies that are providing data to the NSA’s PRISM program, I doubt he’d have even gotten an interview. Yes, he could be a computing savant anyway—many well-known techies dropped out of school. But he was given access way beyond what even a supergeek should have gotten. As he tells the Guardian, the NSA let him see “everything.” He was accorded the NSA’s top security clearance, which allowed him to see and to download the agency’s most sensitive documents. But he didn’t just know about the NSA’s surveillance systems—he says he had the ability to use them. “I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities [sic] to wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email,” he says in a video interview with the paper.

Because Snowden is now in Hong Kong, it’s unclear what the United States can do to him. But watch for officials to tar Snowden—he’ll be called unpatriotic, unprofessional, treasonous, a liar, grandiose, and worse. As in the Bradley Manning case, though, the more badly Snowden is depicted, the more rickety the government’s case for surveillance becomes. After all, they hired him. They gave him unrestricted access to their systems, from court orders to PowerPoint presentations depicting the crown jewels of their surveillance infrastructure. (Also of note: They made a hideous PowerPoint presentation depicting the crown jewels of their surveillance infrastructure—who does that? I’ve been reading a lot of Le Carré lately, and when I saw the PRISM presentation, I remembered how Le Carré’s veteran spy George Smiley endeavored to never write down his big secrets. Now our spies aren’t just writing things down—they’re trying to make their secrets easily presentable to large audiences.)

The worst part about the NSA’s surveillance is not its massive reach. It’s that it operates entirely in secret, so that we have no way of assessing the sophistication of its operation. All we have is the word of our politicians, who tell us that they’ve vetted these systems and that we should blindly trust that the data are being competently safeguarded and aren’t vulnerable to abuse.

Snowden’s leak is thus doubly damaging. The scandal isn’t just that the government is spying on us. It’s also that it’s giving guys like Snowden keys to the spying program. It suggests the worst combination of overreach and amateurishness, of power leveraged by incompetence. The Keystone Cops are listening to us all.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/06/09/edward_snowden_why_did_the_nsa_whistleblower_have_access_to_prism_and_other.html?wpisrc=most_viral

Great point.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 11:42 pm
@hawkeye10,
Maybe that means open and transparent after they get caught and the denials and ambiguous statements fall flat.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 9 Jun, 2013 11:45 pm
@roger,
Quote:
“We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.”


― Winston Churchill
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 08:17 am
@BillRM,
Quote:

Nonsense when I am in the dark net or even just tunneling around with tor my ISP and all the security agencies in the world together can not trace me.

ROFLMAO... You are so blind sometimes Bill.

Your ISP has to direct your traffic. While you may have encrypted the data in the traffic, they can trace where it is going well enough to know you are trying to hide stuff. At that point they can collect all your packets and decode at their leisure.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 08:49 am
Quote:
The New York Times
June 9, 2013
Leaker’s Employer Became Wealthy by Maintaining Government Secrets

By BINYAMIN APPELBAUM and ERIC LIPTON

WASHINGTON — Edward J. Snowden’s employer, Booz Allen Hamilton, has become one of the largest and most profitable corporations in the United States almost exclusively by serving a single client: the government of the United States.

Over the last decade, much of the company’s growth has come from selling expertise, technology and manpower to the National Security Agency and other federal intelligence agencies. Booz Allen earned $1.3 billion, 23 percent of the company’s total revenue, from intelligence work during its most recent fiscal year.

The government has sharply increased spending on high-tech intelligence gathering since 2001, and both the Bush and Obama administrations have chosen to rely on private contractors like Booz Allen for much of the resulting work.

Thousands of people formerly employed by the government, and still approved to deal with classified information, now do essentially the same work for private companies. Mr. Snowden, who revealed on Sunday that he provided the recent leak of national security documents, is among them.

As evidence of the company’s close relationship with government, the Obama administration’s chief intelligence official, James R. Clapper Jr., is a former Booz Allen executive. The official who held that post in the Bush administration, John M. McConnell, now works for Booz Allen.

“The national security apparatus has been more and more privatized and turned over to contractors,” said Danielle Brian, the executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit group that studies federal government contracting. “This is something the public is largely unaware of, how more than a million private contractors are cleared to handle highly sensitive matters.”

It has gone so far, Ms. Brian said, that even the process of granting security clearances is often handled by contractors, allowing companies to grant government security clearances to private sector employees.

Companies like Booz Allen, Lockheed Martin and the Computer Sciences Corporation also engage directly in gathering information and providing analysis and advice to government officials. Booz Allen employees work inside the facilities at the N.S.A., among the most secretive of the intelligence agencies. The company also has several office buildings near the agency’s headquarters in Fort Meade, Md.

The company employs about 25,000 people, almost half of whom hold top secret security clearances, providing “access to information that would cause ‘exceptionally grave damage’ to national security if disclosed to the public,” according to a company securities filing.

In January, Booz Allen announced that it was starting work on a new contract worth perhaps as much as $5.6 billion over five years to provide intelligence analysis services to the Defense Department. Under the deal, Booz Allen employees are being assigned to help military and national security policy makers, the company said.

Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican and former chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said he had no reason to believe that a private contractor was more likely to become a source to reporters than a government official, because both need a security clearance before they can handle top secret information.

“Security is so tight and procedures so strictly enforced, this is really a surprise,” he said of the leaks by Mr. Snowden. “This will have to be fully investigated, inside and out, to find out what happened here. Were there warning signs? Were there issues in his background?”

Stewart A. Baker, who served as general counsel at the N.S.A. in the 1990s and more recently as a top official at the Department of Homeland Security, said he worried that the reliance on outside contractors might, in some ways at least, make the government more vulnerable to leaks.

“Inside the government, there are structures designed to make sure that people understand that they can raise concerns about the lawfulness of particular activities in a variety of established channels,” Mr. Baker said. “You can go to the inspector general or to the Intelligence Committees, and you don’t have to pierce the veil of secrecy to get high-level attention to your concerns without exposing national secrets. It is a little less obvious to employees at a contractor.”

Booz Allen, which notes in securities filings that its business could be damaged by leaks, acknowledged in a statement that Mr. Snowden had been an employee.

The company, based in Virginia, is primarily a technology contractor. It reported revenues of $5.76 billion for the fiscal year ended in March and was No. 436 on Fortune’s list of the 500 largest public companies. The government provided 98 percent of that revenue, the company said.

Its rapid growth, fueled by government investment after the Sept. 11 attacks, led to a 2008 buyout by the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm, followed by a public offering in 2010.

Booz Allen has formed a particularly close relationship with the intelligence agencies, and others besides Mr. Clapper and Mr. McConnell have spent time in the company’s executive offices.

Mr. McConnell has been an advocate for increased federal spending on cybersecurity. He told the CBS News program “60 Minutes” in 2010 that foreign governments had the capacity to bring down the country’s power grid and financial system.

“The United States is not prepared for such an attack,” he said.

The company has also had at least one previous highly publicized problem maintaining data security. In 2011, files maintained by Booz Allen were acquired by the online activist group Anonymous, which claimed to have stolen tens of thousands of encrypted military passwords.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/us/booz-allen-grew-rich-on-government-contracts.html?hp&_r=0
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 08:55 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
“We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.”


― Winston Churchill


Doing the right thing, Winnie, not by a long shot. Bush and the gang aren't in jail, which is where war criminals and terrorists should be.

The US has been holding innocents in a gulag that they have no right to in Cuba. The current prez is a war criminal too, not to mention a terrorist. He gave Bush and the boys and girls a free pass.

Likely that "right things" was deep tongue in cheek 'cause no one seems to be able to describe any "right/good things" the US has ever done.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 09:02 am
@parados,
Quote:
Your ISP has to direct your traffic. While you may have encrypted the data in the traffic, they can trace where it is going well enough to know you are trying to hide stuff. At that point they can collect all your packets and decode at their leisure.


Silly silly person look up tor and the tor network all my ISP know is my traffic is going to a tor node and the encrypted is not something even NSA can break let alone an ISP unless the time frame of their leisure is a few hundreds thousands billions years.

Second one hell of a lot of people used tor for legal reasons including myself and the government for that matter so there is no indications that someone is doing anything illegal in using tor.

This software is used to break through and protected the informations of people living behind the great firewall of China for example.

Hell here is some reading for you so you might not sound so ill informed in the future.

Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)

Tor software is now developed by the Tor Project, which has been a 501(c)(3) research-education nonprofit organization [11] based in the United States of America [1] since December 2006. It has a diverse base of financial support;[10] the U.S. State Department, the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and the National Science Foundation are major contributors.[12] As of 2012, 80% of the Tor Project's $2M annual budget comes from the United States government, with the Swedish government and other organizations providing the rest,[13] including NGOs and thousands of individual sponsors.[14]
In March 2011 The Tor Project was awarded the Free Software Foundation's 2010 Award for Projects of Social Benefit on the following grounds: "Using free software, Tor has enabled roughly 36 million people around the world to experience freedom of access and expression on the Internet while keeping them in control of their privacy and anonymity. Its network has proved pivotal in dissident movements in both Iran and more recently Egypt."[15]
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Jun, 2013 09:09 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Silly silly person look up tor and the tor network all my ISP know is my traffic is going to a tor node

Gee.... What did I just say
parados wrote:
Your ISP has to direct your traffic. While you may have encrypted the data in the traffic, they can trace where it is going well enough

Your ISP and NSA know you are sending your traffic to a TOR node. DUH..... How stupid are you compared to them?

Quote:
Second one hell of a lot of people used tor for legal reasons including myself and the government for that matter so there is no indications that someone is doing anything illegal in using tor.

Spending time on the internet is no indication of a crime so the government won't look at what I am sending in clear text by your argument.

Quote:
the encrypted is not something even NSA can break let alone an ISP
Don't worry. The government can't break encryption and they won't monitor your traffic. (At least they won't tell you unless someone leaks it.)
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 02:14:53