Codename: Prism

[Liar]

Now Republicans are whining that Obama has these powers that they created. In fact it's an outright scandal that he's using them.

They are? Maybe the more Infowars prone ones, and assorted Blog Warriors. Rand Paul is up in arms about it, along with a handful of progressive Dems.

But most of the Old Boys in Washington, both Dems and Pubs all seem to scramble to defend it.

 

[ChinaBandit]

like kbate said, 10 million people should not be seen as suspects under probable cause.

If that's what it takes to ensure our safetly the terrorist ideal is winning.

 

[Busybody]

If this sort of thing has been going on since the Patriot Act and FISA court laws were passed a decade ago, why is it suddenly an Obama scandal?

.

Cause Obama abuses it!

 

[Busybody]

Video: Obama’s Director Of National Intelligence Lies To Congress When Asked If The NSA “Collects Any Type Of Data On Millions Of Americans”…




Via National Journal:


As we now know, the NSA has been collecting data on millions of domestic and international phone calls for some time now — since 2006, according to Dianne Feinstein. Maybe this bothers you; maybe it doesn’t. Feinstein insists the program is an essential part of “protecting America”; Congressman Mike Rogers says it has already been “used to stop a terrorist attack in the United States.”

But one person who doesn’t like the idea of the NSA spying on Americans is Oregon senator Ron Wyden. And at a hearing in March, he asked James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, a straightforward question: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper’s answer? “No, sir … not wittingly

 

[mercury14]

Which of the Ten Million people are they investigating? Everyone is suspect until proven innocent?

When Food Lion sends me a coupon based on my last month's shopping pattern, they are not planning to kill or imprison me without trial if I don't use it.

Comparing marketing to government law enforcement is weak at best.

From Fox News:

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House intelligence committee, said the effort is not "data mining," and has helped quash a terrorist attack on U.S. soil in the past few years. He would not elaborate.

Would you give up your phone call record privacy for this?

 

[Busybody]

While Obama assures us in public that our civil liberties are safe, he's doing different behind the scenes. The next scandal:

Codename PRISM: Secret government program mines data from 9 U.S. Internet companies, including photographs, email and more

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/06/codename_prism_secret_program_data_mining.html

PRISM Scandal: Tech Giants Say NSA Tapped Their Servers Without Their Knowledge…



Not sure what to believe here, at best the firms are trying to cover their asses, at worst (and this would be very, very, very bad) the Obama administration allowed the NSA to secretly tap the servers that run the internet.
Via Guardian:


Two different versions of the PRISM scandal were emerging on Thursday with Silicon Valley executives denying all knowledge of the top secret program that gives the National Security Agency direct access to the internet giants’ servers.

The eavesdropping program is detailed in the form of PowerPoint slides in a leaked NSA document, seen and authenticated by the Guardian, which states that it is based on “legally-compelled collection” but operates with the “assistance of communications providers in the US.”

Each of the 41 slides in the document displays prominently the corporate logos of the tech companies claimed to be taking part in PRISM.

However, senior executives from the internet companies expressed surprise and shock and insisted that no direct access to servers had been offered to any government agency.

The top-secret NSA briefing presentation set out details of the PRISM program, which it said granted access to records such as emails, chat conversations, voice calls, documents and more. The presentation the listed dates when document collection began for each company, and said PRISM enabled “direct access from the servers of these US service providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple”.

Senior officials with knowledge of the situation within the tech giants admitted to being confused by the NSA revelations, and said if such data collection was taking place, it was without companies’ knowledge.

An Apple spokesman said: “We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers and any agency requesting customer data must get a court order,” he said.

Joe Sullivan, Facebook’s chief security officer, said it did not provide government organisation with direct access to Facebook servers. ”When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinise any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law.”

A Google spokesman also said it did not provide officials with access to its servers. “Google cares deeply about the security of our users’ data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘backdoor’ into our systems, but Google does not have a ‘back door’ for the government to access private user data.”

Microsoft said it only turned over data when served with a court order: “We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don’t participate in it.”

A Yahoo spokesman said: “Yahoo! takes users’ privacy very seriously. We do not provide the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network.

 

[Liar]

What do you think FISA courts do?

Apparently rubberstampg requests to get phone records for millions of people who they can not possibly have individual probable cause to access.

 

[Busybody]

From Fox News:



Would you give up your phone call record privacy for this?

when WE asked THIS question

2001-2008, you were screeching like a STUCK PIG

 

[mercury14]

when WE asked THIS question

2001-2008, you were screeching like a STUCK PIG

No you're confused again. I never said anything like that.

 

[Liar]

Cause Obama abuses it!

They all do.

The difference is, Obama was very vocal in saying "I'm not gonna be like that douchenozzle Bush". And people expected this to be one of the areas in which Obama would not be like that douchenozzle Bush. It wasn't.

 

[Busybody]

No you're confused again. I never said anything like that.

stop INSULTING yourself


and once again


The PROBLEM isn't the PAT ACT

The PROBLEM is who implements the PAT ACT!

 

[Busybody]

They all do.

The difference is, Obama was very vocal in saying "I'm not gonna be like that douchenozzle Bush". And people expected this to be one of the areas in which Obama would not be like that douchenozzle Bush. It wasn't.

you musta MISSED what I wrote when the PAT ACT was passed


in short its THIS

"Its an invasion of privacy....at this time after the attacks, it cant be helped ad it has to pass.....this an all governmental acts will be abused.....at this time I trust MY government more then I trust the terrorists!"



And at this time, I DONT TRUST THE OBAMA GOVERNMENT!

They are THE PROBLEM!

 

[ChinaBandit]

They all do.

The difference is, Obama was very vocal in saying "I'm not gonna be like that douchenozzle Bush". And people expected this to be one of the areas in which Obama would not be like that douchenozzle Bush. It wasn't.

Hope and Change = Bullshit and Take It Deeper

 

[Liar]

Hope and Change = Bullshit and Take It Deeper

He has been different in a lot of ways. Just not in the homeland security bullshit overreach area.

 

[kbate]

From Fox News:
Would you give up your phone call record privacy for this?

Would you give up your medical records (and every other medical record in the nation) if the NSA thought a terror suspect might have once had a procedure in the USA and might then be tracked?

 

[kbate]

Are you ready for a 100% DNA database? DNA taken at birth in order to have every single american's DNA on file?

Shouldn't the government be allowed, in order to solve all DNA based cold cases - to collect a sample from every potential suspect?

 

[mercury14]

Would you give up your medical records (and every other medical record in the nation) if the NSA thought a terror suspect might have once had a procedure in the USA and might then be tracked?

If it led to lives being saved, yes I would. In fact I'd do it instantly.

 

[mercury14]

Are you ready for a 100% DNA database? DNA taken at birth in order to have every single american's DNA on file?

Shouldn't the government be allowed, in order to solve all DNA based cold cases - to collect a sample from every potential suspect?

What does that have to do with getting a warrant to look at existing records? Your argument is... way over there now.

 

[kbate]

If it led to lives being saved, yes I would. In fact I'd do it instantly.

And you know that, when the request is made that the purpose is to save lives and that the data will be then destroyed instead of cataloged for 'other purposes'.

The request does not tell you why the government wants data.

 

[Liar]

From Fox News:

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., chairman of the House intelligence committee, said the effort is not "data mining," and has helped quash a terrorist attack on U.S. soil in the past few years. He would not elaborate.

Would you give up your phone call record privacy for this?

Without elaboration? No.

This is legit, nessecary and nothing tro worry about because I say so. Move along Citizen.

 

[ChinaBandit]

If it led to lives being saved, yes I would. In fact I'd do it instantly.

Give all your money away, every last penny, to Feed the Children then.

It will save lives.

 

[ChinaBandit]

Without elaboration? No.

This is legit, nessecary and nothing tro worry about because I say so. Move along Citizen.

He "trusts" the government will do the right thing. Examples of the opposite not withstanding.

 

[kbate]

What does that have to do with getting a warrant to look at existing records? Your argument is... way over there now.

Your DNA is an existing record if you've ever been in a hospital, jail or given blood, just as are your medical files, mental health files, school files, cell phone GPS chip and cell phone logs, driving record, credit card usage logs, bank account statements and basically every other thing that can be collected and stored.

Why can't NSA, CIA, FBI, IRS and other agencies just access it all and sort out the guilty - of whatever crime they find? It is logical that every single person is suspect until the data proves them innocent.

Can you prove the 'terrorist attack' you've now mentioned several times - actually was going to happen, actually was quashed, and actually was a threat to anyone?

So Government is always benign? Why shouldn't the IRS be permitted to access every financial record in the nation in order to find out who might be exchanging work for rent and not declaring the rent money saved as income. They might also find a drug dealer's money laundry in the process of increasing revenues - so win win.

What limit on data mining in the name of good or better health care, or income tax collection, or whatever the next great cause might be?

 

[Busybody]

If it led to lives being saved, yes I would. In fact I'd do it instantly.

you didn't say that 2001-2008

 

[Busybody]

lest we forget

ALL the arguments put forth by the LIBZ/DUMZ here and in real life


were put forth by BushCO.......only to be called a WAR CRIMINAL etc etc.....only to have John Yoo hounded etc etc.........



The problem isn't the LAW

The problem is the ONE BEHIND the LAW

ObamaCO have shown themselves untrustworthy!