Chatham County Online BBS
January 21, 2018, 03:44:43 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: We've got local links galore! Check out the Chatham Links
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Tags Login Register  





Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Send this topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: Republican Senator: Domestic surveillance needs to be ramped up  (Read 1220 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pi
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:January 17, 2018, 10:43:20 AM
Date Registerd:August 09, 2011, 10:12:40 AM
Posts: 4,519



« on: May 13, 2015, 12:31:32 PM »


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SURVEILLANCE_CORKER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-13-11-13-51

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee says he is shocked at how little information the National Security Agency is collecting through American phone records. He says the American public should be less worried about privacy and should back increased collection as a means of foiling terrorist attacks.

Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee said Wednesday that "it's beyond belief how little data is a part of the program."

House leaders have reached a bipartisan compromise on a bill that seeks to codify President Barack Obama's proposal to end the NSA's collection of domestic calling records, but it would allow the agency to request certain phone records under a court order.


Less worried about privacy?  Stick a cork in it, Corker.
Logged

There are two ways to conquer and enslave a country. One is by the sword. The other is by debt. - John Adams
1911A
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 03:11:22 PM
Date Registerd:April 22, 2006, 04:24:28 PM
Posts: 8,682

"Stand Your Ground" by Charles McNaughton


« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2015, 03:39:28 PM »

Quote
Less worried about privacy?

You know, the old "if you don't have to anything to hide" schtick ... 

Quote
Stick a cork in it, Corker.

Yeah, he's a real piece of work, this guy.

I've noticed 4A rarely comes up when "they" discuss this issue and I'm surprised the article even contained the word "warrant".

Logged

"You are clearly a bigoted, racist pig." - Matilda

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Vetustior Humo.
John Florida
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 10:24:04 PM
Date Registerd:May 30, 2010, 12:53:20 PM
Posts: 7,319



« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2015, 06:16:45 PM »

  What happened to all the terrorist attacks that didn't happen because of all the info they were getting?Huh   Talking through both sides of their faces again.
Logged

"ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL"
 FILIPPO MAZZEI
noway2
Chathameister
****
Offline Offline

Last Login:April 22, 2016, 03:02:27 PM
Date Registerd:June 20, 2014, 01:36:40 PM
Posts: 555


« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2015, 09:31:54 AM »

Quote
bill that seeks to codify President Barack Obama's proposal to end the NSA's collection of domestic calling records
From what I've read about this elsewhere, it looks like it is the old proposal we saw following the Swowden release: make the phone companies, ISPs, etc hold the record databases and .gov will just siphon the information.  It is all smoke and mirrors attempting to appease the masses while conducting their (illegal) business as usual. 

I would like to say that I am surprised, but I can't, at the way that govt mouth pieces twist weasel words and legal doctrine such as the 3rd party doctrine, which by the way is in serious need of an overhaul, to justify their actions which completely go against the principles upon which this nation was formed.
Logged
BOFH
Chathamite
***
Offline Offline

Last Login:March 07, 2017, 04:48:08 PM
Date Registerd:October 03, 2013, 09:15:08 AM
Posts: 145


« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2015, 06:00:47 PM »

I'll say it again (quote it again)

The most common retort against privacy advocates -- by those in favor of ID checks, cameras, databases, data mining and other wholesale surveillance measures -- is this line: "If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

Some clever answers: "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect.

Two proverbs say it best: Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? ("Who watches the watchers?") and "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Cardinal Richelieu understood the value of surveillance when he famously said, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." Watch someone long enough, and you'll find something to arrest -- or just blackmail -- with. Privacy is important because without it, surveillance information will be abused: to peep, to sell to marketers and to spy on political enemies -- whoever they happen to be at the time.

Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance.

We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need.

A future in which privacy would face constant assault was so alien to the framers of the Constitution that it never occurred to them to call out privacy as an explicit right. Privacy was inherent to the nobility of their being and their cause. Of course being watched in your own home was unreasonable. Watching at all was an act so unseemly as to be inconceivable among gentlemen in their day. You watched convicted criminals, not free citizens. You ruled your own home. It's intrinsic to the concept of liberty.

For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable.

How many of us have paused during conversation in the past four-and-a-half years, suddenly aware that we might be eavesdropped on? Probably it was a phone conversation, although maybe it was an e-mail or instant-message exchange or a conversation in a public place. Maybe the topic was terrorism, or politics, or Islam. We stop suddenly, momentarily afraid that our words might be taken out of context, then we laugh at our paranoia and go on. But our demeanor has changed, and our words are subtly altered.

This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And it's our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.

Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
Logged
1911A
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:Yesterday at 03:11:22 PM
Date Registerd:April 22, 2006, 04:24:28 PM
Posts: 8,682

"Stand Your Ground" by Charles McNaughton


« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2015, 07:20:35 PM »

Well said.  Did you write that, BOFH?
Logged

"You are clearly a bigoted, racist pig." - Matilda

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Vetustior Humo.
BOFH
Chathamite
***
Offline Offline

Last Login:March 07, 2017, 04:48:08 PM
Date Registerd:October 03, 2013, 09:15:08 AM
Posts: 145


« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2015, 10:25:59 AM »

I wish I was that eloquent.
Written by renowned security researcher Bruce Schneier back in 2006:
https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2006/05/the_eternal_value_of.html

I have always admired his views on the subject.....
Logged
noway2
Chathameister
****
Offline Offline

Last Login:April 22, 2016, 03:02:27 PM
Date Registerd:June 20, 2014, 01:36:40 PM
Posts: 555


« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2015, 12:47:13 PM »

Written by renowned security researcher Bruce Schneier back in 2006
Do you subscribe to his monthly news letter?

For those who aren't aware of it, you can access back issues or subscribe (it's free) it here: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram.html
Logged
chrstnhsbndfthr
Chathamohican
*****
Offline Offline

Last Login:November 11, 2016, 07:23:38 PM
Date Registerd:February 20, 2006, 11:25:33 PM
Posts: 10,008



« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2015, 01:25:53 PM »

Good discussion. Thank you all, especially BOFH for the great quote.
Logged

"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest <> of freedom, go <>in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. <>may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.-- Samuel Adams 1776
BOFH
Chathamite
***
Offline Offline

Last Login:March 07, 2017, 04:48:08 PM
Date Registerd:October 03, 2013, 09:15:08 AM
Posts: 145


« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2015, 09:16:29 AM »

Written by renowned security researcher Bruce Schneier back in 2006
Do you subscribe to his monthly news letter?

For those who aren't aware of it, you can access back issues or subscribe (it's free) it here: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram.html

Yes and I regularly read his blog, always something interesting in there.
His first book "applied cryptography" is an excellent read on the science - the NSA did NOT want him to publish it when it came out.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Send this topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!