FBI wants to access your online etc.

diehardbiker said:
Only with judge approval until Bush expanded it.

What that means before Bush era, in order to wiretap, somebody, investigators are required to submit request for wiretapping though court before doing so. After Bush ERA, some agencies are exempted from this rule, and I think they are going too far.
Click to expand...

Do you really think phone tapping was always done legally in the 40's??
 
naisho said:
My post says that I am not a Verizon customer, therefore it doesn't apply to me yet. I'm on AT&T, and not impacted as of yet. Did you know there was a federal case vs AT&T years ago about similar issue of NSA wiretapping?

I hope you understand that this is based on federal mobile (phone) intelligence. It isn't new, especially since PATRIOT act.
This issue has been around for years since 70s when FISA - Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act came out. It isn't new, it's just revised now to include smartphones. So far Verizon is one of the first.
Click to expand...

I just saw the news tonight and it now being said that EVERYONE phones it being watch it does not matter you uses as a carrier. I am not sure why the news only said Verizon last night. I watch Nighty News with Brian Williams , you watch it online and they have CC .
 
diehardbiker said:
Only with judge approval until Bush expanded it.

What that means before Bush era, in order to wiretap, somebody, investigators are required to submit request for wiretapping though court before doing so. After Bush ERA, some agencies are exempted from this rule, and I think they are going too far.
Click to expand...

The Huffington Post labeled Obama as other Bush.

George W. Obama - on The Huffington Post's front page.
Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post

I don't disagree with them because Obama continue counterterrorist programs that created by GWB.
 
Foxrac said:
The Huffington Post labeled Obama as other Bush.

George W. Obama - on The Huffington Post's front page.
Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post

I don't disagree with them because Obama continue counterterrorist programs that created by GWB.
Click to expand...

Somewhat true. The big difference is that in the past these court orders were more limited in scope and usually(if not always) pertained to international calls. This is a big issue.
 
diehardbiker said:
Only with judge approval until Bush expanded it.

What that means before Bush era, in order to wiretap, somebody, investigators are required to submit request for wiretapping though court before doing so. After Bush ERA, some agencies are exempted from this rule, and I think they are going too far.
Click to expand...

no. it was approved by secret court aka FISA.
 
Jiro said:
yea. disturbing. the government only obtained who, where, and when... but not the contents.
Click to expand...

There are actually conflicting reports. The order said Metadata which some are saying limited them as you said. Others are saying this may have allowed location data and possibly even sent picture and text data.

I don't think anyone knows for sure how far they went.
 
TXgolfer said:
There are actually conflicting reports. The order said Metadata which some are saying limited them as you said. Others are saying this may have allowed location data and possibly even sent picture and text data.

I don't think anyone knows for sure how far they went.
Click to expand...

you're talking about other case. one from telephone companies. and other from internet firms such as facebook/google/apple which is what you're talking about - pix, videos, files, etc.

they're calling this PRISM (NSA Program)
 
Jiro said:
you're talking about other case. one from telephone companies. and other from internet firms such as facebook/google/apple which is what you're talking about - pix, videos, files, etc.

they're calling this PRISM (NSA Program)
Click to expand...

Yes, we kinda have 2 threads going #1 & #2 are like different OPs :lol: I was referring specifically to NSA / Verizon.
 
Jiro said:
yea. disturbing. the government only obtained who, where, and when... but not the contents.
Click to expand...
imo.. contents are not vital if Patriot & FISA can already figure out who is talking to who, that's all that matters.

They can fill in the rest of the blanks from direct surveillence or something - with judge or without judge consent.
 
naisho said:
imo.. contents are not vital if Patriot & FISA can already figure out who is talking to who, that's all that matters.

They can fill in the rest of the blanks from direct surveillence or something - with judge or without judge consent.
Click to expand...

I suppose it's how they can skirted the laws to be able to do this.
 
TXgolfer said:
Yes, we kinda have 2 threads going #1 & #2 are like different OPs :lol: I was referring specifically to NSA / Verizon.
Click to expand...

And Verizon say "we always respect your rights and your rights and privacy" when you call them up. What a load of crap!
 
naisho said:
My post says that I am not a Verizon customer, therefore it doesn't apply to me yet. I'm on AT&T, and not impacted as of yet.
Click to expand...

You can't honestly believe this is only happening with Verizon? You can be sure the other companies are doing it as well.

You realize that the government can more easily search UPS packages than U.S. Postal service packages, right? Private companies are under no obligation to protect the privacy of their customers. In fact, you give up your privacy when you use a private company.

There are more laws protecting privacy from a public company than a private one.
 
whatdidyousay! said:
And Verizon say "we always respect your rights and your rights and privacy" when you call them up. What a load of crap!
Click to expand...

They mean not sharing with the competition, not the government. Your stuff is private as long as a competitor doesn't get it.
 
naisho said:
My post says that I am not a Verizon customer, therefore it doesn't apply to me yet. I'm on AT&T, and not impacted as of yet. Did you know there was a federal case vs AT&T years ago about similar issue of NSA wiretapping?

I hope you understand that this is based on federal mobile (phone) intelligence. It isn't new, especially since PATRIOT act.
This issue has been around for years since 70s when FISA - Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act came out. It isn't new, it's just revised now to include smartphones. So far Verizon is one of the first.
Click to expand...

I am very aware of the PATRIOT act and that after 911 people emails and phone calls where watch. If you made a lot long distance calls to countries that supports terrorists the government will keep an eye on you . I said this is nothing new , the government been tapping people phones for years.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
They mean not sharing with the competition, not the government. Your stuff is private as long as a competitor doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

companies sell our names and addresses to other companies , they may not be competitor of the Verizon or another phone company but our info is given out. I get letters from companies saying they share info about me to other companies and I opt of this if I want to. Verizon does not say that in their message , oh by the way we do give your info to government. So they're still lying to us!
 
I am not worried. I got nothing to hide. I think they want to filter out the terrorists who are U.S. citizens not to spy on ordinary people. Maybe if they intercepted some messages between the Boston Marathon terrorists before the marathon, this tragedy would have never happened.

I am just a nobody on their radar.
 
Back
Top