Aug 8, 2013 at 9:56 pm #1306343
Shut down rather than give data to gov. Lavabit was supposedly used by Snowden. SilentCircle was used by heads of state.
"Taken together, the closures signal that e-mails, even if they are encrypted, can be accessed by government authorities and that the only way to prevent turning over the data is to obliterate the servers that the data sits on."
I consider this to be a huge development. Now we at least know where we stand, at least in regards to email.Aug 9, 2013 at 7:01 am #2013849
"Now we at least know where we stand, at least in regards to email."
On the one hand, the government should follow the constitution and not do searches without warrants
On the other hand, do I really care if someone is listening to my phone calls and emails? I assume they are. This was known before Snowden and Manning.Aug 9, 2013 at 7:19 am #2013853
Katharina LångstrumpBPL Member
@kat_pLocale: Pacific Coast
"On the other hand, do I really care if someone is listening to my phone calls and emails?"
I think you should, even if ( and I hear this all the time) " you have nothing to hide".Aug 9, 2013 at 7:37 am #2013863
spelt with a tBPL Member
@speltLocale: SW/C PA
+1 Kat.Aug 9, 2013 at 7:42 am #2013866
I don't like it, but I'm not going to get all depressed.
It's probably reasonable for them to have access to the stream of emails, but if it doesn't match someone they have a warrant for, then they should immediately delete itAug 9, 2013 at 10:09 am #2013910
Cayenne RedmonkBPL Member
@redmonkLocale: Greater California Ecosystem
Jeez, Perfectly normal, god fearing, moral people have nothing to hide, so they don't care about the NSA listening in, reading their emails, and monitoring their private lives via the cameras and microphones built into every popular phone, tablet, and computer.
It's just the evil doers and perverts that need to worry about being monitored.Aug 9, 2013 at 11:08 am #2013926
Ben 2 WorldBPL Member
@ben2worldLocale: So Cal
You know, even under Fascism, most all who obeyed the laws and kept their heads down really didn't have a lot to be fearful about. If anything, the trains in Italy only began to run on time under Facism! Many back then actually preferred the new order and security over the chaos and paralysis that was post-WWI Italy.
My own experience was growing up in Taiwan under martial law the entire time. Really, it wasn't that bad for most people. We not only survived, but we even prospered — by keeping our heads down! But woe to those who wanted to push the freedom envelop!! Every demand for freedom was met with this: Communist China was only a 3-4 minute fighter jet away and the government needed to have things under control to meet this threat. It was ALL in the name of national security!!
But after four decades of martial law, Taiwan did finally transform itself into a full, multi-party democracy — and lo and behold — the sky did not fall and the Communists did not invade!!
And yet, here in the US, we seem to be heading the opposite — and wrong — direction! Is this all we Americans really aspire to with our freedom? To acquiesce to being monitored — both in public and in secret — at all times — but otherwise be left unmolested by the authorities, so long as we keep our heads down and obey?? Really???
IMO, it is a real shame that some here seem so ready to compromise away their freedom — either out of fear or complacency! I do not believe this is why millions of Americans gave their lives for this country!Aug 9, 2013 at 11:39 am #2013932
"And yet, here in the US, we seem to be heading the opposite — and wrong — direction! Is this all we Americans really aspire to with our freedom? To acquiesce to being monitored — both in pubLic and in secret — at all times — but otherwise be left unmolested by the authorities, so long as we keep our heads down and obey?? Really???"
Edited out an apparent Freudian slip.Aug 9, 2013 at 12:32 pm #2013947
It doesn't seem so bad when they do illegal searches against bad guys, but the next step is for the government to declare political opponents to be bad guys and do illegal searches against them, like Nixon.Aug 9, 2013 at 2:31 pm #2013987
@owareLocale: Steptoe Butte
Some of the data is being shared between private and government.
Say you make it on a "secret" terrorist watch list due to similarities in name and other stuff with a terrorist suspect. Once on the list you have no way to remove yourself. Imagine now that your name on that list is shared with potential employers, your potential mortgage holder, rental agency, Dunn and Bradstreet etc. Heck, some dog breeders do background checks these days.
Ever visit a mug shot site? Pictures of people arrested. Even if you are later let go uncharged, those pictures remain up until you send the site a couple of hundred dollars. There can be many sites with your mug shot.
(none of these photos are me ;^)
Imagine if those "secret" lists make it to places like that. Shared, hacked or otherwise.
Would you like everyone knowing you attended a Tea Party or Occupy movement event? Applied for a concealed pistol license or checked out a book about Marx at the library? Square Dance on the weekends? How about those photos of people in public. What if untoward people, say pedophiles with positions of power, or certain Southern California Mayors, use video the government collects to choose targets for abuse?Aug 9, 2013 at 2:51 pm #2013992
"I think you should, even if ( and I hear this all the time) " you have nothing to hide"."
At the risk of sounding repetitious: "First they came for the gypsies, and I said nothing because I was not a gypsy. Then they came for the gays, and I said nothing because I was not gay……Aug 9, 2013 at 2:58 pm #2013995
"but the next step is for the government to declare political opponents to be bad guys and do illegal searches against them, like Nixon."
Which is precisely why the process of determining who the bad guys are needs to be transparent. As things stand now, the bad guys are whoever the government says they are, based on secret evidence, rubber stamped by a secret court whose decisions and the legal reasoning behind them are "classified". Habeas corpus is out the window, along with the right to a lawyer, and a trial by a jury of your peers. Is this what
we are willing to accept in return for so called security?Aug 9, 2013 at 4:15 pm #2014024
John SmithBPL Member
@jcar3305Locale: East of Cascades
In 2002 I was flying for a business trip from Alaska to Seattle. No big deal, I had done many of them before and with the new TSA requirements I made sure I got to the airport 2 hours before hand. After all I am a compliant man and want to fit in. So I get there and head to the Alaska Airlines counter. I find out that Alaska Airlines had cancelled my flight and moved me to an earlier flight which was leaving in 20 minutes. They had contacted the reservation agency that my company contracted with but no one got a hold of me. So I arrived early by 2 hours and luckily enough was 20 minutes ahead of the flight I had unknowingly been moved to, but the TSA did not like the fact that I had arrived so close to flight time and that I also had a common name. They searched and searched me and I missed my flight.
Now since I was on a company paid flight I did not make a scene. I stayed true to my nature and was compliant and agreeable. I recognized that the TSA agents were simply doing their jobs but still I missed my flight. I went back to the Alaska Airlines desk and got another flight. Then I went back through security.
On my flight back from Seattle I found out that the TSA put me on a watch list. To this day I get hassled at every air flight. Searched and searched. All because I have a common name and that my flight was moved unbeknownst to me.
Somehow in late 2002 the TSA made it difficult for me to travel freely in my own country. I can trace a direct lineage in this country to it's founding and further back to 1624. But the tenure of my ancestry is not what is important here as it could happen to any citizen regardless of when and where their citizenship began.
I understand the national paranoia that surrounded us from 9/11 but to be honest isn't that really what the Al Quacka really wanted to accomplish. They had to be smart enough to know that they could not beat us in a direct war and the only hope they had was to get us to hide in fear and then to be willing to destroy the dreams of freedom that are the hope of this world.
I believe that if we had given out a national survey in August of 2001 asking how many would be willing to give up the freedoms we have since 9/11 if someone attacked us the way we were, we would have shouted a resounding NO! to the world. Instead we have crawled into our homes and barricaded the doors and folded up the constitution so safely that we can no longer find it or read it.Aug 9, 2013 at 5:07 pm #2014037
Are you saying that anyone with the name John Smith is on the watch list? Amazing!
I have not flown since 9/11/2001.Aug 9, 2013 at 7:24 pm #2014066
"On my flight back from Seattle I found out that the TSA put me on a watch list. To this day I get hassled at every air flight. Searched and searched. All because I have a common name and that my flight was moved unbeknownst to me."
This is precisely what I find so disturbing about the surveillance issue, the lack of accountability or checks and balances. In both cases, the evidence is secret and cannot be challenged, and there is no independent organ of government that either is accountable to. When there is no accountability, be it in personal life or in government, people invariably end up behaving badly. It is in our DNA, and precisely why the Founding Fathers designed a system of government based on checks and balances.Aug 9, 2013 at 7:56 pm #2014071Aug 9, 2013 at 8:12 pm #2014075
This story just gets weirder every week.
If you think one person cannot change the world, think again.Aug 9, 2013 at 9:30 pm #2014085
John SmithBPL Member
@jcar3305Locale: East of Cascades
@Jerry-"Are you saying that anyone with the name John Smith is on the watch list? Amazing!"
No- I am saying that the TSA put 'me' on a watch list due to how common my name is and that isolated incident with Alaska Airlines. Now something on my tickets through Alaska Airlines and Delta indicates to the TSA agents at the security line to evaluate me more thoroughly. I also have to have my id run through AK Airlines and Delta Airlines internal security ever since then as well. This may well extend to other airlines but I have not flown any other airlines. Everyone is courteous and I have tried several times to find out how to get off the Watch List to no avail.
I seriously doubt that everyone named John Smith is on that list.
The point I was trying to make is that we as a nation have given up rights in the name of security. A couple of times a year the TSA announces all the stuff they have found but no one seems to be able to tell us if they have really saved lives or not. Our collective paranoia was and is being taken advantage of by terrorists and the powers that be in our government to create a state in which the government now has more control of our rights.
It matters not what I say via e-mail or phone or texting I should feel confident that the government is not going to comb through my communications just because. They should at least have just cause to search me and my media transmissions. I am not pollyannish enough to think that they don't go through it but they should not and when they get caught they should be held accountable like everyone else.
I was never asked what rights I was willing to give up. No national referendum was held to determine how many rights were going to be restricted or eliminated. At no point did the government come out and offer people a say in the matter. Poof they are gone in the name of national security.
Does anyone really think they have a chance of being returned to us?Aug 10, 2013 at 6:32 am #2014127
A lot of people don't know that in 2011 the Foreign Intelligence Security Court ruled parts of the surveillance programs illegal, but that decision has never been released to the public or congress. So when people say "it's all legal" they are lying.
Not even congresspeople (Rep. Grayson) who have asked to see key FISC documents have been allowed: (from Glenn Greenwald's Aug. 4 Guardian story):
On June 19, Grayson wrote to the House Intelligence Committee requesting several documents relating to media accounts about the NSA. Included among them were FISA court opinions directing the collection of telephone records for Americans, as well as documents relating to the PRISM program.
But just over four weeks later, the Chairman of the Committee, GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, wrote to Grayson informing him that his requests had been denied by a Committee "voice vote".
In a follow-up email exchange, a staff member for Grayson wrote to the Chairman, advising him that Congressman Grayson had "discussed the committee's decision with Ranking Member [Dutch] Ruppersberger on the floor last night, and he told the Congressman that he was unaware of any committee action on this matter." Grayson wanted to know how a voice vote denying him access to these documents could have taken place without the knowledge of the ranking member on the Committee, and asked: "can you please share with us the recorded vote, Member-by-Member?" The reply from this Committee was as follows:
Thanks for your inquiry. The full Committee attends Business Meetings. At our July 18, 2013 Business Meeting, there were seven Democrat Members and nine Republican Members in attendance. The transcript is classified."
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.