Today's irony

[billvon 2,463]

A few days ago, Hagar posted something titled "does this worry you?" about the loss of privacy we will see as the government begins to use its new powers to pry into formerly private transactions, phone calls, computer files etc. Yes, it's all part of the war-on-terror thing, and has been both supported and bashed by both sides. I came across this today:

"The Clinton administration would like the Federal government to have the capability to read any international or domestic computer communications. The FBI wants access to decode, digest, and discuss financial transactions, personal e-mail, and proprietary information sent abroad -- all in the name of national security. To accomplish this, President Clinton would like government agencies to have the keys for decoding all exported U.S. software and Internet communications.

This proposed policy raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy . . . why should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state's interest in effective crime-fighting should never vitiate the citizens' Bill of Rights."

The author? John Ashcroft, of course. Apparently the bill of rights can only safely be abrogated by republicans.

(check out http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1097/ijge/gj-7.htm for the original.)

[quade 3]

Quote

Apparently the bill of rights can only safely be abrogated by republicans.

History is written by the victorious.

On the other hand . . . I can't even conceive of anyone at the NSA (or whatever they're going to be called NOW) actually looking through -my- email. Certainly the volume of email, voice-mail, cell phone traffic . . . data in general is just too overwhelming for them to listen to it -all-.

I can certainly see them targeting certain individuals on watchlists, but I don't think they could even possibly listen/read/decrypt everything -- could they?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[ramon 0]

Seems like government ususally needs a good excuse to scare the populace to get what powers they want. Red scare..etc...WWII "shush.... report your neighbor if they seem strange we're locking japanese in to camps and investiaging everyone".
It took Nixon getting booted from office after Kisinger and his bullshit to get us to fear government again..


Reagan actually declared the war on terrorism against Khadaffi, but we weren't really convinced and we all forgot about it. It has never been called off.

hahahaha

ramon

"Revolution is an abrupt change in the form of misgovernment.", Ambrose Bierce.

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

I don't think they could even possibly listen/read/decrypt everything -- could they?

it's all in the appropriations: a money issue. the answer will lie in an upcoming stack of paper in congress.

steve

[LouDiamond 1]

It always amuses me how people get worked up over this topic in general, be it from any political party.

To answer the question:No, they can't wade through everything, even with technology. Yes they can grab unbelievable amounts of information out of the air but it's the processing thats hard. If you're an average law abiding citizen you have nothing to worry about. They could care less what your saying in your e-mail or which porn sites you frequent. There are laws that also dictate how they have to go about doing business if they intend to read your e-mails or tap your phone, as of now I believe it is still called the FISA law and has several levels it has to go through in order to be approved. Of course this may be changing slightly with the current flux in the Homeland security issue.

I've also noticed that the ones that are always yelling the loudest about this topic, regardless of political parties, are those who have never served in this country's military.

The old adage"the sky is falling" comes to mind as does the conspiracy theories and Aliens in Roswell when I hear how our privacy is being invaded or we're losing civil liberties. Americans have to realize that as a culture we are now going to have to live with what the rest of the world has been dealing with since the late 70's ,early 80's. It's a dangerous world and these are dangerous times. Some things have to change if we plan on being here in the future.

Of course this is all just my opinion. Your welcome to believe in the Aliens if you choose to do so

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Gawain 0]

Quote

To accomplish this, President Clinton would like government agencies to have the keys for decoding all exported U.S. software and Internet communications.

The government already has this ability, that's why there are regulations about the export of DES and 3DES technology. Do you think Nortel is allowed to ship it's high-end VPN gateways to places like China or India if there wasn't a way to make the "security" measures transparent?

The fancy spread-spectrum CDMA technology that's so hard to clone, which you work on....the flick of a switch is all that's required and you can listen in (don't feel bad, that's Qualcomm's development too). Best part, the government doesn't even own that gear, Verizon Wireless or Sprint PCS in-source that staff of engineers.

These things happened long ago. Who was that guy at MIT that created PGP? NSA had him locked up for how long? Because they hadn't been able to break that encryption key?

It's not every message that gets read, it's patterns of content that raise the flag. Patterns of communication from certain points to certain points, etc.

It's not big brother per se, more like a sleeping snoop....if you say it or write it, he/she/it/they will take notice and pay attention for a while.

Then again, maybe the grand scheme is watching me now...or this thread...

The weirdest of all, despite all of this conjecture, I am not inhibited from doing anything.

If you want to really be worried about personal information, it's the credit bureaus that p*ss me off....

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[SudsyFist 0]

Quote

I've also noticed that the ones that are always yelling the loudest about this topic, regardless of political parties, are those who have never served in this country's military.

loudiamond, you sexy latin stud you, you da man!

steve

[dove 0]

Quote

I can certainly see them targeting certain individuals on watchlists, but I don't think they could even possibly listen/read/decrypt everything -- could they?

Hey! A solution to the unemployment problem! I need a job and I could just read everyone else's email from home! Schweet!

Fall in dove.

[LouDiamond 1]

THERE YA GO!...secrets out. Thats how they do it. Dove,you let the cat out of the bag. Ever see those "work from home" signs on the telephone poles? Thats what they do. It's actually a very closely guarded secret with in the government.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[billvon 2,463]

>On the other hand . . . I can't even conceive of anyone at the NSA
> (or whatever they're going to be called NOW) actually looking
> through -my- email.

They don't; programs do. They look for certain patterns in credit card purchases, phone calls (especially overseas) and key words in email. Rumor has it that the NSA has gotten speaker-independent voice recognition to the point where a computer can 'flag' a conversation with key words in it, record it, and store it for later analysis.

The laws protecting your privacy are eroding very fast, both intentionally (i.e. provisions of the patriot act, the homeland security bill and Poindexter's new agency) and due to advancing technology. Conversations on a Ma Bell trunk line were considered privledged; but IP packets on a privately owned router that carry voice are often not given the same level of privledge.

>I can certainly see them targeting certain individuals on watchlists,
> but I don't think they could even possibly listen/read/decrypt
> everything -- could they?

Computers can look at a good deal of it. There are even provisions to automate wiretapping (the lawful intercept initiative) so that computers can essentially snoop on who they want to without human intervention.

[billvon 2,463]

>If you're an average law abiding citizen you have nothing to worry
>about.

Unless you're Arab, or are labeled a terrorist supporter. Several Arabs were arrested and held for months before being released when the government realized they had no evidence. It's nothing new - hundreds of people were blacklisted in the 50's when "communist sympathizer" was the buzzword of the day, as opposed to "terrorist." Back then, McCarthy said exactly the same thing - "if you're a law abiding citizen you have nothing to worry about." Of course, McCarthy got to decide who was the law abiding citizen and who wasn't.

> They could care less what your saying in your e-mail

Tell ya what. Send email to an Arab arms dealer via AOL and ask some serious questions about Sarin precursors; see if you get a phone call (or more likely, get a wiretap and get your computer hard drive copied.)

>The old adage"the sky is falling" comes to mind as does the
> conspiracy theories and Aliens in Roswell when I hear how our
> privacy is being invaded or we're losing civil liberties.

Unfortunately, it's happened in the past. We put US citizens and legal residents in concentration camps during WWII for no reason other than their race. Tell a 15 year old boy hauled off to that concentration camp that the sky's really not falling.

Since then, we've learned. We learned not to hate blacks; took us a long time to do that. We learned that privacy rights are important, and letting the government investigate whoever it wants leads to abuses. We learned that affiliation with a political group is not sufficient to blacklist someone, or haul them before a congressional committee. We've learned that our politicians, even our presidents, can be criminals, and we have to be on the watch for that. We've screwed up in the past; it would be sheer fantasy to imagine we'll never do it again.

Roswell aliens are a fantasy people like to believe. Japanese internment camps, McCarthyism and Watergate are all in the history books. Take your pick as to which you believe.

>Your welcome to believe in the Aliens if you choose to do so.

And you're welcome to ignore the lessons of history, and live in a world where the government is always to be trusted.

[quade 3]

(I know I'm going to get rapped for this but here goes anyway.)

Quote

They don't; programs do.

Exactly, so where's the invasion of privacy?

Follow me on this. If no -person- is reading the stuff and only flagged messages then later get analyzed (which is kinda obvious for technical reasons), then what's the big deal?

Slippery slope? You bet.

Actual problem right now or in the near future? I don't really think so.

Anybody snooping on -me- is going to die of boredom. Well, except the one or two obsessive stalkers I have. Then again, that's not really a problem with the government is it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Since then, we've learned. We learned not to hate blacks; took us a long time to do that. We learned that privacy rights are important, and letting the government investigate whoever it wants leads to abuses.

Yet, there is still racial and ancestral tension. In California the struggle is with illegal immigrants. In Georgia or Alabama, it's the same tension since the end of the Civil War. The tension still exists, so does the "hate".

Quote

We learned that affiliation with a political group is not sufficient to blacklist someone, or haul them before a congressional committee. We've learned that our politicians, even our presidents, can be criminals, and we have to be on the watch for that. We've screwed up in the past; it would be sheer fantasy to imagine we'll never do it again.

Unfortunately, Al-Qaeda and extreme fundamentals of Islam are not a political party. Islam does not integrate with a secular government, Iraq is the only living example right now and Afghanistan is too close to call. Islam is a way of life, both spiritually and in principle of conduct of individuals, communities and governments. Us, and our presidents may screw up, but no matter how bad we try, we haven't been able to break this Republic. We air our dirty laundry, and that will certainly not change.

Quote

Roswell aliens are a fantasy people like to believe. Japanese internment camps, McCarthyism and Watergate are all in the history books. Take your pick as to which you believe.

History does cycle itself over time. I knew as a kid during the hostage crisis in Iran that we would not be able to leave this region alone. While I am ready to accept our role in this affair, the small 1% of extremists brought this on themselves, and we all have to take a bite of the sh*t sandwich THEY MADE.

Quote

And you're welcome to ignore the lessons of history, and live in a world where the government is always to be trusted.

The lessons of history aren't being ignored, but they are being tempered with the circumstances of the day. Iraq used to be our ally. India used to be a significantly opposed to us. We were facing communism in our back yard of central America. The lessons we learned then can not be applied en masse to today. 20 years ago, the threat was the USSR. Our mission was to counter that, at all costs. That meant fudging with the Contras, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, training the mujahadeen, keeping the Mexican democracy in check, putting missiles in Germany, expanding the import platform of oil, etc.

Now, it's far more committal, without a single defined threat. That means keeping an interest in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, throwing a hellfire missile in Yemen here, dropping a bomb in Iraq there, putting troops in the Philippines, and sharing intelligence with countries that do not have the liberties we do.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 2,463]

>Follow me on this. If no -person- is reading the stuff and only
> flagged messages then later get analyzed (which is kinda obvious
> for technical reasons), then what's the big deal?

What does a person have to do with it? If you get a traffic ticket from a traffic camera, do you not care because no actual officer wrote you the ticket? If you are fired because a computer, rather than a person, collected the 'evidence' that launched an investigation into you, does that make it better?

The issue is government surveillance and what they do with the data. If the original protections against wiretap and interception of correspondence were in place, no big deal - just the usual amount of wariness would suffice. Those protections have just been weakened. Now it's a slightly bigger deal, and we have to be slightly more wary that the government does not abuse their newly granted power. Historically, they have - quite often.

>Anybody snooping on -me- is going to die of boredom.

Well, you're definitely the right nationality to not get noticed.

[quade 3]

Quote

What does a person have to do with it? If you get a traffic ticket from a traffic camera, do you not care because no actual officer wrote you the ticket? If you are fired because a computer, rather than a person, collected the 'evidence' that launched an investigation into you, does that make it better?

No. But then I take responsibility for my actions and believe (perhaps naively) that unless I actually do something wrong, that there's probably nothing that I should have to worry about.

Quote

The issue is government surveillance and what they do with the data.

Which assumes there's data that's actually worth looking at.

On the other hand, my -work- computer has a hellofalotta more potential for getting me into trouble than I think I ever need to worry about from the government. And, they have far greater powers to monitor -anything- I write or talk about than the government could -ever- hope for.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[blueshrew 0]

Quote

Unfortunately, Al-Qaeda and extreme fundamentals of Islam are not a political party. Islam does not integrate with a secular government, Iraq is the only living example right now and Afghanistan is too close to call. Islam is a way of life, both spiritually and in principle of conduct of individuals, communities and governments. Us, and our presidents may screw up, but no matter how bad we try, we haven't been able to break this Republic. We air our dirty laundry, and that will certainly not change.

No, Islam is not what you heard it is. It is and stays a religion. Al-Qaida is a fundamentalist organization whose acts oppose to everything in that religion. As much as the media loves to say this is the core of Islam, it is everything but. Maybe the "little ones" have been brainwashed to think they are acting for their religion, but the big fish will certainly have other things on their mind.
As for Iraq, it is a dictatorship whose politics don't really associate with any religion.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

No, Islam is not what you heard it is. It is and stays a religion. Al-Qaida is a fundamentalist organization whose acts oppose to everything in that religion. As much as the media loves to say this is the core of Islam, it is everything but. Maybe the "little ones" have been brainwashed to think they are acting for their religion, but the big fish will certainly have other things on their mind.
As for Iraq, it is a dictatorship whose politics don't really associate with any religion.

I was not trying to link Al-Qaeda and Islam as a common entity or as entities with common goals. I could have communicated that more clearly.

As for Iraq's government, it's the fact that the regime there does not advocate religion of one type or another, it's secular, like the US govt, Israeli govt, English govt, etc... Iran on the other hand is not a secular government, it's a theocratic republic based on codified Islamic principles of government. This is what I was trying to convey. There is a foundation within the faith itself which determines personal spiritual growth, as well as a structure of government.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[blueshrew 0]

Quote

As for Iraq's government, it's the fact that the regime there does not advocate religion of one type or another, it's secular, like the US govt, Israeli govt, English govt, etc... Iran on the other hand is not a secular government, it's a theocratic republic based on codified Islamic principles of government. This is what I was trying to convey. There is a foundation within the faith itself which determines personal spiritual growth, as well as a structure of government.

Agreed, but on the other hand, I don't think that anyone who is familiar with the culture and religion in that region would see the Iraqi government as an extremist islamic government. I think Saddam is seen more as an extreme capitalist (sounds weird, I know).
And believe me, he's not a popular man in neighbouring countries, but I guess no one would dare mess with him.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Sorry to re-direct this thread back to the original subject...its a timezone disadvantage I suffer from..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2517647.stm

The Chinese have already started detaining people for internet subversion. Maybe some time in the not too distant future, we could be sharing a cell for posting pics of president Bush with capped binos, or reading from upside down books....

Well, at least we woudln't have to converse online about things anymore..

Can you get a dial up connection from Guantanamo bay?

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[skreamer 1]

Quote

Can you get a dial up connection from Guantanamo bay?

In your case it'll probably be the Outer Hebrides!

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Wouldn't be so bad, there is an 850 ft overhanging cliff out there.......

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[skreamer 1]

Yeah, with reeeeeeeally warm water below it...

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Silly Skreamy boy, the water around the Outer Hebrides is probably the warmest coastal water in the UK. Except the cooling water outfall at Sellafield.
Its a little thingie called the Gulf Stream which brings nice warm water from Florida to us.
Hence palm trees on the north west coast of Scotland!!! You don't believe me do you?
Its not the water, its the locals that I would be worried about. Och Aye!
But we detract, the cliff is landlocked.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[rhino 0]

This is a double edged sword. While I value my rights I also value my life and my childrens life..

I do feel that our basic right to privacy has gone out the window already. I think that the Government should be able to monitor ALL communications of non- US citizens and the communications of those that have been placed on some sort of watch list.

But I don't agree with them being able to have all of our private information. Fact of the matter is if they want it they will get it and their is nothing we can do other than start buying everything with cash and money orders. We shouldn't have to do this.

Have a great morning!!

Rhino

[skreamer 1]

Do they have any sheep on this island?

(what time is the next ferry?)