Court order to Verizon to turn over mass data to the NSA

[.blank cd]

If Obama flat out shot a civilian Blank would have an excuse on why he did it or say it's not entirely about Obama. Jeez dude come on....

In all seriousness, I'm not gonna come in here and condemn something I don't know about. No one really knows what is going on, including everyone in here, as everything is pretty much classified at this point, pso its foolish to come to a conclusion as to how alarmed anyone should be.

Sure, maybe I'm not a big fan of the government having everyone's telephone numbers, but I'm gonna bet money they're not gonna sit around and prank call people, and Im sure there isn't anyone in the back of the White House rubbing one out to the dick pics on my phone or anyone else's for that matter. I've grown past this whole "scary evil big bad government" theory. There's no evidence for it so I'm not gonna perpetuate it. You can call me a liberal commie with his head in the sand if you want, but if Bush or Romney were in the hot seat, Id have said the same thing.

It's too easy to chalk everything up to "Obama is an socialistkenyanmuslimcommunistliberalatheist", and frankly it gets old hearing it over and over again. I'd much rather figure out what's really going on.

[.blank cd]

I like blanks response. " nothing to see here, move along... This is business as usual..."

Typical response from you. "He doesn't think like us so his head is in the sandAHAHAHAHAHALIB"

The hive mind.

[David88vert]

I see nothing about the secretary of defense's involvement after the 4th time reading the article. I have seen that the administration has yet to comment. So what has the SoD told you that they haven't told CNN yet? Lol

You are either trolling, or literally have no concept of how the US government agencies report.
Do you even know that the Secretary of Defense answers to the President? Anything that the NSA does falls under the direction of the DoD, the Secretary, and the President.

Read the 4 pager for yourself:
Verizon forced to hand over telephone data

BTW - Verizon Business Services is not consumer services, so why exactly does the US government need to throw a broad net over all internet communication done by domestic businesses? You can't say that is related to the Boston bombings, which would be consumer services, and would be limited to a geographic area and specific numbers. This is a massive amount of data collection. I am highly familiar with how the telecommunications industry segments its service offerings.

Now, let me make this clear - citizens own and operate businesses, so that is how it affects individuals. The order targeting Verizon Business Customers should be business communications, not individual consumer cellphones, but of course, individuals work for businesses.
From a legal standpoint, it is quite likely that the NSA is NOT violating any "individual rights" if they are targeting businesses, but we should still be concerned about the expansion of privacy intrusion.

[David88vert]

I'm fine with blaming Obama as long as an equal amount of ire is directed at everyone else who deserves it. How many others are being held accountable in this thread so far? Everyone in this forum has a GA representative who voted for the PATRIOT act, yet not a single person here is giving them shit for it. Why not? As GA residents, they are supposed to represent us more directly than Obama!

The NSA falls under the Executive branch, and Congress is already setting up hearings for next week on it.
FBI Direct Robert Mueller will be asked about the matter, when he appears next week before the House Judiciary Committee.
The report will also be the subject of an upcoming classified briefing by Attorney General Eric Holder to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Its chairman, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, is calling for a similar closed-door briefing for the entire U.S. Senate.

[David88vert]

Im surprised Verizon didnt say FUCK YOU and take it to the supreme court

Bandwidth is controlled by the US government. If you want to stay in business with the least amount of problems, you cooperate.

[David88vert]

In all seriousness, I'm not gonna come in here and condemn something I don't know about. No one really knows what is going on, including everyone in here, as everything is pretty much classified at this point, pso its foolish to come to a conclusion as to how alarmed anyone should be.

Sure, maybe I'm not a big fan of the government having everyone's telephone numbers, but I'm gonna bet money they're not gonna sit around and prank call people, and Im sure there isn't anyone in the back of the White House rubbing one out to the dick pics on my phone or anyone else's for that matter. I've grown past this whole "scary evil big bad government" theory. There's no evidence for it so I'm not gonna perpetuate it. You can call me a liberal commie with his head in the sand if you want, but if Bush or Romney were in the hot seat, Id have said the same thing.

It's too easy to chalk everything up to "Obama is an socialistkenyanmuslimcommunistliberalatheist", and frankly it gets old hearing it over and over again. I'd much rather figure out what's really going on.

This is a much more reasonable post.
What you don't understand is that the telecommunications companies have massive databases on their customers, with a lot of Sensitive Private Information data (SPI). The US government now wants full, unfettered access to all of that data. There is no reasonable explanation coming with this request, instead, the request itself is being sealed. That should raise a red flag to you just by itself.
No one has said that the government will use the information with bad intent; however, if you look at history, you will see that the majority of privacy intrusions are not to the benefit of the citizens, but rather benefit the attempts to consolidate power by those currently in power. This is not just an "Obama thing" or a "Democratic thing" - this is a government intrusion, and envelopes both party platforms.

[David88vert]

Typical response from you. "He doesn't think like us so his head is in the sandAHAHAHAHAHALIB"

The hive mind.

Would you say that the concern of Congress, the ACLU, the media, and the citizens is all from "the hive mind"? Do you realize that so far, you have only three people that seem to agree with your assessment - and that would be Saxby Chambliss, Dianne Feinstein, and the White House spokesman, Josh Earnest.

[.blank cd]

Would you say that the concern of Congress, the ACLU, the media, and the citizens is all from "the hive mind"? Do you realize that so far, you have only three people that seem to agree with your assessment - and that would be Saxby Chambliss, Dianne Feinstein, and the White House spokesman, Josh Earnest.

Don't forget the NSA, the FBI (and I guess according to you, the rest of the DOJ), and some judges.

[BanginJimmy]

Sorry. Not always. This is how its been for the past couple hundred years. Nothing changed when Obama came into town. Unless they changed that part in the constitution about the separation of powers recently and I didn't hear about it. Lol. But you know how the liberal left is, always secretly changing the constitution. Damn liberals.

You might want to check out your civics book again. EVERY SINGLE issue that has come up under the Obama admin has come from the Executive Branch. That means every agency currently facing a scandal is is under the direct control of an Obama appointee.

I haven't seen an instance of that happening outside of the recent manufactured crises.

Then you obviously havent been paying attention. I can think of 7 or 8 that are running right now and none of them are 'maufactured', they are all legit issues. Benghazi, IRS non profit branch, IRS audits, EPA, 3 from the DOJ (Fast and Furious, Journalists targeted, Verizon). There are a couple more out there but I am drawing a blank right now. The only ones that have made the level of scandal are F&F and the IRS non profit branch. The others are either being pretty much ignored or are more politics than anything.

Waterboarding is very much in fact torture. We all know that.

We dont all know that. I personally dont consider it torture.

I've grown past this whole "scary evil big bad government" theory. There's no evidence for it so I'm not gonna perpetuate it.

Are you honestly saying there is no evidence that govt agencies can and will target political enemies when they want to?

[David88vert]

Don't forget the NSA, the FBI (and I guess according to you, the rest of the DOJ), and some judges.

The NSA speaking up for its own interest? That is your supporting argument?
The FBI hadn't issued a statement that I saw yesterday - but they will have to soon. I suspect that they would support an extension of power that would be given to them though, don't you?
The DOJ has been very clear that they want to expand their abilities for surveillance for a long time. Nothing new there, but I didn't see a statement from them or any judges yesterday on this issue.

[eraser4g63]

"The hive mindset" if that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

[David88vert]

More details are surfacing : Why the Government Won't Stop Collecting American Phone Records - ABC News

Not just all phone records, but all internet traffic as well are being monitored, and the WH is openly defending it.

Here's a question:
Do you think that all WH administrations that will have access to these abilities will voluntarily choose not to exploit them for political gain? An example would be a Republican President gathering records of calls of Democrat President-elect candidates and their Congressional and financial supporters. Do you really believe that wouldn't happen.

Let's remember that a certain SENATOR Obama made a very public speech about Bush's data collection through blanket phone call and internet data mining. just read a transcript of his own words.
http://obamaspeeches.com/041-The-PAT...ama-Speech.htm

[.blank cd]

"The hive mindset" if that's not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

Do you know what hive mind means? Lol

[Vteckidd]

The Obama administration has already shown it will use arms of their agencies to target and suppress opposition support. I do not trust them.


Not aware of Bush doing it with the data mining mentioned before.

[eraser4g63]

Nope blank don't have a clue what it is, however I am a registered bee keeper with the state of Georgia, I have hives registers with the state of Georgia and hold the business license for Jean Stevens Apiaries and Farms and I am part of a co-op that provides raw honey to retailers. ;-)

[eraser4g63]

By the way blank if your queen was is one of my hives I would have squashed him and replaced hime him with one that was actually productive.

[.blank cd]

The Obama administration has already shown it will use arms of their agencies to target and suppress opposition support. I do not trust them.

LOL. How is the Obama administration suppressing opposition? There is no opposition, Obama isnt going anywhere, and "conservative" voices are hardly silent. I hope you don't mean the manufactured IRS crisis that's falling apart in front of their faces.

http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/featu...257B7B004C0D90

The more and more I hear the falsehoods, the less and less I feel sorry for conservatives. That ended up being the opposite of suppression. It made them louder for no reason. But the IRS thing has run its course at this point.

Granting your "side" the majority of non profit apps, and then when applications from your "side" increase exponentially, more of them get rejected. Sorry. It's a stat problem. Investigating and denying your free tax ride applications isn't anywhere even remotely close to opposition suppression. It is however a good way to devalue the voices of opposition who were ACTUALLY being suppressed.

[Echonova]

Skip to 4:30

[BanginJimmy]

LOL. How is the Obama administration suppressing opposition? There is no opposition, Obama isnt going anywhere, and "conservative" voices are hardly silent. I hope you don't mean the manufactured IRS crisis that's falling apart in front of their faces.

Tax Analysts -- News Analysis -- Substantial Minority of Scrutinized EOs Were Not Conservative

The more and more I hear the falsehoods, the less and less I feel sorry for conservatives. That ended up being the opposite of suppression. It made them louder for no reason. But the IRS thing has run its course at this point.

Granting your "side" the majority of non profit apps, and then when applications from your "side" increase exponentially, more of them get rejected. Sorry. It's a stat problem. Investigating and denying your free tax ride applications isn't anywhere even remotely close to opposition suppression. It is however a good way to devalue the voices of opposition who were ACTUALLY being suppressed.

You really only do see what you want to see dont you?

IRS employees: Washington IRS official Carter Hull oversaw targeting | The Daily Caller

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95605X20130607


If anything about this seems manufactured, it is the outrage Obama tried to show. Every time they pull back a layer of this story it gets closer to the top. It also proved beyond any doubt that the Admin has been lying the entire time.

[Browning151]

You really only do see what you want to see dont you?

IRS employees: Washington IRS official Carter Hull oversaw targeting | The Daily Caller

Misfired 2010 email alerted IRS officials in Washington of targeting | Reuters


If anything about this seems manufactured, it is the outrage Obama tried to show. Every time they pull back a layer of this story it gets closer to the top. It also proved beyond any doubt that the Admin has been lying the entire time.

I was just reading an article along those lines from the AJC and was coming over here to post it.

Blank seems to think that only the "dumb closed minded republicans" are outraged by the recent scandals and that any evidence to the contrary is just simply manufactured and fake, and all these things are small potatoes and not to be worried about according to him.

[BanginJimmy]

I was just reading an article along those lines from the AJC and was coming over here to post it.

Blank seems to think that only the "dumb closed minded republicans" are outraged by the recent scandals and that any evidence to the contrary is just simply manufactured and fake, and all these things are small potatoes and not to be worried about according to him.

When the New York Times Editorial Board says this admin has no credibility, you know they have troubles.

Black will probably come on here and say the NYT is just a right wing rag though so it cant be trusted.

[bu villain]

The NSA falls under the Executive branch, and Congress is already setting up hearings for next week on it.
FBI Direct Robert Mueller will be asked about the matter, when he appears next week before the House Judiciary Committee.
The report will also be the subject of an upcoming classified briefing by Attorney General Eric Holder to the Senate Appropriations Committee. Its chairman, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, is calling for a similar closed-door briefing for the entire U.S. Senate.

The thing is, what they did is probably completely legal under the PATRIOT act. Now just because it is legal doesn't mean it is ethical which is why I do believe the executive branch deserves some of the blame. But congress passed the act which allowed this unethical behavior. They need to be held responsible too and I don't see anyone in here directing their anger towards their elected representative who helped make this overreach possible in the first place.

[.blank cd]

You really only do see what you want to see dont you?

IRS employees: Washington IRS official Carter Hull oversaw targeting | The Daily Caller

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95605X20130607

No, I don't see what I want. Everyone calls it targeting. Targeting targeting targeting. When you actually look into what the "targeting" is, it's actually not targeting at all.

[David88vert]

The thing is, what they did is probably completely legal under the PATRIOT act. Now just because it is legal doesn't mean it is ethical which is why I do believe the executive branch deserves some of the blame. But congress passed the act which allowed this unethical behavior. They need to be held responsible too and I don't see anyone in here directing their anger towards their elected representative who helped make this overreach possible in the first place.

It is legal; however, it was misrepresented multiple times to Congress including recently. Watch the video on the ABC News page, and you can see for yourself how Congress was lied to concerning how it would be implemented.



As for blank's saying that the buck doesn't stop with the President, Obama DISAGREES with blank. He defended his position on it today:
Obama: ‘Nobody Is Listening to Your Phone Calls’ - ABC News

He is correct that no one is listening to the actual call - that would take too long. The metadata that he is referring to for phone calls is correct; however, it is not the same for internet communications and email.

[bu villain]

It is legal; however, it was misrepresented multiple times to Congress including recently. Watch the video on the ABC News page, and you can see for yourself how Congress was lied to concerning how it would be implemented.

Again, the executive branch deserves some anger but I don't think congress is off the hook because the executive branch promised to not use all the overreaching authority congress gave to them. Naivety on Congress's part is not a good enough excuse.

[BanginJimmy]

No, I don't see what I want. Everyone calls it targeting. Targeting targeting targeting. When you actually look into what the "targeting" is, it's actually not targeting at all.

Then what do you call it when only groups with conservative terms or principles laid out in their applications have to deal with such heavy scrutiny? Remember that no groups with liberal terms or principles on their applications seemed to have the same problems.

[David88vert]

Again, the executive branch deserves some anger but I don't think congress is off the hook because the executive branch promised to not use all the overreaching authority congress gave to them. Naivety on Congress's part is not a good enough excuse.

I agree with you on this, if Congress had actually thought this through, they would have identified the probable abuse of power. After all, it was mentioned as a distinct probability for days when they first started discussing the implementation of the plan.

[RandomGuy]

Chinese hacking only part of the story – Global Public Square - CNN.com Blogs

[Echonova]

If we can search every American's phone data and email without their knowledge/consent... Why can't we profile???



Seems like a much better solution.

[BanginJimmy]

If we can search every American's phone data and email without their knowledge/consent... Why can't we profile???



Seems like a much better solution.

Cause profiling could unfairly target innocent people.


And if you are white, profiling makes you a racist.

[.blank cd]

As for blank's saying that the buck doesn't stop with the President, Obama DISAGREES with blank. He defended his position on it today:
Obama: ‘Nobody Is Listening to Your Phone Calls’ - ABC News

LOL. Nothing in that link suggest he disagrees with me. The fact is that the buck doesn't always stop with him. This is in the constitution. There isn't a debate about it. Lol.

[.blank cd]

Then what do you call it when only groups with conservative terms or principles laid out in their applications have to deal with such heavy scrutiny?

Conservative groups aren't the only ones subject to investigations.

Remember that no groups with liberal terms or principles on their applications seemed to have the same problems.

Actually, more conservative groups got approved free tax rides than liberals in that given period of time. That's what Im trying to say. It's not a "targeting" problem. It's a statistics problem and its a problem of happenstance. This didnt become an issue until after the election when the new tea party emerged. The number of applications exploded, so the number of investigations increased in a short period of time. The people who've brought it up and blown it up in the media have decided to focus on the explosion of investigations and not on what caused them. As a result, it looks like a target instead of what it really is: happenstance.

[Echonova]

Cause profiling could unfairly target innocent people.

LIKE ALL OF AMERICA?!?!?!?

[Browning151]

Conservative groups aren't the only ones subject to investigations.

Actually, more conservative groups got approved free tax rides than liberals in that given period of time. That's what Im trying to say. It's not a "targeting" problem. It's a statistics problem and its a problem of happenstance. This didnt become an issue until after the election when the new tea party emerged. The number of applications exploded, so the number of investigations increased in a short period of time. The people who've brought it up and blown it up in the media have decided to focus on the explosion of investigations and not on what caused them. As a result, it looks like a target instead of what it really is: happenstance.

Nothing more really needs to be said about this post other than one of your own personal favorite lines:

Facepalm.

[David88vert]

LOL. Nothing in that link suggest he disagrees with me. The fact is that the buck doesn't always stop with him. This is in the constitution. There isn't a debate about it. Lol.

Let's review your previous comments in this thread.

... the Obama administration has very little to do with this ...

... the order comes from the NSA, NOT the Obama administration...

... what does this have to do with Obama?

...Still trying to figure out what Obamas role in this was ....

Now from the article:
"President Obama today dismissed the “hype” surrounding his administration’s secret surveillance of Americans’ phone records and the nation’s Internet activity and defended the programs as key to protecting national security."

And his own words:
"I came in with a healthy skepticism about these programs. My team evaluated them. We scrubbed them thoroughly. We actually expanded some of the oversight, increased some of safeguards. But my assessment and my team's assessment was that they help us prevent terrorist attacks. And the modest encroachments on the privacy that are involved in getting phone numbers or duration without a name attached and not looking at content, that on net, it was worth us doing."

He sure seems to be taking the responsibility. Everyone else but you sees that clearly.

[.blank cd]

Nothing more really needs to be said about this post other than one of your own personal favorite lines:

Facepalm.

Sorry that anything other than what they feed you on Fox News is difficult to understand.

[Browning151]

Sorry that anything other than what they feed you on Fox News is difficult to understand.

lol, I couldn't even tell you the last time I watched any of those cable "news" networks, or even listened to any meaningful amount of talk radio, but believe whatever you want. You're pretty good at that.

Also, see the post above yours, David pretty much broke it down for you since you can't seem to grasp it.

[.blank cd]

lol, I couldn't even tell you the last time I watched any of those cable "news" networks, or even listened to any meaningful amount of talk radio, but believe whatever you want. You're pretty good at that.

Also, see the post above yours, David pretty much broke it down for you since you can't seem to grasp it.

I saw it. Nothing in his post has contradicted what I've said.

[Browning151]

I saw it. Nothing in his post has contradicted what I've said.

You've got to be trolling at this point.

[BanginJimmy]

Conservative groups aren't the only ones subject to investigations.

Of course not, but they were the only ones investigated.

Actually, more conservative groups got approved free tax rides than liberals in that given period of time. That's what Im trying to say. It's not a "targeting" problem. It's a statistics problem and its a problem of happenstance. This didnt become an issue until after the election when the new tea party emerged. The number of applications exploded, so the number of investigations increased in a short period of time. The people who've brought it up and blown it up in the media have decided to focus on the explosion of investigations and not on what caused them. As a result, it looks like a target instead of what it really is: happenstance.

Can you find a mention of just 1 liberal group that received ANY scrutiny in this same time period? Can you find just 1 case in which a liberal group was sent one of these questionnaires? I havent heard a single one and I know for a fact that would have been speaking up loudly by now to try to prove it wasnt targeting. Can you explain why damn near every statement given by the IRS on this issue has turned out to be a lie? Can you explain why the IRS employee in Cinnci was acting under the direct orders of Carter Hull, who works in the DC office, yet everyone else from DC seems to know nothing about this?

I could go on for hours about the IRS and no one can answer the questions because the IRS is stonewalling and/or flat out lying at every turn. Yet you still this this is just a little coincidence. Ignore the man behind the curtain.