|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cellular phones topics > December 2005 > Re: This Call COULD Be Monitored ...No big deal
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: This Call COULD Be Monitored ...No big deal
|
|
| Mortimer Schnurd 2005-12-18, 5:48 pm |
|
"Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
> Keep in mind that if you have 250 million Americans making phone calls,
> you would need another 250 million people to listen in on all those calls!
>
> So I should think that there would be a limit to how many calls they could
> listen in on.
>
>
This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a court order
or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys". Before this law
enforcement/government needed a court order ON EACH LINE.LE/GOV'T have a lot
of restrictions on monitoring as it is right now.
Telephone carriers and cellular companies DO NOT allow any monitoring
without a judge signed court order as of this time. It takes time to get one
and you cant use ANY of information gleened before said order. In fact the
LE agent will get burned for doing so.
What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about. I seriously doubt they
will listen to people randomly. The ones they will listen in on are already
targeted.
GOV'T/Police/Sheriff couldnt care less and don't have the time to listen in
or investigate your regular personal lives.
| |
|
| If I was listening in on calls, I would want a list of everyone who has
appeared on the Jerry Springer show!
I would think these calls would be the most interesting to listen to....
(I'm afraid my calls would be quite boring to listen in on.)
| |
| ameijers 2005-12-18, 5:48 pm |
|
"Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote in message
news:z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
calls![color=darkred
]
could[color=darkred]
> This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
> By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a court order
> or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys". Before this law
> enforcement/government needed a court order ON EACH LINE.LE/GOV'T have a
lot
> of restrictions on monitoring as it is right now.
> Telephone carriers and cellular companies DO NOT allow any monitoring
> without a judge signed court order as of this time. It takes time to get
one
> and you cant use ANY of information gleened before said order. In fact the
> LE agent will get burned for doing so.
> What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
(Snip)
You just don't get it, do you?
I have nothing to hide, have security clearances up the wazoo, actually work
for the government, and I STILL don't want them to have the power to listen
in whenever the whim suits them. The government needs to be kept on a very
short leash, to keep them out of mischief.
I would refer you to Mr. Franklin's famous quote:
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security
will deserve neither and lose both.
aem sends...
| |
| clifto 2005-12-18, 5:48 pm |
| ameijers wrote:
> I would refer you to Mr. Franklin's famous quote:
> Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security
> will deserve neither and lose both.
Rewritten to suit your purposes, of course.
Bartleby gives:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Bartleby also notes that a plaque on the Statue of Liberty gives a
slightly modified version:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Variations appear, but always include "ESSENTIAL liberty" (emphasis mine)
and "TEMPORARY safety".
Thanks again for the leftist spin rewrite.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
| |
| Steve 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| > What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
Presumably, the people arguing this position have no objection to
having the government listen in on their calls. After all, they're
righteous, upstanding citizens who would never consider doing anything
illegal, so what's the problem?
Well, let's try looking at situations where it might be a problem,
even for those types. I'll start off with one example, feel free to
add others.
Your mother is 94 years old. She has terminal cancer. She wants to
die at home, not at a hospital or hospice. You're her caretaker.
She's had enough of the pain, she's now begging you to assist in her
death. This is an agonizing decision, and you'd like to first discuss
it with your siblings, who unfortunately live several thousand miles
away. Unfortunately, the act would be illegal. Even if you have no
intention of actually doing it, but simply want the comfort of
discussing the situation by phone with people you love, you hesitate -
what if the police decide that in order to prevent a possible crime,
she needs to be immediately removed to a hospital?
--
To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes
may be the biggest mistake of all.
....Peter McWilliams
| |
| Baldur 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| In article <1134927937.490152.50700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
"Williams" <c-williams3@lycos.com> wrote:
>
> yeah if you're a registered republican who regularly
contributes to the
> party and respects your party leaders and has no objections to
the
> illegal and unconstitutional activities committed by the
party, then
> you have nothing to worry about...
>
> the problem is warrantless spying on u.s. citizens is
illegal... it's
> ok in china or russia, but this is america.
There's no difference anymore.
-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.
| |
| Shawn Hirn 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>,
"Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote:
> "Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
> This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
> By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a court order
> or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys". Before this law
> enforcement/government needed a court order ON EACH LINE.LE/GOV'T have a lot
> of restrictions on monitoring as it is right now.
> Telephone carriers and cellular companies DO NOT allow any monitoring
> without a judge signed court order as of this time. It takes time to get one
> and you cant use ANY of information gleened before said order. In fact the
> LE agent will get burned for doing so.
> What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about. I seriously doubt they
> will listen to people randomly. The ones they will listen in on are already
> targeted.
> GOV'T/Police/Sheriff couldnt care less and don't have the time to listen in
> or investigate your regular personal lives.
Really? What if someone you know, such as a roommate, business
associate, or sibling has caught the government's interest? Considering
how inaccurate the federal intelligence apparatus is, don't hold your
breath thinking that they won't spy on you just because YOU THINK you
have nothing to hide. This is the same group that can't find WMD in Iraq
and who still has yet to apprehend bin Laden.
Bottom line, American citizens should not be spied upon for any reason
without a court order, period.
| |
| Shawn Hirn 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| In article <p3sg73-m2g.ln1@remote.clifto.com>,
clifto <clifto@clifto.com> wrote:
> ameijers wrote:
>
> Rewritten to suit your purposes, of course.
>
> Bartleby gives:
>
> Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
> temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
>
> Bartleby also notes that a plaque on the Statue of Liberty gives a
> slightly modified version:
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety.
>
> Variations appear, but always include "ESSENTIAL liberty" (emphasis mine)
> and "TEMPORARY safety".
>
> Thanks again for the leftist spin rewrite.
Uh! The quote still applies, regardless of which version you go with and
neither version supports what Bush and his cohorts are doing.
| |
| Thialfi 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| In article <p3sg73-m2g.ln1@remote.clifto.com>
clifto <clifto@clifto.com> wrote:
>
> ameijers wrote:
little security[color=darkr
ed]
>
> Rewritten to suit your purposes, of course.
>
> Bartleby gives:
>
> Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a
little
> temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
>
> Bartleby also notes that a plaque on the Statue of Liberty
gives a
> slightly modified version:
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety.
>
> Variations appear, but always include "ESSENTIAL liberty"
(emphasis mine)
> and "TEMPORARY safety".
>
> Thanks again for the leftist spin rewrite.
A distinction without a difference.
What's clear is that the greatest danger to American democracy
today is George 'WMD' Bush.
>
> --
> If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential
nomination,
> my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang
Zemin.
You chickenhawks DO seem to despise American war heros, don't
you?
| |
|
| Mortimer Schnurd said the following on 18/12/2005 05:32 pm:
> What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about. I seriously doubt they
> will listen to people randomly. The ones they will listen in on are already
> targeted.
Maybe you could go get someone tattoo that to your forehead...
preferably with a pneumatic drill.
| |
| Fafnir 2005-12-18, 11:48 pm |
| In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
"Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote:
>
>
> "Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
phone calls,[color=darkred
]
all those calls![color=darkred
]
calls they could[color=darkred]
> This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
> By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a
court order
> or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys".
So what you're saying is that under the "Patriot Act" the
Watergate burglary would have been perfectly legal.
I suspect that you're right.
| |
| Stephen K. Gielda 2005-12-19, 5:48 pm |
| In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>,
Mort@aarp.com says...
>
> "Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
> This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
> By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a court order
> or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys". Before this law
> enforcement/government needed a court order ON EACH LINE.LE/GOV'T have a lot
> of restrictions on monitoring as it is right now.
> Telephone carriers and cellular companies DO NOT allow any monitoring
> without a judge signed court order as of this time. It takes time to get one
> and you cant use ANY of information gleened before said order. In fact the
> LE agent will get burned for doing so.
> What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
If the government has nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear
from proper judicial oversight.
/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org
| |
| AllEmailDeletedImmediately 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
|
"Stephen K. Gielda" <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote in message
news:MPG. 1e10893026690292989c
26@news.newsreader.com...
> In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>,
> Mort@aarp.com says...
it's done with computers. via mae west and mae east.
[color=darkred]
>
> If the government has nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear
> from proper judicial oversight.
>
> /steve
> --
> The Missing Amendment
> The Right To Privacy
> http://www.themissingamendment.org
| |
| Gordon Burditt 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| >What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
>you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
The only people who have "nothing to hide" are either extremely
poor or dead. No, actually, even these people can be victims of
identity theft. The living need to avoid being harvested for organ
transplants. And the dead might be upset about grave robbers if
they know about them.
Legally, you're required to hide certain parts of your body when
you are out in public, and if you have clothes, someone wants to
steal them.
Most people have a LOT of things to hide: their money, SSN, where
they keep their keys, any valuable possessions (like toilet paper
or a half a can of beans), account numbers, passwords, etc.
YOU might have a lot to worry about if you make a phone call to someone
who happens to be living with a terrorist, and the government finds
out about it, even if you have no idea this person is even living with
anyone.
Gordon L. Burditt
| |
| i_will_tossit@yahoo.com 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| "Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote:
>What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
>you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about.
The honest, ethical, rational, and sane have _much_ to hide from the
dishonest, unethical, irrational, and insane.
| |
| Notan 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| Gordon Burditt wrote:
>
>
> The only people who have "nothing to hide" are either extremely
> poor or dead. No, actually, even these people can be victims of
> identity theft. The living need to avoid being harvested for organ
> transplants.
>
> <snip>
If you're living in the US, you pulled this last line out of your XXX.
As someone who works in the field, I know.
Notan
| |
| Gordon Burditt 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| >> >What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
>
>If you're living in the US, you pulled this last line out of your XXX.
>
>As someone who works in the field, I know.
You work in the BLACK-MARKET human organ trade? And admit it? in
public?
No, I wasn't talking about honest mistakes being made about whether
you are still alive and taking organs too soon.
I suppose it is more likely in the US that someone would want you
for food than for organ transplants. Jeffery Dahmer (not sure about
spelling), for instance. Plenty of sickos out there.
And just because I'm in the US now, doesn't mean I will be in 24
hours. Never can tell when GWB will grab me by mistake and send
me off to some other country to be tortured, thinking I'm a terrorist.
Gordon L. Burditt
| |
| GEO Me@home.here 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:09:47 -0500, Stephen K. Gielda
<steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>If the government has nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear
>from proper judicial oversight.
LOL
Right on!
Geo
| |
| Notan 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
| Gordon Burditt wrote:
>
>
> You work in the BLACK-MARKET human organ trade? And admit it? in
> public?
>
> No, I wasn't talking about honest mistakes being made about whether
> you are still alive and taking organs too soon.
>
> I suppose it is more likely in the US that someone would want you
> for food than for organ transplants. Jeffery Dahmer (not sure about
> spelling), for instance. Plenty of sickos out there.
>
> <snip>
I don't have a clue what you're talking about and, apparently,
neither do you.
Goodnight, Gordon.
Notan
| |
| AllEmailDeletedImmediately 2005-12-19, 11:48 pm |
|
"GEO" <Me@home.here> wrote in message
news:43a74505.40992889@news.ucalgary.ca...[color=darkred]
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:09:47 -0500, Stephen K. Gielda
> <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
>
>
unfortunately, the courts are in on it. they have overstepped their bounds
and
have begun to make laws, which is constitutionally the provision of the
congress.
one of the founding fathers indicated that we'd be in deep doodoo if the
courts
ever overstepped their bounds like that. maybe i can find the quote.
| |
| Bob Ward 2005-12-20, 2:48 am |
| On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:07:57 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.com> wrote:
>Gordon Burditt wrote:
>
>If you're living in the US, you pulled this last line out of your XXX.
>
>As someone who works in the field, I know.
>
>Notan
You a farm worker?
| |
|
| Bob Ward wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:07:57 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.com> wrote:
>
>
> You a farm worker?
Something like that! <g>
Notan
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-12-21, 5:48 am |
| In article < 11qeh3v5dta8516@corp
.supernews.com>
gordonb.l6xei@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
>
>
> You work in the BLACK-MARKET human organ trade? And admit it? in
> public?
>
> No, I wasn't talking about honest mistakes being made about whether
> you are still alive and taking organs too soon.
>
> I suppose it is more likely in the US that someone would want you
> for food than for organ transplants. Jeffery Dahmer (not sure about
> spelling), for instance. Plenty of sickos out there.
As "Someone who works in the trade" *I* can tell you that the market for "Long Pig" is indeed growing.
> And just because I'm in the US now, doesn't mean I will be in 24
> hours. Never can tell when GWB will grab me by mistake and send
> me off to some other country to be tortured, thinking I'm a terrorist.
..or the weekend buffet.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-12-26, 5:48 pm |
| In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
"Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote:
>
>
> "Bill" <bill190nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:40liktF19hmivU1
@individual.net...
> This is SO simple and NOT a big deal by any means!
> By having a blanket order like this they will no longer need a court order
> or warrant to listen in on the "bad guys". Before this law
> enforcement/government needed a court order ON EACH LINE.LE/GOV'T have a lot
> of restrictions on monitoring as it is right now.
> Telephone carriers and cellular companies DO NOT allow any monitoring
> without a judge signed court order as of this time. It takes time to get one
> and you cant use ANY of information gleened before said order. In fact the
> LE agent will get burned for doing so.
Anyone who believes this is living in a dream world. patriot act allows feds to demand and get this kind of info anytime they want it. Not only that, but the same also features stiff penalties for violating prohibitions against parties involved even reve
aling that the info was demanded
> What it boils down to, if you are not involved in terrorist acts or crime,
> you have nothing to hide and nothing to worry about. I seriously doubt they
> will listen to people randomly. The ones they will listen in on are already
> targeted.
> GOV'T/Police/Sheriff couldnt care less and don't have the time to listen in
> or investigate your regular personal lives.
Again, you are living in a dream world. These powers are being used by FBI for all sorts of investigations, all they need do is make the thinnest, flimsiest BS allegation of terrorist connection to 'justify' it.... "...XXXX his civil rights, The suspect
knows someone who knows someone who is the second cousing thrice removed from the maternal great grandfather of osama bin ladin, and therefore we have authority to use patriot act powers on him."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-12-26, 5:48 pm |
| In article <LU83237038704. 7440277778@anonymous
>
Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Baldur) wrote:
>
> In article <1134927937.490152.50700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
> "Williams" <c-williams3@lycos.com> wrote:
>
> There's no difference anymore.
>
>
yah, ever since UberLeaderBushMieste
r torpedoed the bill of rights first with the homeland security act and then with the patriot act.
Fortuantely, there are some who will still fight to preserve the REAL America from the hands of the Evil UberLeaderBushMieste
r.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-12-26, 5:48 pm |
| In article < 4506382cc8796911b4ad
e4caad80b868@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Fafnir <fritz@spamexpire-200512.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>
> In article <z2hpf.44607$D13.11065@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>
> "Mortimer Schnurd" <Mort@aarp.com> wrote:
>
> So what you're saying is that under the "Patriot Act" the
> Watergate burglary would have been perfectly legal.
>
> I suspect that you're right.
Not only that, but I don't doubt that under the "Patriot Act", the feds can and do get away with enourmous amounts of shit. Partly because part of what the act does is make it majorly illegal to even reveal that it's been used on you.
The "Patriot Act" is Bush's way of telling you to roll over, bite the pillow, and take your XXX-XXXXing like a man.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.
| |
|
| This is the solution to all your privacy issues
ArmorWare is the most advanced Internet privacy protection technology.
It safeguards Internet and network users from hostile intrusions and
guarantees 100% confidentiality.
By incorporating the most sophisticated technologies available today, users
are completely isolated from malicious software (malware).
Armor's proprietary technology was developed to meet the needs of
corporations and individuals who demand the ultimate in online security.
ArmorWare is ideally suited for business professionals who are using the
Internet for online commerce (brokers, bankers, accountants, lawyers); those
engaged in online gaming; as well as Government organizations, such as
Ministries of Health and others that must comply with strict security
regulations when sharing information.
Simply plug in the USB-based Armorkey and run ArmorWare from any PC for
guaranteed confidentiality and complete security.
www.armorware.com
"Thrasher Remailer" <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote in message
news:2YEIDHDI38707.7858101852@reece.net.au...
> In article <LU83237038704. 7440277778@anonymous
>
> Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Baldur) wrote:
>
>
> yah, ever since UberLeaderBushMieste
r torpedoed the bill of rights first
> with the homeland security act and then with the patriot act.
>
> Fortuantely, there are some who will still fight to preserve the REAL
> America from the hands of the Evil UberLeaderBushMieste
r.
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
> is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
> than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
> for abuse and hashcash info.
>
>
>
| |
| NoReply@Privacy.li 2005-12-27, 11:48 pm |
| "PA" < artmanphilip@hotmail
.com> wrote in
news:Te2dnXXafozfKiz
eRVn-hQ@aci.on.ca:
> This is the solution to all your privacy issues
> ArmorWare is the most advanced Internet privacy protection technology.
> It safeguards Internet and network users from hostile intrusions and
> guarantees 100% confidentiality.
>
> By incorporating the most sophisticated technologies available today,
> users are completely isolated from malicious software (malware).
>
> Armor's proprietary technology was developed to meet the needs of
> corporations and individuals who demand the ultimate in online
> security.
>
> ArmorWare is ideally suited for business professionals who are using
> the Internet for online commerce (brokers, bankers, accountants,
> lawyers); those engaged in online gaming; as well as Government
> organizations, such as Ministries of Health and others that must
> comply with strict security regulations when sharing information.
>
> Simply plug in the USB-based Armorkey and run ArmorWare from any PC
> for guaranteed confidentiality and complete security.
>
>
> www.armorware.com
>
>
>
> "Thrasher Remailer" <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote in message
> news:2YEIDHDI38707.7858101852@reece.net.au...
>
>
>
Flush!
| |
| Notan 2005-12-27, 11:48 pm |
| NoReply@Privacy.li wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Flush!
With a one word response, would it have been that difficult to snip a bit?
Notan
| |
| clifto 2005-12-28, 5:48 pm |
| PA wrote:
> By incorporating the most sophisticated technologies available today, users
> are completely isolated from malicious software (malware).
You mean like your SPAM?
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
|
|
|
|
|