U.S. President Barack Obama and other federal leaders have assured the public that the government is not listening to their phone calls or accessing their private electronic information without a warrant. But according to The (U.K.) Guardian – the paper which has been leading the effort to expose the Obama administration’s massive domestic spying network – that isn’t the case.
In July 2009, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (no stranger to domestic spying) submitted a pair of documents to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) outlining the parameters of the administration’s snooping program.
“The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection of foreign intelligence from foreign targets, (domestic) communications can still be collected, retained and used,” The Guardian reported.
The parameters outlined by Holder permit the federal government to obtain, store and make use of “inadvertently acquired” domestic communications. The documents also reveal the authority for determining who gets snooped on lies exclusively with agents at Obama’s National Security Agency (NSA).
All of this is further confirmation of statements made previously by former analyst Edward Snowden, who courageously disclosed the existence of the NSA’s massive snooping operation earlier this month. It’s aslo further evidence against Obama, who sought to assure Americans regarding the scope and purpose of the domestic spy program by saying “nobody’s listening to your phone calls.”
That’s clearly not true … nor was Obama’s assurance that “federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout.”
Again, props to Snowden for continuing his battle on behalf of our liberties (in this case a Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures) and props to The Guardian for doing the job the American mainstream press is clearly too afraid to do.
Meanwhile shame on Obama, Holder and others in Washington, D.C. who are not only spying on us … but lying about it.
There is nothing “inadvertently obtained” about this information. Our government is forcing companies to cough it up, and building massive $4 billion spy centers to store it, search it and use it against us.
***
85 comments
Buck Farack
Huck his Forse
Huck Folder
Huck his Forse 2
Reminds me of someone’s quip that it’s cruel that the word “lisp” has an “s” in it. And that in turn is reminding me of the fact that “monosyllabic” has five syllables.
A dwarf with a lisp goes into a stud farm….
‘I’d like to buy a horth’ he says.
What sort of horse?’, said the owner.
‘A female horth,’ the owner shows him a mare.
‘Nithe horth,’ says the dwarf, ‘can I thee her eyth?”
The owner picks him up shows the eyes.
‘Nith eyth’, says the dwarf, ‘can I thee her teeth?’
The owner picks him up shows the teeth.
‘Nith teeth,’ he says ‘now can I see her twot?’
The owner picks him up and shoves his head deep
inside the horses vagina, pulls him out.
The dwarf shakes his head and says ‘Perhaps I should weefwaze that… ‘
‘Can I see her wun awound? ‘
Hahahahaha! Great one!
I’m still laughing like a maniac several minutes after reading your joke…you’ve ruined me for today.
just taking a humorous jab at jimlews’s post……
a laff a day keeps the insanity away….
Buck Farack
Huck his Forse
Huck Folder
Huck his Forse 2
Reminds me of someone’s quip that it’s cruel that the word “lisp” has an “s” in it. And that in turn is reminding me of the fact that “monosyllabic” has five syllables.
A dwarf with a lisp goes into a stud farm….
‘I’d like to buy a horth’ he says.
What sort of horse?’, said the owner.
‘A female horth,’ the owner shows him a mare.
‘Nithe horth,’ says the dwarf, ‘can I thee her eyth?”
The owner picks him up shows the eyes.
‘Nith eyth’, says the dwarf, ‘can I thee her teeth?’
The owner picks him up shows the teeth.
‘Nith teeth,’ he says ‘now can I see her twot?’
The owner picks him up and shoves his head deep
inside the horses vagina, pulls him out.
The dwarf shakes his head and says ‘Perhaps I should weefwaze that… ‘
‘Can I see her wun awound? ‘
Hahahahaha! Great one!
I’m still laughing like a maniac several minutes after reading your joke…you’ve ruined me for today.
just taking a humorous jab at jimlews’s post……
a laff a day keeps the insanity away….
Someone broke into my house once, and while they were in there they inadvertently acquired my sound system.
It took me a minute to get this one — HAH!
Someone broke into my house once, and while they were in there they inadvertently acquired my sound system.
It took me a minute to get this one — (chuckle)
We’re coming to get you…
We’re coming to get you…
More pathetic paranoid propaganda from ShitFits..
Care to tell us how this is propaganda? And this time, try not to cut and paste from another source like you did on the last article about this, or at least credit your source with a link if you do.
Logic 101
Nope, doesn’t cut it. Try again.
More pathetic paranoid propaganda from ShitFits..
Care to tell us how this is propaganda? And this time, try not to cut and paste from another source like you did on the last article about this, or at least credit your source with a link if you do.
Logic 101
Nope, doesn’t cut it. Try again.
The verb tenses used in the Guardian article indicate that the ability and/or potential are there. I did not see use of past tense indicating that it had occurred. Of course that never bothers Sic Willie.
The potential alone doesn’t bother you?
Potential for a myriad of things have always been there. LE has the potential to do a whole host of things, legal or not, to citizens but do they or did they is the question.
You also need to add “Will they?” to your list.
“Will they?” can’t be answered with anything other than an implied “Eventually.”
You should start building a fallout shelter.
I have known the will they answer for many years. Whenever I have wanted to know who is the registered owner of a vehicle that I have the tag number for, I have asked LE I know. They have never asked why I wanted to know. They just punch it up on their on board computer and tell me. I realize this is minor but obviously it could be “bigger” inquiries. Should we cut them off from all info?
If that’s true, don’t you wonder if some random person is asking for and receiving the same info on you? Are you bothered by that?
and your “solution” is? I (and you) can already look up the judicial record, tax records, etc. of most SC citizens we know. How is this different?
Because you can’t look up the phone and computer records of ordinary citizens. That’s a big effing difference. I’m not sure why you can’t see it.
So you are ok with me having access to you arrest records, your property tax info (which easily can lead me to your address as can you arrest records), etc. but you are very concerned with me knowing what numbers you have called (the phone company already knows) and what web sites you have visited (the internet providers already collect and sell this info).
Yes, because if I have been arrested, then there has been probable cause for a warrant to be issued against me specifically. The problem here is that information is collected on people without warrants that are issued as to their specific alleged wrongdoing, only blanket warrants/orders for all Americans – no applications for which have ever been denied, according to the government’s own records. Judges who issue local warrants that would get me arrested deny warrant applications from the police all the time.
I have no issue with people knowing what my property tax was – I fail to see how that invades my privacy.
Who I called can tell you what my religious affiliation is, what my political affiliation is, and who I associate with. I have voluntarily given the phone company access to those numbers when I signed up. I gave no such permission to the government. Additionally, the NSA has publicly admitted that its analysts can listen in to the actual content of my calls simply because an analyst wants to. According to the 4th amendment and accepted case law, the government needs probable cause and a warrant specific to me to do that – except that under The Patriot Act and FISA, the federal government doesn’t. My local prosecutor would still have to get a warrant, though. I have a huge problem with that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQBttKoetqo
If you get arrested (traffic tickets are “arrests”) it goes on and stays on SC Judicial web site even if it is dismissed in court. That OK? I notice you did not comment on what internet providers do with your usage. By using your tax records I can find out where you live, properties you own, the assessed value of those properties, etc. That OK? I can look up your marriage license info. That OK?
The verb tenses used in the Guardian article indicate that the ability and/or potential are there. I did not see use of past tense indicating that it had occurred. Of course that never bothers Sic Willie.
The potential alone doesn’t bother you?
Potential for a myriad of things have always been there. LE has the potential to do a whole host of things, legal or not, to citizens but do they or did they is the question.
You also need to add “Will they?” to your list.
“Will they?” can’t be answered with anything other than an implied “Eventually.”
You should start building a fallout shelter.
I have known the will they answer for many years. Whenever I have wanted to know who is the registered owner of a vehicle that I have the tag number for, I have asked LE I know. They have never asked why I wanted to know. They just punch it up on their on board computer and tell me. I realize this is minor but obviously it could be “bigger” inquiries. Should we cut them off from all info?
If that’s true, don’t you wonder if some random person is asking for and receiving the same info on you? Are you bothered by that?
and your “solution” is? I (and you) can already look up the judicial record, tax records, etc. of most SC citizens we know. How is this different?
Because you can’t look up the phone and computer records of ordinary citizens. That’s a big effing difference. I’m not sure why you can’t see it.
So you are ok with me having access to you arrest records, your property tax info (which easily can lead me to your address as can you arrest records), etc. but you are very concerned with me knowing what numbers you have called (the phone company already knows) and what web sites you have visited (the internet providers already collect and sell this info).
Yes, because if I have been arrested, then there has been probable cause for a warrant to be issued against me specifically. The problem here is that information is collected on people without warrants that are issued as to their specific alleged wrongdoing, only blanket warrants/orders for all Americans – no applications for which have ever been denied, according to the government’s own records. Judges who issue local warrants that would get me arrested deny warrant applications all the time.
I have no issue with people knowing what my property tax was – I fail to see how that invades my privacy.
Who I called can tell you what my religious affiliation is, what my political affiliation is, and who I associate with. I have voluntarily given the phone company access to those numbers when I signed up. I gave no such permission to the government. Additionally, the NSA has publicly admitted that its analysts can listen in to the actual content of my calls simply because an analyst wants to. According to the 4th amendment and accepted case law, the government needs probable cause and a warrant specific to me to do that – except that under The Patriot Act and FISA, the federal government doesn’t. Local law enforcement would still have to get a warrant to do the same thing, though. I have a huge problem with that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQBttKoetqo
If you get arrested (traffic tickets are “arrests”) it goes on and stays on SC Judicial web site even if it is dismissed in court. That OK? I notice you did not comment on what internet providers do with your usage. By using your tax records I can find out where you live, properties you own, the assessed value of those properties, etc. That OK? I can look up your marriage license info. That OK?
If you want scary, imagine what the government could do with a backdoor into your PC. That goes beyond snooping, too. Doesn’t take much to put incriminating stuff on your hard drive, “browse” to an FBI trap site, bust down your door, take your computer, prosecute a very defenseless you, and throw you in jail.
Snooping is pretty bad in and of itself, though. One aspect is using it is against people who run for office that aren’t sufficiently corrupt or supportive of something, you can find out everything about their personal life and air their dirty laundry a week or two before election time. Run a big corporation that is friends with the government? Get a little snooping on your competitors, or snooping on those inconvenient protesters.
Of course, our government would never do stuff like that, right?
yeah,dude.that keeps me awake all night long
imagine if the government made you slide down a giant razor blade into a swimming pool filled with ammonia
If you want scary, imagine what the government could do with a backdoor into your PC. That goes beyond snooping, too. Doesn’t take much to put incriminating stuff on your hard drive, “browse” to an FBI trap site, bust down your door, take your computer, prosecute a very defenseless you, and throw you in jail.
Snooping is pretty bad in and of itself, though. One aspect is using it is against people who run for office that aren’t sufficiently corrupt or supportive of something, you can find out everything about their personal life and air their dirty laundry a week or two before election time. Run a big corporation that is friends with the government? Get a little snooping on your competitors, or snooping on those inconvenient protesters.
Of course, our government would never do stuff like that, right?
yeah,dude.that keeps me awake all night long
imagine if the government made you slide down a giant razor blade into a swimming pool filled with ammonia
The only Difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama is using the FISA Courts and Bush used secret Executive orders
The only Difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama is using the FISA Courts and Bush used secret Executive orders
If Obama can be taken down for this…or at least have mass firings, w/ a total REJECTION of liberal governemnt failure….it shows the just PEOPLE 9thje people who BUILT America) still own the Country…
If Obama gets away with it….We’re as bad as a brutal un-just dictator-communist country, if the media and Obama and his henchmen get away with it….
Funny that Rand Paul voted yes to the NDAA bill.
Was Rand caught targeting the people he disagrees with, politically? Does he condone race-hating thugs intimidating white voters, like Obama…?????
Until he does, STFU..you leftwing redneck, dumb@$$….
Squawk, squawk squawk!
Just like I thought…LMAO….:)
No, but Bush was.
Sheriff Andy Taylor on eavesdropping (w/short video clip)–
http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/06/video_sheriff_andy_taylor_on_g.html#incart_river
Sheriff Andy Taylor on eavesdropping (w/short video clip)–
http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/06/video_sheriff_andy_taylor_on_g.html#incart_river
Here’s a link to more interesting drama…..
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/20/19061109-lawyers-eye-nsa-data-as-treasure-trove-for-evidence-in-murder-divorce-cases?lite
Here’s a link to more interesting drama…..
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/20/19061109-lawyers-eye-nsa-data-as-treasure-trove-for-evidence-in-murder-divorce-cases?lite
Not so confident about some of these allegations….
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/20/bush-era-nsa-whistleblower-makes-most-explosive-allegations-yet-about-true-extent-of-govt-surveillance/
Not so confident about some of these allegations….
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/20/bush-era-nsa-whistleblower-makes-most-explosive-allegations-yet-about-true-extent-of-govt-surveillance/
Be VERY AFRAID!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFnSxeDfENk
Be VERY AFRAID!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFnSxeDfENk
You’re usually wrong, but you aren’t this time.
You’re usually wrong, but you aren’t this time.
U.S. Seemingly Unaware of Irony in Accusing Snowden of Spying
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) — The United States government charged former intelligence analyst Edward Snowden with spying on Friday, apparently unaware that in doing so it had created a situation dripping with irony.
At a press conference to discuss the accusations, an N.S.A. spokesman surprised observers by announcing the spying charges against Mr. Snowden with a totally straight face.
“These charges send a clear message,” the spokesman said. “In the United States, you can’t spy on people.”
Seemingly not kidding, the spokesman went on to discuss another charge against Mr. Snowden — the theft of government documents: “The American people have the right to assume that their private documents will remain private and won’t be collected by someone in the government for his own purposes.”
“Only by bringing Mr. Snowden to justice can we safeguard the most precious of American rights: privacy,” added the spokesman, apparently serious.
U.S. Seemingly Unaware of Irony in Accusing Snowden of Spying
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) — The United States government charged former intelligence analyst Edward Snowden with spying on Friday, apparently unaware that in doing so it had created a situation dripping with irony.
At a press conference to discuss the accusations, an N.S.A. spokesman surprised observers by announcing the spying charges against Mr. Snowden with a totally straight face.
“These charges send a clear message,” the spokesman said. “In the United States, you can’t spy on people.”
Seemingly not kidding, the spokesman went on to discuss another charge against Mr. Snowden — the theft of government documents: “The American people have the right to assume that their private documents will remain private and won’t be collected by someone in the government for his own purposes.”
“Only by bringing Mr. Snowden to justice can we safeguard the most precious of American rights: privacy,” added the spokesman, apparently serious.
Fits got a blow job from Haley,and is now obsessed with exposing hypocrisy and corruption, whether or not it exists,but he’s only exposed himself:
A fool,and and a weakling,with no conscience,whatsoever:
Take him to church!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8SO1bfT3v0
Fits got a blow job from Haley,and is now obsessed with exposing hypocrisy and corruption, whether or not it exists,but he’s only exposed himself:
A fool,and and a weakling,with no conscience,whatsoever:
Take him to church!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8SO1bfT3v0
I’m not sure what he actually exposed, WIRED ran an article in March of 2012 that pretty much says what Snowden “exposed”. Anyone in government contracting knows about these +$1BM “datacenters”
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/3/
I’m not sure what he actually exposed, WIRED ran an article in March of 2012 that pretty much says what Snowden “exposed”. Anyone in government contracting knows about these +$1BM “datacenters”
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/3/