General

[quote=Vicariously]I understand why they do it, but I think it's excessive, and it jsut makes me uncomfortable. It's like the stop&frisk policy that the Sumpreme Court said was constitutional a while ago. IN NYC, stop&frisk only have a 10% success rate of catching an actual criminal.[/quote]

If that 10% is an actual statistic, that is amazing.

[quote=Vicariously]And the patdown thing at airports, how many terrorist attack did that prevent?[/quote]

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/fifty-terror-plots-foiled-since-9-11-the-homegrown-threat-and-the-long-war-on-terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foiled_Islamic_terrorist_plots_in_the_post-9/11_United_States

Would you rather die, or have someone touch your hip with the back of their hand? This was posted over a year ago, btw, so it seems reasonable to assume another handful have been stopped since then. And do you know how ridiculous we would look as a nation if we did absolutely nothing following 9/11?

[quote=Vicariously]It's like if my house get struck my lightning twice and then paying millions of dollars to prevent my house from getting struck by lightning again.[/quote]

And then it gets struck by lightning 50 more times, and you're sure as hell glad that you bought that insurance.

[quote=Vicariously]I want to know how many criminals and terrorists the TSA caught by secretly spying on us, but I doubt we'll be happy with the results.[/quote]

We weren't talking about the TSA. You switched the argument to this topic (not even to your favor, by the way).

And they aren't "secretly spying." They are publicly stating what they are doing, what they are searching for, and how they are searching for it.

Officially, the US government can listen in for 'key words' without a warrant or anything else. (Trigger words). I think its called the echelon project or something.

They can however go beyond that if necessary.

How it affects Australians too: http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/security-it/australians-at-risk-in-us-electronic-surveillance-program-20130607-2ntwj.html

You can have freedom or you can have better protection, but it isn't very easy to have both.

[quote=sl3athOwl]100% of guilty people aren't guilty until they get caught. I don't get what I can possibly do to make it more clear as to why it is necessary / worth doing. The reason for "spying" (if you can even call it that) is so that when you have someone who *can* be dangerous, the government will be able to stop them. From what I understand about the government and Verizon, it appears that they are given the list of phone call times and numbers, neither of which are associated with a person unless they request it, which they won't unless they find an unusual pattern, in which case they may monitor one of your calls during a time that would fit this pattern.

If I called (555)-555-5555 every night at 3 am, talked for exactly 18 minutes, and then hung up, they would view this pattern as unusual, and then look further into it and then they'll see "oh, he's just talking to his grandmother on the west coast" or "he's planning an attack on something," based on what occurs in the next conversation.

He's making a joke / insult on the idea that some people think our president is a Muslim.

[b]If you still can't manage to get this through your skull:[/b]

They have it as a preemptive measure the same way you have police officers around on highways. I don't get mad at them, calling them "spies" for sitting on the side of the road as I go 60, but I'm sure as hell grateful when they pull someone over who blew by me at 110. Unless you're doing something questionable (driving 110, planning a terrorist attack), then it won't affect you, and you should be glad that they are there so you don't get injured by someone who is doing something stupid (driving 110, performing a terrorist attack).[/quote]
I understand why they do it, but I think it's excessive, and it jsut makes me uncomfortable. It's like the stop&frisk policy that the Sumpreme Court said was constitutional a while ago. IN NYC, stop&frisk only have a 10% success rate of catching an actual criminal.
And the patdown thing at airports, how many terrorist attack did that prevent? It's like if my house get struck my lightning twice and then paying millions of dollars to prevent my house from getting struck by lightning again.
I want to know how many criminals and terrorists the TSA caught by secretly spying on us, but I doubt we'll be happy with the results.

[quote=RubyRidge]Here's the thing: I said one sentence and you turned it into a multi-page "debate" - I never said I wanted one. I made a comment and you decided to jump on it because you felt offended.

If you want to bump your thread, you can find other ways of doing so.[/quote]
Oh psssh
Don't act innocent, you posted like 6 links to defend your argument. If I initiated the debate, you reciprocated that desire to debate.

@RubyRidge
I'm not trying to pick a fight. I don't have anything against you, and I certainly don't dislike you. Likewise, I may not agree with Obama on all his policies, but my disagreements with him is never personal. I'm sure you and Obama are very cool people and would be awesome friends to have by my side if I'm lucky enough to have the opportunity.
But if you don't want to debate about your accusations, then here's a general rule everytime you don't want to have a debate: if you don't have nice and sweet things to say, don't say it.
Good night and don't forget to be awesome.

[quote=Vicariously]Well if you don't care when the government invades your privacy, then that's your opinion and I can't do anything about that. But I don't like it when people I don't know is spying on me even though I didn't do anything wrong. It's my government too and I don't feel comfortable knowing what I know now. And a lot of people don't like what the government is doing, either.[/quote]

100% of guilty people aren't guilty until they get caught. I don't get what I can possibly do to make it more clear as to why it is necessary / worth doing. The reason for "spying" (if you can even call it that) is so that when you have someone who *can* be dangerous, the government will be able to stop them. From what I understand about the government and Verizon, it appears that they are given the list of phone call times and numbers, neither of which are associated with a person unless they request it, which they won't unless they find an unusual pattern, in which case they may monitor one of your calls during a time that would fit this pattern.

If I called (555)-555-5555 every night at 3 am, talked for exactly 18 minutes, and then hung up, they would view this pattern as unusual, and then look further into it and then they'll see "oh, he's just talking to his grandmother on the west coast" or "he's planning an attack on something," based on what occurs in the next conversation.

[quote=Vicariously]I get that you're being sarcastic and you don't actually love Obama, but what does Allah have to do with it?[/quote]

He's making a joke / insult on the idea that some people think our president is a Muslim.

[b]If you still can't manage to get this through your skull:[/b]

They have it as a preemptive measure the same way you have police officers around on highways. I don't get mad at them, calling them "spies" for sitting on the side of the road as I go 60, but I'm sure as hell grateful when they pull someone over who blew by me at 110. Unless you're doing something questionable (driving 110, planning a terrorist attack), then it won't affect you, and you should be glad that they are there so you don't get injured by someone who is doing something stupid (driving 110, performing a terrorist attack).

[quote=RubyRidge]@Vicariously: I think the idea behind his arrest was to placate radical Muslims.

"Like me"

Oh wow, that's another whopper.

I also added some other links to the post you just responded to.

Look, you have your ideas, I have mine.

I'm not here to argue with you.[/quote]
Do you think that someone who stole and used false identity to steal money should go free after violating his parole? Do you think people who steal and break the law should go free just because you think Obama want to placate radical Muslims? I know your answer is obviously no, but so far your posts are telling me that people who don't like Muslims should be exempt from the law! I don't think that's fair or just.

And yes, we agree and disagree about a lot of issues. But the one thing I don't like is racism. I may be more tolerant of racism if it's only on a personal level and you don't mix your racism into politics, but that's where I personally draw the line. Whether you like or dislike Muslims, they deserve to be treated like any other human being.

[quote=RubyRidge]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7875584/Barack-Obama-Nasa-must-try-to-make-Muslims-feel-good.html

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/06/03/obama-wants-to-jail-people-like-me-who-criticize-islam-online-but-muslims-in-prison-for-threatening-non-muslims-online-are-allowed-to-post-extremist-rhetoric-on-the-internet-from-jail/

http://www.examiner.com/article/if-you-are-muslim-you-can-opt-out-of-the-obamacare-health-care-reform-laws-with-no-penalties

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/truth-be-told/2013/may/10/why-islams-shariah-law-biggest-threat-american-saf/[/quote]
Making Muslims feel good is not a crime or an executive order to enforce Sharia law.

The second link is based are not based on facts.

The opt-out option have been available for a lot of organizations (not all of them are religious, but I digress), including the Amish. I don't understand why that's so controversial. Are you going to accuse Obama of appeasing Amish people now?

The last link is the same as the second link.

For Verizon / Verizon Wireless users specifically.

[quote=RubyRidge]@Vicariously: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/us-embassy-condemns-continuing-efforts-misguided-individuals-hurt-religious-feelings-muslims_652183.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57521939/man-behind-anti-muslim-film-ordered-jailed/[/quote]
The first example were statements made by diplomats, diplomats like the late Ambassador Stevens and Gregory Hicks. Their job is to appease. Here's Obama's reaction:
"'Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. Moreover, as President of our country, and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208396/Obama-condemns-disgusting-anti-Islam-video-insists-Muslims-suffered-hands-extremism.html#ixzz2VUgqs3uR

And do you know why that man was arrested? http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/anti-islam-flick/
"During 2008 and 2009, court documents reviewed by Danger Room and embedded below show that Nakoula again and again opened bank accounts with fake names and stolen social security numbers. Then Nakoula would deposit bogus checks into the new accounts and withdraw money before the checks bounced."

He was arrested, and part of his parole was to not take on another false identity, which is exactly what he did to make that anti-islam video.
Or do you think he should go free?

[quote=RubyRidge]@Vicariously: I'm just welcoming the religion that is being protected by this current government and will be enforced if Sharia law is allowed.[/quote]
Is this an example of the US government protecting Muslims? http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election/liu-surveillance-muslim-unconstitutional-article-1.1335780
Gosh darn, people should just let the government spy on Muslims, except for White, Asian and Hispanic Americans. Only spy on Muslims!

I'm still looking for Obama enforcing Sharia law in America, but it's probably there if I take a few seconds to Google the facts. Hold on....

@sl3athOwl: Well if you don't care when the government invades your privacy, then that's your opinion and I can't do anything about that. But I don't like it when people I don't know is spying on me even though I didn't do anything wrong. It's my government too and I don't feel comfortable knowing what I know now. And a lot of people don't like what the government is doing, either.

[quote=RubyRidge]@Vicariously: http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/06/codename_prism_secret_program_data_mining.html

I'd just like to say, for the record, I love our Dear Leader, President Obama. I love the government. I love everything to do with the government.

Allah bless the Obama administration and our current government.[/quote]
I get that you're being sarcastic and you don't actually love Obama, but what does Allah have to do with it?

I don't care. I'm not comfortable with the government handling the economy, but I'm rather comfortable with the government with security manners.
Everybody thinks that the government isn't doing their job well as soon as there's an attack, but they don't realize that dozens of other attacks are prevented because the government's doing things like this.

I'm not going to lie, I do pirate things occasionally, but I doubt the government's going to give a crap if thousands of lives could be at stake.

[quote=Vicariously]I find your "get used to it" comment very disturbing. What if some random person started asking personal questions about your life?[/quote]

Unless you are doing something questionable, why would it matter? If I asked a friend over the phone, "hey, want to go to the movies this weekend?" I'd be fine with someone asking me what I was planning on doing that weekend. If there was something illegal that I was planning, *then* I would be concerned about someone asking me what I was doing on the weekend, but if I wasn't doing anything illegal, I wouldn't care.

[quote=Vicariously]Well, someone should tell the government to mind their own business and leave us alone.[/quote]

There are departments dedicated solely to making sure people aren't planning anything dangerous (Homeland Security). If something you are doing is so embarrassing or illegal, then you shouldn't be doing it, and the government *will* mind their own business, as you won't be doing anything that could harm anyone.

I don't complain about cops driving around, as I never speed excessively. If I were to go 100 in a 55 mph zone, then I wouldn't act like the cop was spying on me, and I wouldn't tell him to mind his own business, as his business is to stop people who are putting other people in danger. In the case of Homeland Security, they won't "pull you over" unless you are planning or doing something dangerous.

[quote=Vicariously]Go after real terrorists instead of snooping around the privacy of millions of American citizens.[/quote]

Real terrorists *are* American citizens. One of the brothers behind the Boston bombing *was* an American citizen. In 9/11 there were multiple US Citizens involved, and a majority of those involved were legally allowed to be in the US through Visas.

If you value your weekend plans more than the lives of potentially thousands of people, then in my opinion, you need to be more worried about a psychiatrist hearing about what you are doing than the US government.

[quote=Vicariously]I sort of agree with you and I sort of disagree with you, but I'm mostly confused. What does metadata mean? And I don't think I have an ISP warning or whatever you're talking about.

I also highly doubt that millions of people are committing murder, owning slaves and kidnapping little girls.[/quote]

Metadata is data referencing other data in a set. It is used to view abnormal patterns in someone's cell phone usage, then, if someone has abnormal patterns, they may look into your conversation (most likely with a warrant) and then see, "Oh, she's just talking to her grandmother each night" or "He's planning on bombing this sports stadium, we should stop that."

And you don't need millions of people doing something to warrant it being stopped. How many people are murderers? Very few. So why do we even have police officers?

@Vicariously: It means that they're only tracking the number of times you called and the length of the calls, which I'm sort of ambiguous about just because if the US government tells you one thing, you know for sure that they could be lying to you, but then again that database is HUGE and who are they gonna go through that many calls.

And there's millions in the world that does that. Don't you know the Iceburg analogy? Although it's conventionally used for Freud's theory of sub/un conscious, it applies to the information on the Internet; 1/3 of the sites we go on are everyday sites, while 2/3 of the Internet is very dark and untouchable place, which means there's a vast minority that's carrying out some shady stuff like the ones you mentioned of.

And ISP means your internet service provider, like Comcast or Verizon FiOS, etc...

[quote=Rezoina]I could really care less. I'm not hiding anything illegal or diabolical, and if you read closely its only to collect metadata from the calls. Sure I might pirate here and there, but really? I don't talk about pirating things during an everyday phone call, and I doubt the US government really cares about that, when our own ISP's give out warnings at the worst. Okay, maybe you do some crack here and there, but really... you're not running a cartel and that kind of crime is dealt with local law enforcement, which I highly doubt is gonna get access to gigantor database of calls.

And there's some screwed up things in the world that need to be stopped like human trafficking, mass murders, kidnapping, etc... you can maybe look at this benefiting society. Invading privacy a crime? Hell yeah, but really it's like book keeping; you're not gonna find the FBI blackmailing you for watching some pr0n when you're married.[/quote]
I sort of agree with you and I sort of disagree with you, but I'm mostly confused. What does metadata mean? And I don't think I have an ISP warning or whatever you're talking about.

I also highly doubt that millions of people are committing murder, owning slaves and kidnapping little girls.

Welcome to Murica

I could really care less. I'm not hiding anything illegal or diabolical, and if you read closely its only to collect metadata from the calls. Sure I might pirate here and there, but really? I don't talk about pirating things during an everyday phone call, and I doubt the US government really cares about that, when our own ISP's give out warnings at the worst. Okay, maybe you do some crack here and there, but really... you're not running a cartel and that kind of crime is dealt with local law enforcement, which I highly doubt is gonna get access to gigantor database of calls.

And there's some screwed up things in the world that need to be stopped like human trafficking, mass murders, kidnapping, etc... you can maybe look at this benefiting society. Invading privacy a crime? Hell yeah, but really it's like book keeping; you're not gonna find the FBI blackmailing you for watching some pr0n when you're married.

It's not like they listen in to every single phone conversation all the time, they're looking for people who would be stupid enough to use key words like bomb terrorist etc. or to track the conversations of people they find suspicious. After 9/11 and everything they want to have phone records so that they have proof if anything happens again.
It's not just the US government though, lots of governments moniter phone conversations.

@Vicariously: hey i didn't say i like it but what can I do about it ? nothing.

and by the way its not US who spy on people, every government does.

[quote=yesno1]i dont think its new. they would spy on you ( it doesn't have to be terrorist related ) i think they started spying when the first cell phones came out.

they spy on this comment too. and urs.

+ i forgot to mention those people who get arrested for pirating in the web. its old thing and you'll get used to it.[/quote]
I find your "get used to it" comment very disturbing. What if some random person started asking personal questions about your life? You'd say, "mind your own business!" Well, someone should tell the government to mind their own business and leave us alone. Go after real terrorists instead of snooping around the privacy of millions of American citizens.

I also really quickly googled your claim that the government has been spying on us for along time, and you're right!
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ID/1350/Clinton-Reagan-and-Carters-Legal-Warrantless-Wiretaps-on-US-Citizens.aspx
Apparently, there were warrentless wiretapping since the 1970s, and probably even further back in time too!
This is insane....

i dont think its new. they would spy on you ( it doesn't have to be terrorist related ) i think they started spying when the first cell phones came out.

they spy on this comment too. and urs.

+ i forgot to mention those people who get arrested for pirating in the web. its old thing and you'll get used to it.

Everything is legal to them.

@ShaNayNay Yes, but they can't honestly make us believe that practically EVERYONE is an assumed terrorist...that just sounds like an excuse at that point.

its probably somewhere in the terms and conditions of life in the usa somewhere..

This is why I won't use FB

[quote=metaghost4]The government has the same cell phone tech from the Dark Knight.[/quote]
I googled it and it says you're lying. You tricked me! =(

[quote=metaghost4]The government has the same cell phone tech from the Dark Knight.[/quote]
Really? Is that true?

[quote=Vicariously]What possible reason can there be for the government to spy on, say, John Doe making a call to Aunt Sally about plans for Memorial Day? That ain't logical![/quote]
But the government doesn't know what you're making plans about.

[quote=Wallflowers]I think it's legal if they have a reason to do it (but I'm not too sure. I'm not that knowledgeable about how the government and politics work)[/quote]
What possible reason can there be for the government to spy on, say, John Doe making a call to Aunt Sally about plans for Memorial Day? That ain't logical!

What's wrong with getting spied by the government?

If you are aware they are spying on you, then is is not spying