Warrantless Surveillance: The Worst Is Yet to Come

Lets face it, we don't have any expectation of privacy.  We haven't had it for a while.

Dave

 

I don't expect much change on this front even in an Obama administration. National Security is one of Obama's achille's heel and as a result will attempt in his first term to bolster his resume on that front. As a result, i don't expect to see too many changes from the National Security agenda followed by Bush in an Obama administration. Whether eavesdropping will be as pervasive as during the Bush era will have to determined in the years to come.

It's even rumoured that he plan on holding on to Gate as Secreatary of Defence, this is enough to tell me that he won't deviate much from Bush in terms techniques for keeping the homeland safe. 

Congress just reach a deal to continue wiretapping and proving so call 'limited' immunity to Telcos: Congress Reaches Deal on Wiretapping Bill

In Sweden though the government has been given sweeping powers to eavesdrop on almost everything.

So those privacy advocates you better wake because the signs are really not good!!!

 

Trust? Mitnick talks about TRUST? Paranoia anyone?While I cannot "prove" that the government wont employ this technology, I didn't see any "proof" of such activity in Mitnick's article either.Consider the source of this "information": he is a convicted criminal, a person who lied and deceived to obtain information.  In fact, he is guilty of exactly what he is saying that the govt is going to do some time into the future. He is guilty of it NOW. Not maybe guilty of it in the future.  He needs to spend time convincing me why I should believe anything he would say, having violated the society's trust.He was prosecuted by the govt that he is accusing, maybe not an objective source?Again, remain vigilant. Let’s not let our governments abuse/remove our rights. But also don't let a convicted criminal who is most likely biased on this topic get you "spun up" with this possibility.

 

I don't think you totally realize all of what is going on in the US today, compromizing more the freedoms and rights of the American citizen, rather than that of a potential terrorist or other threat.

First, I'm not sure I'm aware of any other country where you need a passport to go home. Usually, it is just to visit. This is not solving the illegal problem we have, nor is it solving the problem we have with terrorists. All it is doing, is tracking the American citizen by making sure we cannot make a move to come home without it.

Have you heard of NAIS (National Animal Identification System). This "protection" of our food supply, could change our food supply as we know it. Enjoy fresh farm produce and meats direct from your neighborhood farm? This could end it. Of course, again, it is NOT addressing he REAL food safety problems, which is big agriculture, factory farms and a number of imports. They say they are addressing the consumer's want for safe food. But they are not. The consumer is wanting, more and more, to buy DIRECT from the farm. NAIS could change this and leave you no choice but to buy from the big guys..you know...those who have been having all the recalls.

How about Real ID? Ready to hear "Your Federal ID Card please?" This goes against EVERYTHING America stands for, and will do little to nothing to prevent terrorists. Remember, some of the 9/11 terrorists were here LEGALLY to begin with.... no forged documentation. How is this going to help? Basically, if the one FBI agent out west had been taken seriously when she reported people wanting to lear to fly, but not take off and land, MAYBE they could have prevented 9/11. Not saying for sure, but..... Real ID would not have helped. Even with expired Visas, as a few had. This would not have surfaced until the next license renewal. MEanwhile, while we have to hav a federal ID, we still have millions of people running around illegally, with the number growing. 

Then we have the NAFTA Super highway, talk about a North American Union...all without telling the American people what is attempting to be done.  

There is so much more going on. Warrantless surveillance is just a small tipof the iceberg. Now I would not be against the surveillance if they only went after terrorists. But, unfortuantly, they do not. Even on out little anti NAIS egroups, we KNOW we have government offices keeping tabs. We're not terrorist. Just fighting for our farms in a legal matter, unlike the way the feds and states are working.

So, as far as the suthor's story, there may be more, but my guess is, if there is, not much. There is a lot going on out there. Things many of us never, ever thought we'd be seeing in the USA. 

 And as far as the airports....that is a whole other story. Unfortuntly, from what I am seeing, as far as security, the terrorists have won. We have been told over and over that what the terrorists do not like about us are our freedoms. So what are the first things that we are seeing go? 

Food for thought.    

Hello,Kevin!

During my study here( in the US),have read a lot of books on the History of the Internet , and you are just in every book:)))So , my respect to the legend:)

as far as your post is concerned-this is a State, a huge mechanism, that will do anything to take control over its wheels.I don't really think its all about  national security,it's just about keeping control over people-when you know what they are talking and thinking about, it's easier to manipulate.So I think your predictions will come true sooner or later, the question is how people who get used to have some respect for their rights and property will deal with that?But I guess the State will find a logical explanation,why for the safety you should be  under  permanent surveillance. It always does.Big Brother is watching you.

You don't have to be anonymous in your posts if you want our government to have the most information.

Kevin was held without bail on false ruses but the real reason, one that the government coudn't even say in court, was that Kevin had knowledge of the undercover FBI agents, by name, in Southern California. The government couldn't risk him passing this information on, hence tactics to keep him in solitary including claiming that he could whistle into a payphone and launch a nuclear strike.

 The more we believe bad sources, the more likely we'll miss the real terrorists. I'll say it again. Senseless paranoia makes us less safe, not more safe.

Yes, some of the rest of the story is available here. http://www.takedown.com/.

After reading the article "Warrantless Surveillance", I felt like I had only heard part of the story. You mentioned that you were held for almost a year without being charged. I beleive there had to be a reason. Was our national security compromised? If so, shame on you. Personnally the goverment can read all of my e-mail and monitor my internet traffic. I'm sure it would be pretty dry and insignificant. Which brings up another point, think of the vast amount of mindless bantering that is exchanged. It's absurd the think any goverment entity could sift through the vertible mountain of information to get something worthwhile.  I believe if monitoring the electronic exchange of information from someone who acts suspiciously by visiting sites with key words such as terrorists, bombs, kiddy porn, ect., could save us from a 911 disaster or save 1 kid from being victomized then hurray for the advance of technology.

 

Your post was next to this in my inbox:

U.K. seeks ways to stop militant grooming on WebThursday January 17, 2008 11:14AM PSTHome Secretary says she wants Internet industry to help combat extremism in the same way it cooperates to fight crimes against kids.

CNET News.com

 

Cute. 

With kiddy porn as a measure, and when I think of the kind of randomness that created the Nixon "Enemies List" it makes me want to re-evaluate my position on kiddy porn

 

Lawrence Ricci

www.EmbeddedInsider.com