US Patriot Act

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Dari
I read Robert Fisk every once in a while. Good columnist. I came upon this tidbit about the US Patriot act:

Indeed, many Americans don't even know what the chilling acronym of the "US Patriot Act" even stands for. "Patriot" is not a reference to patriotism. The name stands for the "United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act". America's $200m (£125m) "Total Awareness Programme" will permit the US government to monitor citizens' e-mail and internet activity and collect data on the movement of all Americans. And although we have not been told about this by our journalists, the US administration is now pestering European governments for the contents of their own citizens' data files. The most recent ? and most preposterous ? of these claims came in a US demand for access to the computer records of the French national airline, Air France, so that it could "profile" thousands of its passengers. All this is beyond the wildest dreams of Saddam and the Dear Leader Kim.

Can anyone confirm this?

link

He left out the part that gives the President authorization to have anyone killed on his say-so. And no, I'm not kidding. If you want to see something really creepy, have a look at the Total Awareness Program emblem image

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

I have nothing to hide. The government can feel free to scan my emails and track my Internet useage. If it means catching terrorists and making the world safer for the next generation, then fine. You reprobates are just pissed that somebody's gonna know how much prOn you look at.

Part of living in a society of great liberties means being vulnerable. To be safe you need to give up liberties. A balance has to be struck. How many liberties are we willing to give up? How safe do we want to be? Would you prefer another 3,000 people die from a terrorist attack, knowing you could have done something about it, or would you prefer invading people's privacy a little bit? We'll all have our opinions, but, ultimatly and in the short term, it's our leaders who will make this decision for us. With leadership comes a sense of responsibility which may sway them more to caution and protection.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I have nothing to hide. The government can feel free to scan my emails and track my Internet useage. If it means catching terrorists and making the world safer for the next generation, then fine. You reprobates are just pissed that somebody's gonna know how much prOn you look at.

Part of living in a society of great liberties means being vulnerable. To be safe you need to give up liberties. A balance has to be struck. How many liberties are we willing to give up? How safe do we want to be? Would you prefer another 3,000 people die from a terrorist attack, knowing you could have done something about it, or would you prefer invading people's privacy a little bit? We'll all have our opinions, but, ultimatly and in the short term, it's our leaders who will make this decision for us. With leadership comes a sense of responsibility which may sway them more to caution and protection.

Sheep.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: axiom
These so called privacy concerns should not be concerns. What you think is in the bill is not in the bill.

Such as?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I have nothing to hide. The government can feel free to scan my emails and track my Internet useage. If it means catching terrorists and making the world safer for the next generation, then fine. You reprobates are just pissed that somebody's gonna know how much prOn you look at.

Part of living in a society of great liberties means being vulnerable. To be safe you need to give up liberties. A balance has to be struck. How many liberties are we willing to give up? How safe do we want to be? Would you prefer another 3,000 people die from a terrorist attack, knowing you could have done something about it, or would you prefer invading people's privacy a little bit? We'll all have our opinions, but, ultimatly and in the short term, it's our leaders who will make this decision for us. With leadership comes a sense of responsibility which may sway them more to caution and protection.

Sheep.

Blind dissident.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: SlowSS
I like to see how government is going to keep tabs on 287,000,000 + people in the USA.

Hell, they can't even keep tabs on their own administrations/agencies.

Which is why know one should really have a problem unless they've done something to alert these agencies. They need something to go by and I'm assuming they aren't just picking random people and monitoring their e-mail.

Yup, if a person is involved with criminal act or terrorism, then they should be worried.

I'm not worried about it. But I'm sure there will be lot of peeps who will cry because they

feel government is infringing on their rights.

In order to monitor E-mails of USA's population, government have to increase their

agency (whomever that may be) by ???....Whatever the size of increase is, it will have

to be very big.

heh i love it when people say only criminals or terrorist will be worried.

well i am neither a criminal or terrorist and i am worried. we are erroding rights that people belived in so strongly that they fought and died for. its a shame we arent doing the same.

my email is/should be private. My telephone calls are intended for the person i am calling. They should not be able to monitor them. idont want the goverment knowing i orderd pizza or whatnot.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I have nothing to hide. The government can feel free to scan my emails and track my Internet useage. If it means catching terrorists and making the world safer for the next generation, then fine. You reprobates are just pissed that somebody's gonna know how much prOn you look at.

Part of living in a society of great liberties means being vulnerable. To be safe you need to give up liberties. A balance has to be struck. How many liberties are we willing to give up? How safe do we want to be? Would you prefer another 3,000 people die from a terrorist attack, knowing you could have done something about it, or would you prefer invading people's privacy a little bit? We'll all have our opinions, but, ultimatly and in the short term, it's our leaders who will make this decision for us. With leadership comes a sense of responsibility which may sway them more to caution and protection.

Sheep.

Blind dissident.

No, I'm an informed dissenter. 3,000 people died because certain organizations didn't take advantage of the information they already had.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: Zakath15<br
Doesn't matter whether or not you're involved in something illegal, you should still have the right to privacy in your personal communications.

How do you suppose that government is going to monitor every person in the USA with e-mail?

Some of these peeps have 4 or more e-mail accounts.

I just don't see government is capable of doing it. They have to pick and choose their targets

based on their suspision/information. Don't forget we still have bill of rights and constitution

to protect us if we were wronged by the govenment.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I have nothing to hide. The government can feel free to scan my emails and track my Internet useage. If it means catching terrorists and making the world safer for the next generation, then fine. You reprobates are just pissed that somebody's gonna know how much prOn you look at.

Part of living in a society of great liberties means being vulnerable. To be safe you need to give up liberties. A balance has to be struck. How many liberties are we willing to give up? How safe do we want to be? Would you prefer another 3,000 people die from a terrorist attack, knowing you could have done something about it, or would you prefer invading people's privacy a little bit? We'll all have our opinions, but, ultimatly and in the short term, it's our leaders who will make this decision for us. With leadership comes a sense of responsibility which may sway them more to caution and protection.

Sheep.

Blind dissident.

No, I'm an informed dissenter. 3,000 people died because certain organizations didn't take advantage of the information they already had.

"Taking advantage" of that information probably would have meant invasions of privacy.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Zakath15<br
Doesn't matter whether or not you're involved in something illegal, you should still have the right to privacy in your personal communications.

How do you suppose that government is going to monitor every person in the USA with e-mail?

Some of these peeps have 4 or more e-mail accounts.

I just don't see government is capable of doing it. They have to pick and choose their targets

based on their suspision/information. Don't forget we still have bill of rights and constitution

to protect us if we were wronged by the govenment.

It still doesn't matter if it's immediately "feasible", it should never even be considered.

Freedom is not retroactive.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Zakath15<br
Doesn't matter whether or not you're involved in something illegal, you should still have the right to privacy in your personal communications.

How do you suppose that government is going to monitor every person in the USA with e-mail?

Some of these peeps have 4 or more e-mail accounts.

I just don't see government is capable of doing it. They have to pick and choose their targets

based on their suspision/information. Don't forget we still have bill of rights and constitution

to protect us if we were wronged by the govenment.

It still doesn't matter if it's immediately "feasible", it should never even be considered.

Freedom is not retroactive.

You could continue to be worried about this possible intrusion to your privacy.

I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

 

[SnapIT]

A country monitoring it's citizens is not a nice thought....

Intrusion in privacy is something that i would never accept unless i was absolutely forced and then i would protest in every possible way...

it's like having to prove innocense....

 

[308nato]

Reading the bill is not an option for the bleeting sheep. It would be to easy. Then they would have to shut their mouths. Much easier to pontificate on what might be than what is clearly there for them to see.

OOOOO....even the Tire Companies are spying on you now.


Their eyes are every where. Oh the humanity. Bib is reading my e-mail !!!!

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Zakath15<br
Doesn't matter whether or not you're involved in something illegal, you should still have the right to privacy in your personal communications.

How do you suppose that government is going to monitor every person in the USA with e-mail?

Some of these peeps have 4 or more e-mail accounts.

I just don't see government is capable of doing it. They have to pick and choose their targets

based on their suspision/information. Don't forget we still have bill of rights and constitution

to protect us if we were wronged by the govenment.

It still doesn't matter if it's immediately "feasible", it should never even be considered.

Freedom is not retroactive.

Freedom is an illusion. You think you have freedom? Try walking around naked through Walmart. Try going into your neighbors house to borrow something without permission. Try building a house on public land. In America we do not have freedom; we are granted liberties. What those liberties are or are not is the issue.

 

[Bluga]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
If you hate America, move to Iraq!

This country is turning more into Iraq everyday. But of course you're just too blind to recognize it.

Indeed, propaganda works wonder.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: axiom

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: axiom
These so called privacy concerns should not be concerns. What you think is in the bill is not in the bill.

Such as?

Such as whatever you think is in the bill. The spyware people think is in there is not in there. Read the bill.

Yeah! Whatever you think is in the bill is not in the bill! Even if it was in the bill if you think it's in the bill it isn't in the bill AND if you even think it's not in the bill it will be in the bill until you think it is!

-brought to you by the thought police

 

[philmacrevis]

While they're reading my e-mail, they could at least delete some of my spam.

 

[Harvey]

Regardless of the intentions of those who wrote and passed this act, one objective of any such laws should be to ensure that there are sufficient limitations on the actions of those in position to carry them out. The thought of having asshat ideologs like John Ashcroft at the controls of the DOJ scares the living sh8 out of me. The "Patriot Act" fails to do that, and I fear it is a long step toward enabling a totalitarian dictatorship.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Dari
I read Robert Fisk every once in a while. Good columnist. I came upon this tidbit about the US Patriot act:

Indeed, many Americans don't even know what the chilling acronym of the "US Patriot Act" even stands for. "Patriot" is not a reference to patriotism. The name stands for the "United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act". America's $200m (£125m) "Total Awareness Programme" will permit the US government to monitor citizens' e-mail and internet activity and collect data on the movement of all Americans. And although we have not been told about this by our journalists, the US administration is now pestering European governments for the contents of their own citizens' data files. The most recent ? and most preposterous ? of these claims came in a US demand for access to the computer records of the French national airline, Air France, so that it could "profile" thousands of its passengers. All this is beyond the wildest dreams of Saddam and the Dear Leader Kim.

Can anyone confirm this?

link

He left out the part that gives the President authorization to have anyone killed on his say-so. And no, I'm not kidding. If you want to see something really creepy, have a look at the Total Awareness Program emblem image

Hagbard, can you prove that's the official emblem by showing another site with the same exact emblem in reference to the Total Awareness Program?

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Dari
I read Robert Fisk every once in a while. Good columnist. I came upon this tidbit about the US Patriot act:

Indeed, many Americans don't even know what the chilling acronym of the "US Patriot Act" even stands for. "Patriot" is not a reference to patriotism. The name stands for the "United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act". America's $200m (£125m) "Total Awareness Programme" will permit the US government to monitor citizens' e-mail and internet activity and collect data on the movement of all Americans. And although we have not been told about this by our journalists, the US administration is now pestering European governments for the contents of their own citizens' data files. The most recent ? and most preposterous ? of these claims came in a US demand for access to the computer records of the French national airline, Air France, so that it could "profile" thousands of its passengers. All this is beyond the wildest dreams of Saddam and the Dear Leader Kim.

Can anyone confirm this?

link

He left out the part that gives the President authorization to have anyone killed on his say-so. And no, I'm not kidding. If you want to see something really creepy, have a look at the Total Awareness Program emblem image

Hagbard, can you prove that's the official emblem by showing another site with the same exact emblem in reference to the Total Awareness Program?

Here

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: Dari
I read Robert Fisk every once in a while. Good columnist. I came upon this tidbit about the US Patriot act:

Indeed, many Americans don't even know what the chilling acronym of the "US Patriot Act" even stands for. "Patriot" is not a reference to patriotism. The name stands for the "United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act". America's $200m (£125m) "Total Awareness Programme" will permit the US government to monitor citizens' e-mail and internet activity and collect data on the movement of all Americans. And although we have not been told about this by our journalists, the US administration is now pestering European governments for the contents of their own citizens' data files. The most recent ? and most preposterous ? of these claims came in a US demand for access to the computer records of the French national airline, Air France, so that it could "profile" thousands of its passengers. All this is beyond the wildest dreams of Saddam and the Dear Leader Kim.

Can anyone confirm this?

link

He left out the part that gives the President authorization to have anyone killed on his say-so. And no, I'm not kidding. If you want to see something really creepy, have a look at the Total Awareness Program emblem image

Hagbard, can you prove that's the official emblem by showing another site with the same exact emblem in reference to the Total Awareness Program?

Here

Link doesn't work

EDIT: Saw it. Works, sorry

 

[Orsorum]

Gosh darn it.

 

[Evadman]

I will immedately send e-mails to everyone I know with trigger words sprinkled liberaly throughout the page. If I am taken away, you know why. I will have to make sure they are spelled correctly so they trigger though 😉

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Evadman
I will immedately send e-mails to everyone I know with trigger words sprinkled liberaly throughout the page. If I am taken away, you know why. I will have to make sure they are spelled correctly so they trigger though 😉

lol

 

[Soybomb]

Originally posted by: axiom
Did any of you even read the bill? Christ, stop crying about it until you read the bill. Frankly I'm surprised that such smart people managed to post 'totalitarian" in this thread. Or maybe I am exaggerating when I say 'smart' people.

Read the bill.

So have you read the bill or are you just assuming the government is too nice to do such a thing? I'm about to leave but if you claim you've read it and those sections aren't there I will post how to find the relevant sections tonight.