Imagine Obama Looking in Your Mailbox Every Day, and Writing Down Every Letter You Send and Receive.

[grahamhgreen]

That is what he is doing with our phone calls.

It is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.

It is also rather perverse and twisted.

[Buzz Clik]

1. Why the hell would I care? My teenagers do the same thing. As do my colleagues at work.

Actually, I wouldn't mind. There are some red wasps that try to set up shop in my mail box. I could leave some Raid next to the box for Obama to help me kill the damned things.

[grahamhgreen]

36. Well, there are those of us who would defend the constitution, and those who will not.

[Buzz Clik]

38. Whether or not someone is reading the outside of envelopes ...

... is of zero importance. I do not find it creepy or strange or a violation of my rights.

[grahamhgreen]

49. It is a violation of my rights. These are private communications. What is it you want to see?

[Buzz Clik]

78. What do I want to see? I don't understand the question. I am not the snooper, I'm the snoopee.

I don't care. Read the outside of my envelopes. Knock yourself out. Follow my driving habits.

[Rincewind]

151. According to the Supreme Court,

your phone records don't belong to you, they belong to the phone company. And the NSA had, and probably still has a warrant. It may be wrong, it may be unethical, but until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, it's not unconstitutional.

[RC]

183. Apparently you have not read the Constitution lately.

It does not matter who those records belong to, the US government does not have a right to them without due process. Where is the due process with this wides ranging hoovering of all internet and phone information?
After reading the Preamble, you might want to skip down to the First 10 Amendments. The 2nd may not apply as much, but the 1st, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th and 10th. most surely do.
I cam post them if you wish.

And an aside, because of the Supreme Courts recent bad decision, Article XV (15) How does that decision square with the Constitution?

[NoOneMan]

68. Do you understand how metadata can be used to identify future criminals and prevent future crime?

Do you have a clue?

Do you realize that these algorithms are currently already being used to net billions of dollars of revenue by identifying future buyers and future investors? Its not science-fiction and its very effectively used in the private sector. Do you realize that all metadata collected in the past can be retroactively analyzed to determine likely, potential and future ______ for any new, pertinent reason for any new powerful user?

These algorithms can be used to segment the population based on predicted personality types and likelihood to vote for a candidate, protest a candidate, bomb a candidate, etc... (so you can be suppressed, silenced, or removed before a threat is explicit).

What might not be a crime today may be a crime tomorrow. A person who may not be a criminal tomorrow may be determined (based on metadata analysis) to be a a potential criminal next week.

The reality is, that if I am ever forced by a tyrannical state to become a dissident, I would like to preserve my ability to effectively be so insofar as I was fighting for the people. Any argument against such protection is an argument in favor of the most tyrannical government one could envision, and thus, one I wish to be able to effectively fight against. But I guess, "it can't happen here" (yet it already is underway). Kill lists, spying, rendition, war..... and thats with Obama reading your mail. Wait for some redneck asshole replacement to pick up his notes and carry on.

But hell, why do you care about your mail, email and phone calls since you aren't committing a crime today? I guess you will trust those algorithms to never determine that you or any other innocent (or just) person could ever be a threat to whatever regime may or may not be in power in the future. Just the baddies, eh?

[Buzz Clik]

75. What part of "I don't care" was unclear to you?

[NoOneMan]

84. There's not an abuse or atrocity in human history you couldn't ignore by saying "I don't care"

(forgive the double-negative)

In any case, your approach to bury your head in the sand isn't new, witty or remotely interesting enough to warrant an OP. You ignore because you can. So fuckn what? I shit because I have to. Yay.

[Buzz Clik]

92. Snooping in my mail box without opening the envelopes ...

...falls way below abuse and atrocity levels.

You wanna see the bullshit in my box today? I would be happy to scan them and post them here.

[NoOneMan]

97. As of today, when you don't care, perhaps it doesn't to you

(but you don't seem to care enough to take the time to understand it)

But if this data collected today is ever used as nefariously as it could easily be by assholes who will be elected to such a point that you would care, you would not be likely to build a time-machine to go back and fix the situation. How about that human discount factor?

Of course, you don't seem to care enough to understand what it potentially can be used for, but surely you must understand what assholes will eventually be sifting through your personal behavioral patterns & associations (for reasons yet to be determined). But if you don't care enough to learn about this, then surely you won't care enough to find this as abusive at all.

And to be honest, there are plenty of reasons that plenty of people have not cared about an abuse and atrocity enough to even learn about that abuse or attrocity, so that they never in fact classified it as an abuse or atrocity. Willful ignorance.

You can continue to diminish this as much as you want but as long as you "dont care" about its details, its potential, how it works, etc, you are in no position to determine how it rates in terms of an abuse or atrocity. You simply do not care.

[Buzz Clik]

106. Sweet, Jeebus! Paranoid much? I get bills and ads in the mail. Nothing else.

If somebody really wanted to fuck with me, they'd be better off using the crap I post here at DU than wasting their time with my mail.

Do I understand that CERTAIN kinds of information can be horribly, horribly abused? Yeah, I get it. Do you understand I never left the context of the OP, nor will I, in my responses to you?

We're talking about mail -- letters, magazines, and general shit. I just don't care.

[NoOneMan]

112. No "future" subversive reading material? No letters from potential "future" criminals?

No reason to care eh? How about caring for your neighbor who actually uses their mail?


Im not paranoid. I simply understand the fact what everything collected today will be used tomorrow by an algorithm yet to be written for a crime that may not yet exist on the orders of an asshole not yet in power. BTW, Im also an international person and a computer scientist who does this stuff for a living from time to time...I'm fully aware of the realities of metadata collection and analysis.

[Buzz Clik]

114. Let's put it this way: you win. You're scared shitless, and I agree (that you're scared).

I'm not.

Can we agree on that?

If not, forget it. This lost it's zing about 5 hours ago.

[NoOneMan]

118. This is what happens when a Straw Man date rapes an ad Hominem

Look, I understand because I care enough to and because I am educated & experienced enough with the subject. If I lived in the USA, I'd care enough to be fearful of the future. I don't. So I merely understand both the program and why people should be outraged (and even scared).

And I get it...you don't care. You will get the government you deserve. In fact, you already are getting it.

[Buzz Clik]

125. At last, we agree.

[MNBrewer]

130. +1

Too bad the rest of us are getting it, too.

[OilemFirchen]

88. Hang on...

two phone numbers, a date, time and duration can predict future criminals?

Holy hell.

I'd love to see that algorithm.

[NoOneMan]

93. No.

Its not about a single instance of data (a single phone call), but an entire collection of data that forms patterns that predict behavior (or defines segments). When this data can be cross-referenced with other data sets (email destinations or tld lookups) it can increase its usefulness exponentially.

[OilemFirchen]

95. I believe you're conflating several issues.

The OP is, one could only presume, making a comparison between the NSA collection of metadata and what's printed on the envelopes in your mailbox. They are similar, in a confusing muddle of a way, except that your envelope data likely contains even more than your telephone data - specifically, and usually, a name. The collected phone data is an outbound number, an inbound number, the date, time and duration of the call. They have no idea who the caller was, they have no idea who the answerer was. They don't even know if humans were involved in the exchange.

While it's true that, once a phone number is targeted for surveillance, some intelligence may be gleaned from patterns associated with that number, and that that intelligence may result in a warrant for further surveillance, random numbers form no "patterns" whatsoever.

[NoOneMan]

98. Its clear what the intent of this thread is

It is to characterize the collection of metadata as absolutely benign and insignificant, especially if their trusted, chosen leader is doing the collection. So I'm not conflating anything in my opinion, and not really addressing the direct obfuscating bullshit

[OilemFirchen]

101. Beg your pardon?

Here's the OP, in the event that you're too fucking lazy to look up^^^.

Imagine Obama Looking in Your Mailbox Every Day, and Writing Down Every Letter You Send and Receive.

That is what he is doing with our phone calls.

It is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.

It is also rather perverse and twisted.

[NoOneMan]

102. Haha.

Im all jumbled up. OP was trying to create a tangible example and the person Im responding to wrote it off like its no big deal.

Its not about a letter. A phone call. Or the current president. Even today's current laws. We must only be ok with the mass collection (and cross-referencing) of all our data in order to profile and segment us in under any possible president with any conceivable laws that may be passed in the future. If you are totally ok with the idea, fine.

This isn't necessarily an issue you can boil down to a single event at a single time. All events collected over a long span of time can will be used in the future. Its either ok under all circumstances or none at all

[treestar]

168. Where was the outrage when they found out about the envelope scanning?

Oh right, they never did. The panic on that should be much greater.

[Hekate]

157. I understand, and I still shop at Amazon.com

They have algorithmed me up the wazoo.

Big Brother is a Corporation and I have known that for a couple of decades now. I try to limit my interactions in certain arenas to protect what is left of my privacy, but the rest of the country just wants their shiny new electronic toys that track their every move and their every purchase.

All your information are belong to us: The Phone Company. We care so we share: Your Happy Credit Card Company.

I surely do want the government to rein in the Corporations, but the SCOTUS has said that Corporations are people, my friend. So I'm not holding my breath.

I surely do want the government to rein in its spying apparatus at home, but that will take a Democratic House, Senate, and President to even have a prayer. But so many people here say that there's no difference between the Dems and the Pubs, so I am not holding my breath for that, either.

Oh -- and Obama is not reading your mail. The intern does that.

[WilliamPitt]

104. You're a fucking trip, you know that?

Straight out of central casting, you are.

[Buzz Clik]

108. LOL! Just jump in anywhere with the insults, Will.

Wanna know about caricatures? I could give you 20 links in a heartbeat from your "fan club" who think you are the biggest dipshit to ever draw a breath. "Derp" would be a compliment by comparison. Personally, I think we all have the right to express ourselves freely without being fed the kind of shit you just dished up. So, unless you really want to go there, I really suggest you back the fuck up.

[WilliamPitt]

113. LOL tough guy.

Feel free. You just parroted the "I have nothing to hide, so why worry" talking point that dominated the first decade of this century. I'd tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself, but I get the definite sense that you have no shame.

So fire away, giggles. I was here before you. I'll be here when you're gone.

[Buzz Clik]

115. Are you announcing my departure from DU? Your predictions have a shitty history.

No predictions today?

Wanna borrow a shovel with a longer handle? That hole is might deep.

[WilliamPitt]

116. Still waiting for those links

in a heartbeat.

P.S. Type slower.

[Buzz Clik]

150. Waiting for moi?

You aren't worth the hassle, but I do admire your obsessive compulsive behavior.

Do this: run a search with your name and the vulgar aphorism for sphincter. Follow the links. As if you didn't know...

[WilliamPitt]

164. Weaksauce.

Par for the course.

[WilliamPitt]

126. You fall asleep or what?

[MNBrewer]

132. Checking to see if the teenager's list of letters in and out of the mailbox is accurate, probably.

[WilliamPitt]

138. *snerk*

[WilliamPitt]

143. That's a long heartbeat you got there.

[WilliamPitt]

145. . . . . . .

[RILib]

110. It's a violation of my rights, for sure, and of the Constitution.

[Buzz Clik]

111. Fine.

Call the police and tell them Obama is reading your mail.

Record the call, okay?

[MNBrewer]

121. YOu have a very limited imagination

Imagine President Bachman doing it!
or President Cruz
or President Bush III
or President Christy
or President Huckabee

[Buzz Clik]

123. I really don't know how to say this more clearly:

Anyone and everyone is welcome to read the envelopes in my mailbox. Any president, any time. You can. Invite your friends.

[MNBrewer]

129. Just remember....

you no longer have the right to remain silent.

[Buzz Clik]

131. Great advice. I'll embroider that into a pillow.

[MNBrewer]

134. I'm sure the goon squad will know exactly what to do with it.

[Buzz Clik]

136. Read my mail, go into a killing rage, and smother me in my sleep.

Yep. Tonight in all likelihood.

It's not like you didn't warn me.

[MNBrewer]

137. you're welcome

enjoy your police state

[Buzz Clik]

139. Not my police state. Your imaginary police state.

We're playing fantasy land with you as the dungeon master, and you just had me killed.

Shit happens.

[MNBrewer]

140. No, it's fully yours.

You embrace it, you buy it.

[Buzz Clik]

141. I'm the dungeon master now? Awesome.

[MNBrewer]

142. LOL

As if.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

163. Truly craven

But authoritarian governments just love a guy like you.

[Buzz Clik]

165. You do understand the context, right?

We're talking ONLY about someone looking at the outside of envelopes coming and going from my home. That's it.

Not tapping my phone, harvesting emails, gathering wireless communication information. Just my mail.

Ever have a neighbor's mail delivered to your residence by accident? Did you have the mail carrier arrested? Did you lose sleep wondering if your neighbor inadvertently glanced at the return address of the envelope?

The OP presents the most benign, ridiculous non-eventful scenario imaginable. Yet, DUers are acting as if Obama were personally murdering members of their family. And anyone not properly OUTRAGED!!!11 is "craven."

[grahamhgreen]

185. I don't know how to say more clearly: YOU ARE NOT WELCOME TO READ MINE!

[Buzz Clik]

188. No desire. You are safe.

[grahamhgreen]

189. No, I'm not safe,because somebody wants to, don't they? I don't want them to. It is unconstitutional

without probable cause and a warrant.

[MNBrewer]

119. I doubt your teenagers do the same thing.

[Buzz Clik]

127. Why?

[MNBrewer]

128. Your teenagers look into your mailbox and write down every letter you send and receive.....

Seriously???

[Buzz Clik]

133. You misundertand. Not my mail -- your mail.

Sorry for the confusion.

[krispos42]

166. Your teenagers can't use that information to arrest you

Your teenagers can't hold that information indefinitely.

Your teenagers can't build a database about you for years, then decide in 2019 to go back and read the mail they recorded the presence of in 2013.

Your teenagers can't arrest you on trumped-up charges when you become a political liability.

Your teenagers can't make you spends tens of thousands of dollars on a lawyer against those trumped-up charges.

Your teenagers can't use the trumped-up charges as an excuse to go through EVERYTHING in your house.

Your teenagers can't use the trumped-up charges to seize your computers and iNouns and paw through them.

Your teenagers can't refer any illegally downloaded copyrighted files to the RIAA for civil action.

Your teenagers can't make you lose your job due to being in jail.

Your teenagers can't go to your boss with some of the interesting mail HE'S received and suggest your boss downsize you.

Your teenagers can't make you post hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bail bond.

Your teenagers can't label you in the public record as a "suspected terrorist" or "terrorist sympathizer".

[Buzz Clik]

167. And Obama is going to do all of this. Just by reading the outside of the envelopes in my mail.

The hysteria at DU is at record pitch.

[krispos42]

170. The Federal government will at some point.

I mean, only if somebody steps out of line, of course. Gets a little to involved in OWS. Runs for office. Decides to become a whistleblower. Does some inconvenient investigative reporting.


Or are you going to really say that if you piss off Boeing or Exxon-Mobile or Lockheed-Martin enough, they don't have the influence to get the Feds to start harassing you?


Remember to control people, you need to scare them. The Federal government doesn't have to harass YOU, particularly, in order to make the general public more complacent. A few examples keeps the rest in line.

Just ask Manning or Snowden.

[Buzz Clik]

171. Sometimes I come to DU and have to recheck the URL in the address bar.

It feels like I'm being lectured by Ron Paul or members of the Tea Party. "The government is out of control! Welcome to 1984! We're in a police state!" Only, at DU we dress up that paranoia with a hatred of all corporations.

It is surreal.

[krispos42]

172. The Federal government, by and large...

...operates autonomously. Hundreds of thousands of people doing their jobs daily, in their own little circles of responsibility and power and authority.

It's not the routine stuff that I worry about. It's when a senior official makes a specific decision to go after a specific individual.

Once the tools to do this become commonplace and easy to use, it is inevitable that use of those tools will become commonplace.

Even as an investigative tool.

I can easily envision the FBI, in the course of some investigation when they come across a person that refuses to cooperate, using this information to blackmail that person because the FBI knows that the person is having an affair, for example. Or has massive gambling debts. Or is an abused spouse in hiding, and wouldn't it be a damn shame if your violent ex found your new identity?

[NoPasaran]

2. I bet he'd steal the Bed Bath & Beyond coupons too!

[NightWatcher]

27. Dammit. I need pods for my Keurig and Obama's making me pay full price

All those $5 off coupons could be used to pay down the debt I guess.

[Buzz Clik]

82. Whoa! Obama did that? Now I am really, really pissed off!!!!11

Do you have any idea how many flavors of coffee and cocoa for Keurig cups they have? And I'm paying FULL PRICE.

[randome]

3. And why do you think he's doing that with our phone calls?

Because Snowden told you what to think?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[grahamhgreen]

54. Why? To increase control and lessen freedom.

[randome]

57. No, I mean what makes you think he is doing that?

All we have to go on is what Snowden says and he has offered no evidence.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[grahamhgreen]

74. Because Obama has admitted it.

[OilemFirchen]

89. That would call for a cite.

Please be a dear, m'kay?

[emulatorloo]

179. Link with quotation please. Out of context does not count

nor does hyperbolic "summary"

nor half truths or cherry picked "facts"

[gcomeau]

4. Join us in the real world whenever you're ready. -eom

[WestStar]

5. The USPS already images the front and back of every piece of mail it handles.

So imagine that.

[PoliticAverse]

18. Indeed. For those that missed this...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/woman-arrested-for-obama-bloomberg-ricin-letters-687435

[Cleita]

6. I wish he'd look in his own mailbox to read all the emails I send him.

That's all he needs to know what I'm thinking.

[KittyWampus]

24. You made me laugh a rather bitter laugh.

oen of those things where it's only funny cause it's so sadly true.

[OilemFirchen]

90. You send him emails to his mailbox?

Could that be why he's not responding?

[Cleita]

99. Ha ha!

I'm dying laughing. Email boxes are often referred to as mail boxes. I thought referencing email would make that plain to anyone reading my post which box I was talking about. He has answered once and he gave me a bunch of double speak and never answered the question I was asking which was why he was putting chained CPI on the table at the expense of some of the poorest people in this country, those getting Social Security. He hasn't answered me since then.

[otohara]

107. He's Not Reading Mine Either

nor do the Senators, Congress folk.

[Cleita]

109. Yes, they really have decided they can ignore us like

the unwashed masses of the past. I'm sure that's what they think we are.

[randome]

13. I would tell you but the NSA is blackmailing me, forcing me to shut up about it.

This is the state of 'protest' in America today. "By God, I will fight to the death to free my metadata!"

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Ask and you shall receive

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Oregon-lawyer-s-fingerprint-tied-to-bombings-in-2760915.php

[Hosnon]

31. That's irrelevant.

It's unconstitutional whether it is abused or not.

And I don't want to cross my fingers that it won't be abused. Imagine Karl Rove with all that info...

[Skidmore]

45. This started under Bush and you are naive if you

don't think Rove didn't get his cloven hooves on some of it then.

[frylock]

73. so you were cools with it then?

[Skidmore]

77. Did I say I was?

Where did you get that notion from my reminder of the fact that this activity was devised and implemented under the Bush administration?

[frylock]

85. what was the purpose of reminding us of something that we're acutely aware of?

you were here during bush's reign of terror. certainly you recall the prevailing attitude back then?

[Skidmore]

96. Not everyone was here back then and some people

appear to think that this NSA issue has just sprung fully formed from the forehead of Zeus.

[Hosnon]

182. Not the collection of the metadata. That is much more recent (and troubling). nt.

[Uncle Joe]

32. Does something have to happen a specific way for people to connect dots on how it could?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

There were also more subtle forces encouraging the rise of McCarthyism. It had long been a practice of more conservative politicians to refer to progressive reforms such as child labor laws and women's suffrage as "Communist" or "Red plots."[7] This tendency increased in the 1930s in reaction to the New Deal policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Many conservatives equated the New Deal with socialism or Communism, and saw its policies as evidence that the government had been heavily influenced by Communist policy-makers in the Roosevelt administration.[8] In general, the vaguely defined danger of "Communist influence" was a more common theme in the rhetoric of anti-Communist politicians than was espionage or any other specific activity.

(snip)

In Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America, historian Ellen Schrecker calls the FBI "the single most important component of the anti-communist crusade" and writes: "Had observers known in the 1950s what they have learned since the 1970s, when the Freedom of Information Act opened the Bureau's files, 'McCarthyism' would probably be called 'Hooverism.'"[18] FBI director J. Edgar Hoover was one of the nation's most fervent anti-communists, and one of the most powerful.

Hoover designed President Truman's loyalty-security program, and its background investigations of employees were carried out by FBI agents. This was a major assignment that led to the number of agents in the Bureau being increased from 3,559 in 1946 to 7,029 in 1952. Hoover's extreme sense of the Communist threat and the politically conservative standards of evidence applied by his bureau resulted in thousands of government workers losing their jobs. Due to Hoover's insistence upon keeping the identity of his informers secret, most subjects of loyalty-security reviews were not allowed to cross-examine or know the identities of those who accused them. In many cases they were not even told what they were accused of.[19]

Hoover's influence extended beyond federal government employees and beyond the loyalty-security programs. The records of loyalty review hearings and investigations were supposed to be confidential, but Hoover routinely gave evidence from them to congressional committees such as HUAC.[20]

From 1951 to 1955, the FBI operated a secret "Responsibilities Program" that distributed anonymous documents with evidence from FBI files of Communist affiliations on the part of teachers, lawyers, and others. Many people accused in these "blind memoranda" were fired without any further process.[21]

The FBI engaged in a number of illegal practices in its pursuit of information on Communists, including burglaries, opening mail and illegal wiretaps.[22] The members of the left-wing National Lawyers Guild were among the few attorneys who were willing to defend clients in communist-related cases, and this made the NLG a particular target of Hoover's. The office of this organization was burgled by the FBI at least fourteen times between 1947 and 1951.[23]

There is much more on the link if you or anyone else that believes this is harmless care to read it.

[musiclawyer]

8. No. Better analogy is a camcorder in your living room

Running 24/7. Government says they can't look at the video without a warrant and the third party contractors say they can't look at it or else they committ a crime.

Oh and your defense attorney can never know if the warrant was based on bullshit grounds and congress can't audit whether the contractors break the law or not. Yeah. .... So you are all good with that eh?

Seizure before search. Brilliant! Dick Cheney like a lot.....

[grahamhgreen]

55. +1.

[longship]

9. Imagine a ridiculous straw man to get a political point across.

Nobody likes what the NSA is doing, but the President is not looking into my mailbox, let alone writing everything down.

This post is hyperbole, the only intent is to inflame the rhetoric here at DU.

I refuse to bite on the bait other than to point out that I see both the hook and the bait.

I would prefer having informed, rational discussions here. This is nothing other than an attempt to fan flames here.

[grahamhgreen]

35. No, it's not ridiculous. It is exactly what is happening. Why would anyone need to see all of my

communications?

Why?

[longship]

46. Another straw man?

Look, I like many of your posts here. But this thread is not one of them.

And no!!! I do not support this NSA spying.

But hyperbole is not going to get what we all want done, to stop it!!!

I firmly believe in rational discussion. Hyperbole and straw men get us no where. It opens your argument to ridicule, which from the responses to this OP should make obvious to you.

I suggest a different tact.

As always, I appreciate your response.

[OilemFirchen]

94. "It is exactly what is happening."

Damn tootin'.

I had to chase four Secret Service agents off my porch just two hours ago. Plus, the Presidential Limo was blocking my driveway.

Cursed Stasi vermin!

[Silent3]

187. It's *exactly* what's happening? *Exactly*?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[treestar]

67. And it is inflamed already

Flamers are never satisfied, it seems, must be like heroin.

[longship]

72. Lots of that these days here.

I usually ignore these. But there are apparently many more people who seem to be intent on throwing chairs into the room rather than making reasonable, thoughtful discussion.

Some are long time DUers for whom I am rather rapidly losing respect.

Regardless, nobody is on my Ignore list and I rarely Alert. But I reserve the right to call posts out which have a clear intent to initiate yet another chair throwing thread.

They make DU suck sometimes.

Thank you for your response.

[Uncle Joe]

10. Imagine George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Joe McCarthy, Jay Edgar Hoover,

Richard Nixon, etc. etc. etc. etc. doing so.

I agree it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, basically criminalizing all of the American People, pushing us one step closer to being suspect.

Combined with for profit prisons ability to bribe/lobby politicians to encourage the passage of more draconian laws, punitive sentencing and this will be a growing disaster for our nation.

Thanks for the thread, grahamhgreen.

[Democracyinkind]

11. It's the reality for most of us in Europe.

Although it's not evil Obama doing it.

Considering the studies done on the effectiveness of collecting significant amounts of meta-data and content in Europe, the whole project is a farce anyway. But maybe my example does prove that such programs - even if futile - can be made compatible with the rule of law. I certainly trust these govs more with this kind of info than I would the American securiy apparatus.

[Tarheel_Dem]

12. Duh! Your "U.S." postman already does that "Every Day", and he reports straight to the White House.

This is how you know your argument's beginning to lose its punch!



TRY HARDER!!!!

[randome]

21. Really? You think Mailman Mike is more trustworthy than Obama?

Get real.



[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. I'm sorry, but if the debate has devolved to the point of the o.p., they're in big trouble.

I love Mailman Mike! I wish Obama would teach my "US" postman the difference between a "9" & a "7". I'm so damned tired of getting my neighbor's mail.

[JI7]

81. it really is, the whole thing is just getting more sad and pathetic each day

[Hekate]

160. Hey! Did Agent Mike get demoted? Who have they got on DU now?

I am shocked and appalled. We're too important for them to put an intern on the DU case.

[phleshdef]

14. Wow, painful failure of logic on your part.

First off, if you were to make an accurate comparison, you would say that the government is keeping tabs on every piece of mail sent, the sender, the receiver and the date it was sent/received without actually looking at the mail. Secondly, the USPS basically already does so that as they, to my knowledge, scan an image of the outside of everything that gets mailed.

[magellan]

42. Actually, since they're storing email content for analysis

...it's more like the USPS opening every piece of mail and scanning and storing the content (without looking at it), on top of scanning an image of the outer envelope.

[phleshdef]

71. The OP said "That is what he is doing with our phone calls. "

So my response was in regard to that.

I won't even get into the email stuff because we still don't know enough about the extent of the internet surveillance. There is no factual evidence that has been presented that proves the government is storing my email on its own servers. And aside from that, I've always known that all my email is stored on a server and server backups owned by a private company. Its always been that way.

[grahamhgreen]

79. If that is true, then the USPS is violating the 4th amendment as well. i believe they only do this

to deliver the mail, not to collect, collate, and archive metadata on my private communications.

[Hekate]

161. Nefarious barcodes

[Historic NY]

16. I wish he would.......

then he'd find the bastards that ignore the "do not call list".

[The Straight Story]

17. Well, all I can say is - AWESOME!! Because...

We citizens hate and fear one another.

We think we are all terrorists (and don't mention gun owners, they are all crazy killers, all 57 million of em). We put up with not being able to take water onto a plane and seeing our loved ones off to the gate like we used too.

Day in and out we are finding new ways we want the government to protect us from others - wanna go to a bar with friends and have a drink and a smoke? Nope, we don't like that choice - protect us so we don't have to decide which bars allow something.

Ban kids from playing cops and robbers at school, they might make their finger into a gun.

What we need is more fear of each other and more restrictions to keep us safe. Oh...and more wars! I still know people who freak out if Iran has a small ship anywhere within 500 miles of the US.

Here, government, take my emails and listen to my calls. Save me from my neighbors and others. Keep me safe.

Just don't do anything real about single payer, poverty, the wealthy screwing us and robbing us - cause those things aren't as much a threat to us as my nephew who skeet shoots or my friends who fly with hand lotion.

[avaistheone1]

23. Bravo.

[grahamhgreen]

80. Hear hear!

[Coyotl]

22. Imagine a world without religion, it is easy to do

A fu***ng lot easier than imagining Obama reading my mail

[randome]

25. Obama put ants in my mailbox, goddamnit!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Politicalboi]

33. Mmmmmm!

Your mail must be good. Get them some...

<a href="http://imgur.com/FJSa8mB"><img src="" title="Hosted by imgur.com"/></a>

[JoePhilly]

63. Bwahahaha!!!!

[ksoze]

26. I prefer to live in the real world - too many drugs needed to comply with your fantasy

[frazzled]

28. He'd be really, really busy

No, really. I can't believe you have in your head an image of the government listening in on every single phone call we make.

I talk to my sister for at least an hour every morning (we live far across the country from one another, are early risers, and like to keep in touch before we start our days). I imagine that millions of other women make such calls on a daily basis to their sisters, or mothers or children. There are 300,000,000 people in the United States, each making multiple phone calls daily.

Do you imagine in your wildest dreams there is enough manpower -- or interest -- in monitoring maybe a billion calls a day? Lasting for several billions of hours each day?

You may argue, "well, they're keeping logs of them to view later." No, those logs contain no content. They're just lists of "to's" and "from's." If some suspicious connections should ever arise, the government has to go and seek an INDIVIDUAL court warrant to tap a phone, with probable cause ... related to potential terrorism only.

I can't figure the kind of paranoia (and at the same time, narcissism) one must have to imagine that the government is actually listening to your boring phone calls.

[snooper2]

29. Yep, every single fucking packet in the WORLD is being captured

Every protocol, every packet over the public Internet,

Every corporate VPN

Every PSTN call-

Every TLS encrypted SIP call

Every packet from every DDOS attack

every ICMP initiated

every video call

every debit/credit card transaction- POS transaction

Every YouTube video * Trillions-

Every single intercept message played (I'm sorry, but the number you dialed is not in service, please check the number and try again)

Every TCAP query

Every soft client registration attempt

Even the fucking smilies at the bottom of my post!





I tell you, it's fucking amazing

[tridim]

69. and lolcats... Billions and billions of lolcats

[Hekate]

162. My eyes!!!!

Those cat eyes!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

30. He can keep all those catalogs.

[SidDithers]

34. Thanks, Obama...

Sid

[bunnies]

40. !!!

Thats the best one yet!

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. !!!

[JoePhilly]

64. !!!

[pnwmom]

37. It's more like he's looking at itemized phone bills. n/t

[bunnies]

39. You mean like the Post Office does?

[grahamhgreen]

50. Not at all. The post Office does it to deliver the mail, not to collate data.

[bunnies]

51. You sure?

[grahamhgreen]

59. Actually, no. But that should be what they are doing if they want to stay in compliance.

[bunnies]

61. In compliance with the Gov't?

I dont know what to think anymore.

[randome]

56. Ah, but the POTENTIAL is there. Do you really want a Republican administration to have that power?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Pisces]

41. President Obama is not personally looking at your things. This has everything to do with the person

for many and not the act.

[Recursion]

44. Two issues

1. It's specifically not a violation of the 4th Amendment, but of statute (the Court has actually ruled on this)

2. You have to imagine a situation where they don't know that you own the mailbox without a warrant.

[grahamhgreen]

52. 1) a statute does not override the constitution. 2) Not sure what you mean?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

53. HUH?!?!??!!

[Buns_of_Fire]

58. He'd be bored to death. Except maybe for the "Victoria's Secret" catalogs.

The local constabulary might be interested in them while looking for preverts. Jedgar Hoover might be interested in them for shopping.

[grahamhgreen]

62. Not with my mail! My mail is cool and exciting. But private.

[krawhitham]

60. I would rather Imagine people had a clue

[treestar]

65. That wouldn't be all that bad. Better than Agent Mike.

[sabrina 1]

66. It would be creepy if your mother was doing it. But at least you could catch her and stop her.

When the powerful government is doing it, it is even more creepy. Strangers, maybe in some foreign country since those Giant Security Corps have to outsource their work to maximize their profits, it is even creepier and even when you catch them, you can't stop them.

Strangers, tracking your every phone call, 'collecting and storing them' for possible later enjoym ... use! Isn't that a crime?

[BlueToTheBone]

70. He is one busy man! n/t

[KoKo]

76. And is it any difference from Romney, McCain, Bush, Reagan, Nixon doing it?

NO...it's only PARTY DIFFERENCES!

We EXPECTED AND VOTED FOR YEARS FOR BETTER! THIS SHIT IS WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN!

What are we gonna' DO about it?

Tell Me? We did what the best we coould do...and THIS is what we get?

Should we keep blaming REPUGS when our own DEM Party is complicit or compliant..(does it make a difference?)

Many here want to blame RW Repugs for EVERYTHING.... It's getting to be think gruel when the evidence IS that BOTH are selling us down the river....just that ONE PARTY seems to sell us DRIVIL about "Hope from Arkansas" or "Hope and Change" from Chicago.

Take your pick.

[840high]

83. My feelings exactly.

[NoOneMan]

86. Any data collected today can be used by tomorrow's algorithms and assholes

Who is in charge is actually irrelevant. Even the current "law of the land" is irrelevant. Today's data *will* be analyzed by the most nefarious imaginable programs in the most viable worst-case scenario in the future. Just because you aren't being flagged today for being a likely criminal does not mean what you are doing today will not get you flagged tomorrow.

[Summer Hathaway]

87. Thanks for your help!

Those votes aren't going to just surpress themselves!

[Tarheel_Dem]

100. You noticed that too? All opposition research directed at Obama; rarely, if ever at the Repukes.

[Summer Hathaway]

103. The 'both parties are the same',

why bother voting crowd is out in force today.

Just got an ad here on DU for an "Obama should be impeached" click-through. It's a great day here on DemocraticUnderground, ain't it?

[Tarheel_Dem]

147. That's it. It's about suppression, pure & simple. It's not work I'd wanna do, but....

I wonder if it pays well?

[Summer Hathaway]

152. It might have paid well at one time

but the sheer volume of applicants has probably brought the pay scale down. And the quality of the work product seems to have suffered as a result.

[Tarheel_Dem]

154. And the employer sucks! Can you imagine having to work for them?

[Summer Hathaway]

155. Well, according to some,

one employer is exactly the same as the other. So why bother choosing between them?

[Tarheel_Dem]

156. And the worst ones think DU represents "the left". Anonymous internet "liberals" tickle me.

[Summer Hathaway]

159. It's more hilarious than that, my friend

There are those here who think DU represents the real world.

[emulatorloo]

180. My favorite part about this place

As delusional as Freepers.

[emulatorloo]

181. Betting Karl Rove is DU's top $$$$$ contributor w all the Fake Progressives he's sponsoring.

But their gullible sycophants work for free.

[Tarheel_Dem]

184. The collusion of Jane Hamsher & Grover Norquist was my first HUGE clue to what's happening in the...

leftosphere. If they're doing it for free, then they're even sadder than I thought.

[Progressive dog]

91. Obama personally is looking at nothing. nt

[grahamhgreen]

117. Especially the law.

[Progressive dog]

124. Now that would be an opinion

based on limited evidence.

[grahamhgreen]

144. Based on "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,

against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause"

[Progressive dog]

174. See this is why the constitution has lasted so long

through all the new technologies the founders didn't have. Congress writes bills and there's a mechanism in the Constitution for turning them into laws. Once they become laws, over 200 years of precedent says that only the Supreme court can declare them unconstitutional.
I can read the Constitution, I'm just wondering who put you in charge.

[grahamhgreen]

175. Who put us in charge? Why the Constitution!

[Progressive dog]

178. I missed that part and so has everyone else since it was written

[treestar]

169. "The law" is not the body of your opinions

If he looked at the law, Obama will keep reading your letters until it has been established that the law he is operating under is invalid. The courts decide that, rather than your personal wishes.

[marshall]

105. They already do that

The US Post Office takes a photo of every letter that passes through its hands. It would be a simple task to digitize the text from those photos and cross reference it with phone records. Throw in the census information for good measure and you've got a party detailed account of many many folks.

[grahamhgreen]

120. The do it to deliver the mail, not snoop on citizens.

[marshall]

149. Yeah, that's it, to deliver the mail...

Wink, wink!

[Liberal_in_LA]

122. excellent analogy

[ucrdem]

135. You're thinking of Gone With the Wind.

But that was just a movie.

[madrchsod]

146. where`s he find the time to do this?

that guy isn`t be paid enough to do what he does everyday of the week.

[Trekologer]

148. It isn't a violation of the 4th Amendment

In Smith v. Maryland, the Supreme Court decided in 1979 that you have no expectation of privacy of the phone numbers you call.

[Hekate]

153. Yeah, Obama is personally doing this.

And he personally set up the program as soon as Baby Caligula left office, because it didn't exist before then.

YES the system is fubared.

But what is "perverse and twisted" is the way so many here seem to believe my above sarcastic comments as if they were the simple truth, when the truth is a lot more complicated than that, and if we continue to look for simple answers we will get nowhere.

I had a very sarcastic history professor in college, very bright as well, and she used to snarl at us: "Simple minds, simple answers."

Surely we can do better.

[6000eliot]

158. Who cares about this paranoid nonsense?

Real rights are being threatened while people focus their attentions on this crap.

[sibelian]

173. If it was Obama himself I don't think I'd mind all that much, although I WOULD mind...

It isn't. It's some other bunch of guy that we don't really get to do anything about. That's the problem that so many defending Obama over surveillance don't seem to get....

[still_one]

176. Wow, how does he find time to do anything else?

[still_one]

177. I wonder if he reads the ED spam I get also

[baldguy]

186. That's not what's happening.

It's more like he's writing down the make, model, plate # & color of the cars going through an intersection. There's no way he can know which car belongs to which person. But, if there's a hit&run he can see where that particular car has been - and maybe catch the driver.