Feds seek sweeping measures to make web wiretapping easier!

[SOURCE]

The Obama administration is prepping a new digital security plan, and it is: We need to retrofit the Internet for the FBI.

Long gone are the days when law enforcement could easy tap into land line telephones to monitor nefarious conversations. Those nefarious conversations have moved online, and increasingly to social networks like Facebook, peer-to-peer services like Skype, and elsewhere on the Web. In an effort to catch up, The New York Times reports, the administration will submit new legislation that would require companies to build in back doors for law enforcement.

New rules

The new regulations that would be sent to Congress next year would affect American and foreign companies that provide communications services inside the U.S. It would require service providers to make the plain text of encrypted conversations — over the phone, computer or e-mail — readily available to law enforcement, according to federal officials and analysts. [AP]

The FBI’s argument is that these new rules simply allow them to enforce the legal authority they already possess, not to extend it further. For example, federal law established in 1994 extended law enforcement’s wiretapping power to broadband and digital networks because that was where more phone conversations were headed. In the FBI’s eyes, then, this is the logical next step: If the people they investigate are now doing their talking online, officers should be able to monitor that with roughly the same ease they can tap a phone call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now....... Where are all the Liberals who were screaming bloody murder over the Patriot Act and George Bush's trampling of the Constitution????

*crickets chirping*
 
[SOURCE]

The Obama administration is prepping a new digital security plan, and it is: We need to retrofit the Internet for the FBI.

Long gone are the days when law enforcement could easy tap into land line telephones to monitor nefarious conversations. Those nefarious conversations have moved online, and increasingly to social networks like Facebook, peer-to-peer services like Skype, and elsewhere on the Web. In an effort to catch up, The New York Times reports, the administration will submit new legislation that would require companies to build in back doors for law enforcement.

New rules

The new regulations that would be sent to Congress next year would affect American and foreign companies that provide communications services inside the U.S. It would require service providers to make the plain text of encrypted conversations — over the phone, computer or e-mail — readily available to law enforcement, according to federal officials and analysts. [AP]

The FBI’s argument is that these new rules simply allow them to enforce the legal authority they already possess, not to extend it further. For example, federal law established in 1994 extended law enforcement’s wiretapping power to broadband and digital networks because that was where more phone conversations were headed. In the FBI’s eyes, then, this is the logical next step: If the people they investigate are now doing their talking online, officers should be able to monitor that with roughly the same ease they can tap a phone call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now....... Where are all the Liberals who were screaming bloody murder over the Patriot Act and George Bush's trampling of the Constitution????

*crickets chirping*

I have a question for you, Dixie. Do things like this truly worry you?
 
I have a question for you, Dixie. Do things like this truly worry you?

Contrast that statement with what was said about Bush and the warrantless wiretaps, patriot act, etc. Are you that much of a delusional hack, that you think this is somehow different because Obama is president?

Nope... doesn't worry me a bit, I have nothing to hide. I just wondered what all the liberals who were opposed to the patriot act and warrantless wiretaps thought about it... and now I see, it doesn't matter to you one little bit, because it's Obama doing it.
 
I though the custom was to post an article and at least wait a while before breaking out the *crickets* stuff, no?

If you're looking for liberals that were complaining about the Patriot Act that are complaining about this it isn't too difficult to some up. Start with Glen Greenwald.

Personally, I think that any liberal that thought Obama would be any better than Bush on this score simply wasn't paying attention, just like the anti-war folks. Obama voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act including legalization of illegal warrantless surveillance and granting telcos retroactive immunity for illegal actions. It should have been clear that Obama bought into the modern surveillance state to anyone paying attention. It's total bullshit, but it was to be expected.
 
I though the custom was to post an article and at least wait a while before breaking out the *crickets* stuff, no?

If you're looking for liberals that were complaining about the Patriot Act that are complaining about this it isn't too difficult to some up. Start with Glen Greenwald.

Personally, I think that any liberal that thought Obama would be any better than Bush on this score simply wasn't paying attention, just like the anti-war folks. Obama voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act including legalization of illegal warrantless surveillance and granting telcos retroactive immunity for illegal actions. It should have been clear that Obama bought into the modern surveillance state to anyone paying attention. It's total bullshit, but it was to be expected.

Well, where are all the mindless proles running around screaming in faux outrage over their constitutional rights being trampled? Google the fucking story, it's NOT BEING REPORTED! If GWB had done something like this, you would all be shooting cows out of your ears by now! Obama does something 10x worse than Bush ever dreamed of, and we hear not a whimper from the left, not a mention from the liberal MSM about it... no one seems to really be all that concerned!

You're right, they are the same way about the wars! Hypocrites full of double standards... their guy can do whatever the fuck he wants, and they don't say a word... Bush did it, and it was the end of the world as we know it!
 
Well, where are all the mindless proles running around screaming in faux outrage over their constitutional rights being trampled? Google the fucking story, it's NOT BEING REPORTED! If GWB had done something like this, you would all be shooting cows out of your ears by now! Obama does something 10x worse than Bush ever dreamed of, and we hear not a whimper from the left, not a mention from the liberal MSM about it... no one seems to really be all that concerned!

You're right, they are the same way about the wars! Hypocrites full of double standards... their guy can do whatever the fuck he wants, and they don't say a word... Bush did it, and it was the end of the world as we know it!


Dude, your link has cites to the New York Times, the Associated Press and the Washington Post. Are those not mainstream news media?

The story broke yesterday and at this point the story is that the Obama Administration plans to submit a not yet drafted bill to Congress sometime next year. There will be plenty of time for plenty of outrage. Obama hasn't done anything. He hasn't even proposed anything yet. I understand that you and yours like to shoot first and ask questions later but let's get real.

With Bush, they just did shit without Congressional approval in the case of warrantless wiretapping and people did indeed get pissed once it was reported. Had Obama implemented this program unilaterally without Congressional approval you'd likely see a similar reaction. But the two instances are not the same. Conversely, where Bush did seek Congressional approval as with the Patriot Act the civil libertarian lefties were up in arms, and you will see a similar reaction once the details of this proposal are actually laid out.
 
snort-meth.jpg


Dixie's extra-long line o' meth.

223789797-SeizedMeth.jpg
 
Last edited:
When it comes to Democrats I think they're more concerned about being able to get medical care than whether someone is reading their email.


There are three types of Democrats near as I can tell: those that care about civil liberties, essentially the "far left," (2) those that care about civil liberties but not enough to overcome their pants-shitting fear of looking "soft on terror" and (3) those that don't really give a shit about civil liberties but may pay lip service every so often.
 
Well, where are all the mindless proles running around screaming in faux outrage over their constitutional rights being trampled? Google the fucking story, it's NOT BEING REPORTED!

I read about it in the NY Times before I read about it here. I think that you righties are given to fits of delusion, and that when Glenn Beck, in between sobs, tells you that the media isn't covering something, you just repeat that.

What does this prove? That none of you read a goddamned newspaper.

And that's all it proves.
 
Riiiiight. If anyone actually wants to read a liberal civil libertarian type on this, rather than pretending liberals don't care about it, you can just go here:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/09/27/privacy/index.html


I suppose DY's position is that it's OK even though Obama is doing it.

I'm simply going on what Apple, WM and Darla have expressed in this very thread.

My position is certainly not government censorship of speech, especially political speech.
 
I have a question for you, Dixie. Do things like this truly worry you?

I worries me because it is an invasion of my privacy. The whole "I don't have anything to hide" is irrelevant. It is a right that we should protect, not toss aside based on who resides in the whitehouse.

This is as nauseating as the patriot act.

In fact, it worries me more that more people are not worried about it.
 
Back
Top