In a shocking unexpected move that nobody predicted, NSA data will soon routinely be used for domes
68 replies, posted
[quote]A while back, we noted a report showing that the “sneak-and-peek” provision of the Patriot Act that was alleged to be used only in national security and terrorism investigations has overwhelmingly been used in narcotics cases. Now the New York Times reports that National Security Agency data will be shared with other intelligence agencies like the FBI without first applying any screens for privacy. The ACLU of Massachusetts blog Privacy SOS explains why this is important:
[quote]
What does this rule change mean for you? In short, domestic law enforcement officials now have access to huge troves of American communications, obtained without warrants, that they can use to put people in cages. FBI agents don’t need to have any “national security” related reason to plug your name, email address, phone number, or other “selector” into the NSA’s gargantuan data trove. They can simply poke around in your private information in the course of totally routine investigations. And if they find something that suggests, say, involvement in illegal drug activity, they can send that information to local or state police. That means information the NSA collects for purposes of so-called “national security” will be used by police to lock up ordinary Americans for routine crimes. And we don’t have to guess who’s going to suffer this unconstitutional indignity the most brutally. It’ll be Black, Brown, poor, immigrant, Muslim, and dissident Americans: the same people who are always targeted by law enforcement for extra “special” attention.[/quote][/quote]
source:[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/03/10/surprise-nsa-data-will-soon-routinely-be-used-for-domestic-policing-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-terrorism/[/url]
[t]http://scotshonor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/cropped-CryingEagle-Flag640.jpg[/t]
It's like when that catalogue of police stingrays came out and pretty much all of them advertised waaay more intrusive features than what people thought was possible
Honestly how are the NSA lovers in Congress and on the trail going to spin this
uh.... wouldn't this be illegal?
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49922230]uh.... wouldn't this be illegal?[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure. But with no one to actually enforce this being illegal, I'm afraid it's not worth much.
[QUOTE=Sableye;49922185]It's like when that catalogue of police stingrays came out and pretty much all of them advertised waaay more intrusive features than what people thought was possible
Honestly how are the NSA lovers in Congress and on the trail going to spin this[/QUOTE]
There's nothing to spin. You can't undo something every law enforcement agency in America will actively enforce, no matter how utterly bullshit it is.
Thomas Jefferson didn't go on multipage rants about [I]actively[/I] securing the [b]rights and responsibilities[/b] of a democratic society because it passed the time between snogging the help.
This was all predicted quite some time ago, and here we are.
Nothing will change unless the majority decide it is to be changed and then actively pursue just that.
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49922230]uh.... wouldn't this be illegal?[/QUOTE]
Not if they do [URL="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/how-the-dea-uses-parallel-construction-to-hide-unconstitutional-investigations.html"]parallel construction[/URL].
It is a really clever trick. NSA finds out that Joe sells 2 kilograms of marijuana a month, they dispatch the information and everything about Joe to the DEA, including his personal habits, activities and his schedule (e..g when he leaves the house.) This is a decades old, bedrock concept utilized by the DEA.
[quote]The undated documents show that federal agents are trained to [URL="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805"]"recreate" the investigative trail [/URL]to effectively cover up where the information originated, a practice that some experts say violates a defendant's Constitutional right to a fair trial. If defendants don't know how an investigation began, they cannot know to ask to review potential sources of exculpatory evidence - information that could reveal entrapment, mistakes or biased witnesses.[/quote]
As you know, saying to the courts that you have illegally obtained information that Joe the drug dealer has sold drugs acquired fresh from NSA databanks, is not a valid probable cause. There has to be something that Joe did in front of LEOs that "triggered" the investigation of him in the first place. So what they do, is recreate the investigation trail. They find some minor crime that Joe has committed, like for example, a broken tail light. They wait until Joe is transporting large amount of drugs in the car with the broken tail light, and THEN they pull him over. The officer "spots" the drugs either by plain-view sight or by calling in drug dogs (again with no valid reason). After the DEA finds it, they can say they busted Joe based on legal pretenses and the judge would allow it.
It would not simply be possible for the DEA to bust Joe because the NSA has gathered intel on Joe when neither government agency hasn't acquired sufficient probable cause.
And Edward Snowden was the traitor?
Next thing you know, there are actually people who do not support Edward's Snowden's martyrdom.
Fucking cunts.
so what 3 letter agencies do actually care about America?
[QUOTE=Starpluck;49922374]Not if they do [URL="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/how-the-dea-uses-parallel-construction-to-hide-unconstitutional-investigations.html"]parallel construction[/URL].
It is a really clever trick. NSA finds out that Joe sells 2 kilograms of marijuana a month, they dispatch the information and everything about Joe to the DEA, including his personal habits, activities and his schedule (e..g when he leaves the house.) This an a decades old, bedrock concept utilized by the DEA.
As you know, saying to the courts that you have illegally obtained information that Joe the drug dealer is going to sell drugs, acquired from NSA databanks, is not a valid probable cause. There has to be something Joe does that "triggered" your investigation of him in the first place. So what they do, is recreate the investigation trail. They find some minor crime that Joe has committed, like for example, a broken tail light. They wait until Joe is transporting large amount of drugs in the car with the broken tail light, and THEN they pull him over. The officer "spots" the drugs either by plain-view sight or by calling in drug dogs (again with no valid reason). After the DEA finds it, they can say they busted Joe based on legal pretenses and the judge would allow it.
It would not simply be possible for the DEA to bust Joe because the NSA has gathered intel on Joe when neither government agency hasn't acquired sufficient probable cause.[/QUOTE]
Shut it down! Shut it all down!
Boy am I glad I crossed the border back into Canada today. The surveillance state grew another suffocating tentacle. Right now it's drug deals, how long until political activists get it? (This is nothing new, COINTELPRO targeted activists among others.)
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49922494]so what 3 letter agencies do actually care about America?[/QUOTE]
The CDC hasn't gone to the dark side yet.
-wait, that's not a government agency-
[QUOTE=pentium;49922675]The KKK.[/QUOTE]
Do you even think or do you just type words into your computer when they come to you
I mean I'm not usually one to attack users but jesus christ my man
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49922538]Boy am I glad I crossed the border back into Canada today. The surveillance state grew another suffocating tentacle. Right now it's drug deals, how long until political activists get it? (This is nothing new, COINTELPRO targeted activists among others.)
The CDC hasn't gone to the dark side yet.[/QUOTE]
...yet. don't tempt the fates
[QUOTE=phygon;49922690]Do you even think or do you just type words into your computer when they come to you
I mean I'm not usually one to attack users but jesus christ my man[/QUOTE]
It's a three lett
Oh wait, it's not a government organization. Nevermind.
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49922230]uh.... wouldn't this be illegal?[/QUOTE]
Your not a Communist are you?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49922538]Boy am I glad I crossed the border back into Canada today. The surveillance state grew another suffocating tentacle. Right now it's drug deals, how long until political activists get it? (This is nothing new, COINTELPRO targeted activists among others.)
The CDC hasn't gone to the dark side yet.[/QUOTE]
Actually I would be totally on board with the CDC being able to access the NSAs tracking data if it were for mapping out epidemic spreads, but that is probably the worst possible scenario
[QUOTE=Sableye;49922185]It's like when that catalogue of police stingrays came out and pretty much all of them advertised waaay more intrusive features than what people thought was possible
[B]Honestly how are the NSA lovers in Congress and on the trail going to spin this[/B] [/QUOTE]
What you're not on board with this? do you want your kids to be getting sold heroin/murdered/raped? You must be a sick fuck if you want kids to get raped.
Parallel construction is so fucking immoral though.
It brings up huge moral dilemmas around "The ends justify the means".
Well as long as its for the safety of the people, then its aaaallll eh-oh-kay
What kind of data do they go off for this kind of thing? Phone numbers that have been called, websites visited?
[QUOTE=Spacewolf;49923405]What kind of data do they go off for this kind of thing? Phone numbers that have been called, websites visited?[/QUOTE]
Basically everything.
[QUOTE=Spacewolf;49923405]What kind of data do they go off for this kind of thing? Phone numbers that have been called, websites visited?[/QUOTE]
They probably compile massive webs involving call frequency between known drug dealers or something.
If you have a history of calling some guy every 2 weeks, who is also frequently called by other people at oddly regular intervals, and had no job to explain how he paid for what he owns, they probably figure you're a user of some kind.
Further, they can extrapolate that and find new dealers after arresting old dealers by seeing who their old clients start contacting at similar intervals.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;49923499]They probably compile massive webs involving call frequency between known drug dealers or something.
If you have a history of calling some guy every 2 weeks, who is also frequently called by other people at oddly regular intervals, and had no job to explain how he paid for what he owns, they probably figure you're a user of some kind.
Further, they can extrapolate that and find new dealers after arresting old dealers by seeing who their old clients start contacting at similar intervals.[/QUOTE]
That's interesting, so it's not like they've literally recorded all your calls or something?
They wouldn't start recording literally everyone's calls, no.
Firstly the legal implications would put their whole operation at risk. 99% of that data would be useless, they'd have to rely on speech recognition software to even try sifting that data, which would be unreliable. And they'd have to store that data, both extremely expensive and a threat to their security as well as our own in the event of a security breech.
However I'm sure after securing a warrant, they probably have methods of recording calls if they really want too, though it might rely on carrier compliance of some kind.
Just rename yourself to Russia 2 and all questions will fade.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49924271]What if you just met in person[/QUOTE]
How do you meet in person without first somehow scheduling a meeting?
[QUOTE=CoixNiro;49923062]What you're not on board with this? do you want your kids to be getting sold heroin/murdered/raped? You must be a sick fuck if you want kids to get raped.[/QUOTE]
You want to trample on our GLORIOUS FREEDOM and LIBERTY? You want to ignore the CONSTITUTION?
Are you a COMMUNIST?
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49924329]Just showing up out of the blue, making a calendar of meetings and then giving it to them
Or you could call them one time and talk about something inconspicuous like "lets go for coffee"
Then you plan meetings over a long period of time[/QUOTE]
Sounds highly unreliable unless you're dealing in bulk. I can only imagine how much of a pain it would be for a dealer to long term schedule meetings for each client.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49924348]If scheduling is the hardest part of dealing drugs, sign me up[/QUOTE]
Scheduling so that you can pay off your loaned drugs on time while not getting caught is quite hard.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.