Warentless wiretapping is an erosion of our civil liberties, plain and simple.

Not according to the Federal Appeals Court: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/washington/16fisa.html?hp

I have a suspicion that the NSA computers work about as well as most voice recognition programs. So I’m guessing for every “Jihad!” they intercept they get half a million “Gee, Dads!”

Voice communication is infinitely more complicated to analyze than regular internet traffic, and far more prone to false positives for the systems that do, (sort of) work.

Phone communication is a more precise type of monitoring. You pretty much have to know what number(s) you’re going to monitor and build a phone tree off of those. You can use voice analysis software to match voices to other known voices, but it’s very very difficult for software to actually do speech/text conversion. I mean, even on the best conditions that’s difficult, but over cell phones where audio quality is minimal it’s almost impossible. Throw in accents, and it gets even worse. Often these calls have to be monitored in real time by humans, or recorded and analyzed later by humans.

I know you all think I’m a paranoid lefty nutjob, but if anyone here has any concerns about email security, you can have a look at PGP encryption, or one of the greatest pieces of open source encryption software available right now called TrueCrypt, which can be found at http://www.truecrypt.org/.

I understand NSA is working on a super-secret phone tree that will ask you to clarify so that it can direct you to the proper department. “Did you say ‘Fill all the shoes?’ If yes, press 1. If you said ‘Kill all the Jews,’ press 2.”

You don’t know that your communications are “intercepted, analyzed, and cataloged.” You have no idea if that is true because NO ONE KNOWS THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS!

I know from the details that have been leaked, and because I have written simmilar software to perform simmilar functions.

Even the NY Times said it is likely that your communications wouldn’t be “analyzed” or even “catalogued” – they are intercepted by a big fat dumb brute of a computer that looks for keywords and other factors and, if none are present (if you are not communicating with a terrorist or suspect person overseas) your phonecon, email, or other communication is spit out back into the ether never to be seen or heard again.

Realtime analysis of data on that volume would slow communications and would be noticed. Data is split at the trunk nodes and housed for the slower analysis process. Never to be seen or heard again is joke. It’s there until a scheduled purge takes place, which could be years later depending on the schedule, if it even happens at all.

ANALYZED? Where in God’s name could you possibly have gotten that idea?

Because I have written simmilar software and it is far more trivial than you think. The data in question is granularized and depending on the parameters can be brought to the attention of actual human beings depending on the sift constraints.

You think there are a million little NSA workers sitting around analyzing people’s calls?

Nope. A million lines of code, maybe, but not a million little NSA workers. NSA workers analyze what bubbles to the surface.

And the way you made it sound, that’s exactly the kind of hysterical nonsense the left has been putting out for years – the kind of civil liberties absolutism bullshit (where anything the government does to protect us is “shredding the constitution) that either marks you as a paranoid fool or partisan hack.

Meh. Call me whatever you want. I’ll never understand why being worried about the loss of civil liberties gets you classified as being from the left. Just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. I simply find it harder to trust the government than you do.

I asked you for one example of your lost of civil rights and you quote the Constitution. How is that an answer except in your damaged brain?

Because that was a liberty lost, which is what you asked for.

Let’s see if I can make it so clear that even you can understand it:

I really appreciate your condescending high minded approach. If you’re trying to tell my how smart you are, I believe you. I get it. You’re very intelligent.

what civil rights have you PERSONALLY lost under Bush? Name one. Are you not secure in your home and papers?

No, in fact, I am not. After a technical reading of the details of the at&t federal warentless wiretapping process, it is clear to me that communications sent by me, and others who unknowingly used the CMP endpoints on the DCSNet to friends and colleagues were intercepted, analyzed, and cataloged. Thus, constituting a violation of the civil liberties of myself and everyone else who used that network, possibly you, as well. What more do you need to know? Google it. It’s all there. I’m not making this stuff up. There was a congressional investigation. It was illegal.

Any American citizen should be pissed off and up in arms that their rights were violated, and many are. What I don’t understand is the belittlement and ridicule of people who are rightfully pissed off that their privacy has been illegally violated. Doesn’t this upset you at all?

Have the police entered your home without a warrent and searched it? When the ACLU was busting it’s balls trying to prove that American citizens had their civil/Constitutional rights violated, why were they not able to come up with even one person?

No. Perhaps you should refresh yourself on the concept of the National Security Letter though. Something that was recently determined to be illegal and unconstitutional.

You offer me only the standard “hate Bush” left wing fare. Sorry, I don’t eat B/S. Nor do I chose to deal with those who try to serve it up.

I don’t understand why being pissed off at loss of liberty classifies me as left wing to you. The constitution is designed to protect the people from the government.

You don’t answer questions, you offer spin. No instance of where your civil rights have been violated and you refuse to answer the “rule of law” question when it comes to illegals in our midst.

Your illegals question was absurd and a distraction from the topic. I have no real opinion on illegal immigration. I do understand that a great deal of American business is based on it, and that’s why it’s treated with kid gloves. I’m not afraid of illegal immigrants, and as to whether or not they should be blanket deported? I really don’t care. I do know that it would destroy certain areas of commerce, rip families apart, and negatively impact American business, as can be seen by the meatpackers in Iowa.

And then, to affirm how lame your logic is, you determine that because being waterboarded by a fellow peace protester was voluntary, it was not a crime.

Of course it was not a crime. Nobody was held against their will. The torture could be stopped at any moment. It was a demonstration. It’s not even clear if it was done correctly.

By that stardard, if you volunteer to have me shoot you in the head, creating your death, I am not guilty of murder because you volunteered to be shot.

Wow. You are truly a master of logical fallacy. I don’t even know how to respond to that. What you’ve described would be murder. That’s pretty clear cut.

Thanks, you continue to show just how dimwitted you really are.

Right. You’ve made it abundantly clear how intelligent you are already. I get it.

Take your crap to you next CPA meeting. We now have a PEBO that says tough times requires tough methods. Seems you accept that from him but not President Bush.

“Tough methods” doesn’t mean illegal methods.

I am sure you will be more than happy with the socialist government that Obama is going to give you.

I’m a capitalist. Obama will not turn the country socialist.

Oh, and while you are on the Geneva Convention rant, please, do you care to tell me when Al Qaeda signed the Geneva Convention or post the clause in the Geneva Convention that deals with terrorists who hide behind civilians?

It’s interesting to see how you randomly inject stuff like this into the discussion. It’s like you honestly think that because torture is illegal and wrong, someone who is against torture actually gives a shit about terrorists. You didn’t read what I wrote before.

If you’re going to go this route, then all I can say is that it’s also U.S. Law that torture is illegal.

You don’t accept the Constitution for what it says; you accept the Constitution for what you want it to say.

Actually, the Constitution is quite clear on some very basic points. I very much accept and agree with what it says.

You are bane on American socieity.

Well then, if my getting upset about constitutional civil rights issues is that bad for American society, then I humbly, and sincerely apologize.

“After a technical reading of the details of the at&t federal warentless wiretapping process, it is clear to me that communications sent by me, and others who unknowingly used the CMP endpoints on the DCSNet to friends and colleagues were intercepted, analyzed, and cataloged.”

You don’t know that your communications are “intercepted, analyzed, and cataloged.” You have no idea if that is true because NO ONE KNOWS THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS!

Even the NY Times said it is likely that your communications wouldn’t be “analyzed” or even “catalogued” - they are intercepted by a big fat dumb brute of a computer that looks for keywords and other factors and, if none are present (if you are not communicating with a terrorist or suspect person overseas) your phonecon, email, or other communication is spit out back into the ether never to be seen or heard again.

ANALYZED? Where in God’s name could you possibly have gotten that idea? You think there are a million little NSA workers sitting around analyzing people’s calls? And the way you made it sound, that’s exactly the kind of hysterical nonsense the left has been putting out for years - the kind of civil liberties absolutism bullshit (where anything the government does to protect us is “shredding the constitution) that either marks you as a paranoid fool or partisan hack.

ed.

I asked you for one example of your lost of civil rights and you quote the Constitution. How is that an answer except in your damaged brain? Let’s see if I can make it so clear that even you can understand it:

what civil rights have you PERSONALLY lost under Bush? Name one. Are you not secure in your home and papers? Have the police entered your home without a warrent and searched it? When the ACLU was busting it’s balls trying to prove that American citizens had their civil/Constitutional rights violated, why were they not able to come up with even one person?

You offer me only the standard “hate Bush” left wing fare. Sorry, I don’t eat B/S. Nor do I chose to deal with those who try to serve it up.

You don’t answer questions, you offer spin. No instance of where your civil rights have been violated and you refuse to answer the “rule of law” question when it comes to illegals in our midst.

And then, to affirm how lame your logic is, you determine that because being waterboarded by a fellow peace protester was voluntary, it was not a crime. By that stardard, if you volunteer to have me shoot you in the head, creating your death, I am not guilty of murder because you volunteered to be shot.

Thanks, you continue to show just how dimwitted you really are.

Take your crap to you next CPA meeting. We now have a PEBO that says tough times requires tough methods. Seems you accept that from him but not President Bush.

I am sure you will be more than happy with the socialist government that Obama is going to give you.

Oh, and while you are on the Geneva Convention rant, please, do you care to tell me when Al Qaeda signed the Geneva Convention or post the clause in the Geneva Convention that deals with terrorists who hide behind civilians?

You don’t accept the Constitution for what it says; you accept the Constitution for what you want it to say.

You are bane on American socieity.

Thanks for explaining that. I foolishly assumed he was clairvoyant- traveling time through worm-holes makes much more sense. And people thought he was dumb.