Re: NSA wiretap, Friday night

responder wrote:

imhotep wrote:

Barton L. Phillips wrote:

imhotep wrote:
Barton L. Phillips wrote:

responder wrote:
Even in this article, what is _not_ said, what is glossed over, is
that there is no oversight. The program has been judged illegal and
unconstitutional and yet continues.

Even in this article, what is _not_ said, what is glossed over, is
that all (_*all*_) communications within the US, or that pass
through US hubs
*might* be monitored, tapped, recorded, or *modified*. That
includes all commercial, personal or political communications.
That is the really big problem, "no oversight". The government says
there can't be oversight because that would compromise security. If
that is not a catch 21 explanation I don't know what is. The Bush
administration is saying "trust me", and why shouldn't we have they
ever
done anything to make us thing they are not the most trustworthy
people in all the world?

They say that the spying is only on information going in and out of
the country, but how is anyone to know if there is no oversight. That
is why this kind of activity should and previously did need a
warrant. Their approach is like the classic joke "I could tell you
but then I would have to kill you". Well they are killing us.



...and your *REALLY* think anti Net Neutrality is really about helping
business get better bandwidth???

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Imhotep
Interesting web site, but what does it have to do with this thread?
What am I missing? There was another thread about "Net Neutrality" was
this supposed to go with that thread?


They are related as there is a covert attempt here in the US to monitor
and thus control the Internet. In some ways it is also linked to the
illegal (in my opinion anyway) wiretapping that is also going on. Also,
it was revealed that AT&T had been examining email for the US Gov about
6 months ago. Also without a warrent. Then look at the fight Google had
when the US Gov wanted the searches from 1 Million people. And it was
revealed that Yahoo had been doing it for sometime. I ask you, why would
you ask for 1 million random people?

If you look at the big picture here in the US there is a broad and far
reaching attempt to remove the anonymity of people on the Internet...as
well as monitor them...

Imhotep

it is far more board than one first thinks.


As OP in this thread, I think you have gone off topic.

I agree with your net-neutral ideas. Many (who I know) do not. Your
off-topic comments in this thread do not advance any meaningful discussion
of the subject at hand. They actually detract from the focus of the
discussion.

Not to be unkind or mean in any way. But: If you cannot talk to the
subject at hand, then don't write at all.

...Hope to hear from you in a different thread soon. :)


Again, I did not mean to derail your discussion. However, I do see a
connection (Illegal Wiretaps and Anti Net Neutrality). My point was to
*add* to your discussion not *subtract* from it...If you think I was
subtracting from it, then I apologize. It was not my intent...

Imhotep
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NSA wiretap, Friday night
    ... Barton L. Phillips wrote: ... there can't be oversight because that would compromise security. ... There was another thread about "Net Neutrality" was this ... well as monitor them... ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: NSA wiretap, Friday night
    ... imhotep wrote: ... there can't be oversight because that would compromise security. ... administration is saying "trust me", and why shouldn't we have they ... They are related as there is a covert attempt here in the US to monitor ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: NSA wiretap, Friday night
    ... imhotep wrote: ... there can't be oversight because that would compromise security. ... Interesting web site, but what does it have to do with this thread? ... There was another thread about "Net Neutrality" was this supposed to go with that thread? ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)