Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News NY Times discloses secret Executive Order: NSA is spying domestically

  1. Dec 15, 2005 #1
    [SOLVED] NY Times discloses secret Executive Order: NSA is spying domestically

    continued (5 page article)

    Oh my god.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 15, 2005 #2
    People really are retarted...

    When the Patriot Act was passed, every raving Liberal nutcase was screaming that it gave the Federal Government way too much power in it's ability to spy on people, to tap their phone and so on. Most people said they were nuts, and supported the Patriot Act. Now look what happened, those nutjobs were dead on. It just took everyone else about 4 years to get it.
  4. Dec 15, 2005 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Actually, this has been pretty much known for quite awhile, lots of articles about it in the last couple of years. The government's ability to demand access to ISP's records, etc... phone taps, this isn't new.

    I attended a seminar (for about 30 of us) my company (a major telecom) held for us a couple of years ago with a person who was the former technology advisor to Chief Justice Warren Burger, Rear Admiral Grace Hopper, The Executive Office of the President of the United States, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This stuff isn't secret. He was a cool guy, great to talk to. Quite an eye opener.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  5. Dec 15, 2005 #4
    No this hasn't been known about at all - you didn't look at the article did you?

  6. Dec 15, 2005 #5


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Yes, I did, The NSA, that's been known for awhile.
  7. Dec 15, 2005 #6
    Oh - I'd never heard of it. Do you have any links?
  8. Dec 16, 2005 #7
    Who cares? How does this affect you in ANY WAY whatsoever? The government could have a camera in front of my face all day for all I care.

    This has been done in the past, people have known about it. Why would anyone care? If you aren't planning on causing some terror (!!!!), then the government will take no interest in you anyway. Before you say that this is taking away your rights, just think for a second. What rights is it taking away? Privacy? pfft, just because some person can listen to your phone call doesn't mean it's the end of your privacy, which is overrated anyway.
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2005
  9. Dec 16, 2005 #8
    The only people aside from terrorists that would have to worry would be big time criminals and even then I don't think the information gathered by the NSA would be usable legally.
  10. Dec 16, 2005 #9


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I was thinking of posting last night, but didn't - glad (for once) others posted their opinions before me.

    I agree that this is old news - have you guys just never heard of the NSA? Echelon? The encryption debate? Email routing?

    And I also agree that this isn't a big deal unless you are a criminal. Guys, privacy? It only exists in your bedroom - and then only if you are alone and have the drapes closed.

    Consider this: why should your right to privacy in a phone conversation be any different from your right to privacy in a face-to-face conversation in a crowded restaurant (ie, nonexistent)?
  11. Dec 16, 2005 #10
    Echelon didn't spy on US citizens in the US.
  12. Dec 16, 2005 #11


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    What I think is the right to know that you are being monitored. When you call those support centers, they sometimes tell you that your call may be monitored. That is correct practice. In a crowded restaurant, sure I know that the guy sitting beside could potentially listen in. But on the phone, I wouldn't expect the same. There are times you don't want people knowing about parts of your life.

    The whole issue about privacy isn't just about privacy. Atleast not in my opinion. It's about how it can be abused. If you know the guy who's doing these 'investigations', it's mighty easy to get someone marked a terrorist suspect isn't it. Although it may sound okay that this info is going to the 'government', but government is still people.
  13. Dec 16, 2005 #12


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    YEAH RIGHT hahahahha :rofl:

    Well anyway. The only thing NSA is incapable of cracking are those big bit keys. So take out your EE reference handbook and start making PGP video phones over TCP/IP if you are so worried about your privacy.
  14. Dec 16, 2005 #13
    yup... In Italy most phones are tapped, people are just used to it now..
  15. Dec 16, 2005 #14
    Evo, yup I agree, for the most part, I would say the majority of people who learn from sources other than the mainstream media know this, however, those who stay current - mainly through the media... well they might be a bit ... clueless. Those are the same peeps who after 4 or 5 yrs. are only now starting to realize the Prez, Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, ect - lied about Iraq's WMDs and guess what, they learned this fact from the media - only after the media sarted putting it out.
    I believe the tapping of individual and corporate phone lines has and will prove to be susceptible to abuse by those with dubious ethics and greed for values. I think the proof of the pudding will come when and if we hear or see indictments, suits and or media investigations into 'alledged' vioplations that give some unknown group or individual assess that lets them profit in stocks,bonds or trading info - that allows for the type of indescrections like the 'Plume' flap, that lets some person(s) in positions of authority extort some public official(s) into acting against their publicly stated position and/or conscience.
  16. Dec 16, 2005 #15


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Because a phone conversation in the privacy of one's home is not in a public forum, unless one now considers the telecom systems to be public forums.

    That would defeat the purpose of 'spying'. The idea is that someone is violating the law, or perhaps planning to do so, and the government reserves the right to intervene.

    As far as call centers go, that is a commerical relationship or transaction. The call is monitored for quality, and perhaps the fact that the company wants their employees to be efficient - more calls/unit time = more calls/unit cost.

    Until the president signed the order, the NSA was not supposed to spy on US citizens, but was supposed to be restricted to embassies and foreign missions (and perhaps foreigners).

    The problem however is when the government spies on the citizens for purely political reasons and not for national security. The Bush administration apparently spies on people who do not agree with policy, which has nothing to do with national security.
  17. Dec 16, 2005 #16


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Because, moose&russ watters, saying in private phone conversation
    something like "Can't somebody kill that idiot of a president we've got" can easily be construed by fanatics as an attempt to murder George W. Bush.

    After all, the vast majority of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay haven't done anything more "criminal" than this.
  18. Dec 16, 2005 #17
    Perhaps this is a bit of an exageration?
    I and friends of mine have deliberately said all kinds of no-no phrases on the phone for the specific purpose of seeing what would happen. Well that and because we were ****ing around. Nothing ever happened. We've talking about the mob, kidnappings, drugs, drug running, gun running, bombs, assasinating the president, yada yada. It makes you wonder.
  19. Dec 16, 2005 #18
    That is one of my concerns.

    More likely its because you are or were being covertly observed and as long as your a staunch Bushie you canna do no-ting wrong.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 16, 2005
  20. Dec 16, 2005 #19
    But I'm not a "bushie".
  21. Dec 16, 2005 #20
    Sorry, my bad TSA. I don't know why you gave me the feeling you flowed along the types of lines Russ follow. Again my apologies.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook