top secret court ruling: your telephone data are no secret

Verizon forced to hand over telephone data – full court ruling

www.guardian.co.uk...

Btw., what is a "top secret" court order? Isnt a " top secret" court order unconstitutional?

This story is hot stuff around the internet. So why is this thread lifelesss? Does no one care that the Obama admin is treating our constitution as toilet paper? Come on folks, stand up for our last shred of privavy we HAD left!

Originally posted by elouina
This story is hot stuff around the internet. So why is this thread lifelesss?

Probably because this story has already been posted multiple times now.

reply to post by elouina


It is also not even 4am on the east coast yet. Most of America is still in bed.
Still, this is nothing new. Actually, I'm surprised they even went to court at all. I never expected anything on my phone to be private anyway. Of course they are listening, I'de be disappointing if they weren't.

reply to post by alfa1


Yeah I saw that, but wow those threads should be at the top of the recent topic lists and they weren't when I showed up. This topic is fully alive and awake elsewhere in the US. Even CNN has it on their front page news. Comments showing up 20- 80 every minute there. This is major news!

Well I consider it full frontal nudity on part of the Obama administration.

But, there are more important things that arent on the news, like the fact that the administration is chest deep in scandals and currently they are planning some sort of invasion on the southern border.

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by alfa1

 

Yeah I saw that, but wow those threads should be at the top of the recent topic lists and they weren't when I showed up. This topic is fully alive and awake elsewhere in the US. Even CNN has it on their front page news. Comments showing up 20- 80 every minute there. This is major news!

But as watchitburn (and others) have suggested, maybe its also that ATS users dont consider it news.
Its more like an assumption from first principles that everyone is keeping records on everything you do, and have been for years.
So its official? Yeah, kinda knew it already.

Yep, privacy is an endangered right anymore. I even heard that the F.B.I wants yahoo to fork over user mail data! I'm so sick of the noose tightening around everybody's neck!!! Do this!! Don't do that!!! What??? you have a little marijuana in your system?? You'll never get a job around here again you sinner!!!!! You know what I say??? K M A and F T W

reply to post by watchitburn


You seem to be expressing a defeatist point of view. The US has the benefit of its constitution and the Fourth Amendment.

'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This order flies in the face of the principles set out above. Where is the probable cause in this case?

I'm in the UK where we don't have the benefit of a written constitution - but legally - the US citizenry has their government over a barrel on this one.

There are many famous quotes that apply to just these circumstances.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

In relation to the fictitious war on 'terror' I found this definition of 'terror' on Wiki rather interesting

The modern definition of terrorism refers to criminal or illegal acts of violence at randomly chosen targets, in an effort to raise fear. It is practiced by extremist groups with a limited political base or parties on the weaker side in asymmetric warfare. Terror on the other hand is practiced by governments and law enforcement officials, usually within the legal framework of the state.

So 'terrorism' is practiced by extremists but 'terror' is practiced by government - curious that the political class described it as a 'war on terror' and not a 'war on terrorism'. What they mean is a 'war for terror.' Because with fear they have the excuse to erode more and more rights and freedoms.

Where is this all going? To a dark place I think.

Originally posted by elouina
This is major news!

But it's not news to those who suspected that the powers of the federal government were being abused already. And now it's out there for all to see, maybe it's time for theorists to get on those comments around the net and say "told you so!" to all the people who just put too much trust in their government?

Whatever people here think about this, it is a step in the right direction because now plenty of people know the truth and have lost more trust in their government. The real question is, will this create more BS partisan politics, or will people actually start thinking for themselves and stop cheer leading for a team?

I would also like to state here and now that anyone cheer leading for the prosecution of Bradley Manning but is not against this leak needs to GTFO.

He was a whistle-blower, the same as the person who leaked this secret document. If you want one of them hanged, you have to hang them all, and by doing so hand over complete totalitarian power to your government.