"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."

I think I remember reading this somewhere. If I come across it again I'll be sure to cite it.

^^^this.

There's no watchdog, at least not a reliable one in real time. In light of what is coming out from DOJ, EPA, IRS and probably some day the HHS...Very dangerous stuff for the suppression of opposition and dissent.

And that's just cherry-picking and subverting context of stuff people actually said and did - imagine when you get into doctoring the data!

BoatShoes;1453299 wrote:I'm beginning to think there should just be a 4th branch of government...An investigatory branch charged with being a watch dog on the Executive branch. Like, we elect a National Inspector General every 4 years but in the middle of a presidential term and she appoints the Inspector's General for each Executive Agency, etc.

Isn't this always the answer. More government. Government failure begets more government. The Federal government is abusing its power so lets massively expand it. Yeah that will work. I got a novel idea. How about we shrink the size, scope, and ability of the Federal government has to pry into our daily lives. Maybe we should eliminate or drastically cut Federal bureaucracies? Maybe we could eliminate the DHS? How about ditching the current tax code which is designed by social engineers to coerce citizens to act as the government sees fit and replace it with a simple across the board method? I could go on and on.

Whats awesome is the government can do whatever it wants and the people argue over pepsi or coke. "No the dems! No the republicans!" - totally allows them to do whatever they want. Congrats.

Who's going to stop them? Just try and get a revolution started and see what happens. You think it's bad in other countries, with our military it wouldn't last a day. I don't believe that crap about the military not firing on Americans, they will do what they are told. Voting for another party? Good luck with that, they are all the same. Obama railed against this in 2006, but "being President changes things". Rand Paul could get elected President and he would do the exact same stuff as Clinton, Bush and Obama. Once government gets power, you aren't getting it away from them.

Well, safe to assume all the wireless providers are included. Add to the list MS, Google, Apple, Skype and pretty much all the major internet/social media players.

I'm still a little torn, or at least I was. In some respects, I would put this on the level of tracking/data mining that we willingly give to Google and others for free services. I don't feel threatened giving the govt something similar to keep me safe. The problem is, as mentioned, that we just can't trust the govt with this data.

Anyway, gives a whole new meaning to "Obama phones"...ba-dah-bah-bop

The vast majority of this data won't do shit, most people in this country just aren't interesting enough. It's the principle of the thing that pisses me off. We supposedly have this constitution that gives us rights and protections against stuff like this, but who is going to make the government obey the constitution?

tk421;1453721 wrote:The vast majority of this data won't do shit, most people in this country just aren't interesting enough. It's the principle of the thing that pisses me off. We supposedly have this constitution that gives us rights and protections against stuff like this, but who is going to make the government obey the constitution?

We The Sheeple

tk421;1453721 wrote:The vast majority of this data won't do ****, most people in this country just aren't interesting enough. It's the principle of the thing that pisses me off. We supposedly have this constitution that gives us rights and protections against stuff like this, but who is going to make the government obey the constitution?

+1. And add in the other point about our citizenry arguing more about Pepsi or Coke, and a media hyping that argument and it's a recipe for an uninformed and uneducated mass of - yes, sheeple!

ps: Pepsi.

RC COLA

majorspark;1453611 wrote:Isn't this always the answer. More government. Government failure begets more government. The Federal government is abusing its power so lets massively expand it. Yeah that will work.

That was my first thought when I read that. I considered that maybe that "4th branch" should be comprised of private citizens, but that branch would eventually just follow the government's lead.

BoatShoes;1453299 wrote:
I'm beginning to think there should just be a 4th branch of government...An investigatory branch charged with being a watch dog on the Executive branch.

Then who watches the watchers, the 5th branch? Iterate to infinity.

majorspark;1453611 wrote:Isn't this always the answer. More government. Government failure begets more government. The Federal government is abusing its power so lets massively expand it. Yeah that will work. I got a novel idea. How about we shrink the size, scope, and ability of the Federal government has to pry into our daily lives. Maybe we should eliminate or drastically cut Federal bureaucracies? Maybe we could eliminate the DHS? How about ditching the current tax code which is designed by social engineers to coerce citizens to act as the government sees fit and replace it with a simple across the board method? I could go on and on.

You make a valid point. I suppose I'm presupposing that much of America wants the current National Security Public infrastructure, Tax Exempt Organizations, an Income Tax, etc., that would need to investigate it.

maybe we don't need a new branch but to give Congress better investigatory problems. We already do have inspectors general and I personally find it problematic that the President appoints them and that they report to the President and aren't obligated to go to Congress immediately when they find something....that the DOJ is supposed to investigate its own brother-sister departments for criminal wrong doing.

Seems like, within the vein that the Founders envisioned the branches checking on one an other...at the very least, that inspections of the Executive branch or investigations of criminal wrong doing of the executive, out to be more within the realm of Congress. Like, to me, it should instantly be a special prosector appointed by Congress...not Eric Holder investigating guys on his own team.

queencitybuckeye;1453784 wrote:Then who watches the watchers, the 5th branch? Iterate to infinity.

You make a good point. As I said to Major...maybe just give Congress better investigatory powers.

1. Not shocked. I've assumed this has been the case for years.
2. It sucks, but honestly, that is the system put in place that has largely protected us.
3. Trying to stop or end a bureaucratic spy program like that is damn near impossible.
4. I doubt it is peeping into everything we say or do, just too much data for that. Still it is the concept that gets people upset.
5. Compared to things the Government did during the Cold War, this is nothing.
6. We all wanted to prevent another 9/11, well, this is what we got.

I'm concerned like you all are. I just want proper, really proper oversight on this, if it is continued.

ptown_trojans_1;1453899 wrote:1. Not shocked. I've assumed this has been the case for years.
2. It sucks, but honestly, that is the system put in place that has largely protected us.
3. Trying to stop or end a bureaucratic spy program like that is damn near impossible.
4. I doubt it is peeping into everything we say or do, just too much data for that. Still it is the concept that gets people upset.
5. Compared to things the Government did during the Cold War, this is nothing.
6. We all wanted to prevent another 9/11, well, this is what we got.

I'm concerned like you all are. I just want proper, really proper oversight on this, if it is continued.

"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."

Are these just words on old paper to remind us of our past or do they actually mean something?

BGFalcons82;1453909 wrote:"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."

Are these just words on old paper to remind us of our past or do they actually mean something?

They are.
But, they didn't during the Cold War when we wiretapped, subjected people to radiation after nuclear tests, tested biological and chemical agents, and other horrible things.
That has been and is our Government.

ptown_trojans_1;1453928 wrote:They are.
But, they didn't during the Cold War when we wiretapped, subjected people to radiation after nuclear tests, tested biological and chemical agents, and other horrible things.
That has been and is our Government.

So...because the old parchment was violated previously, it should be violated again and again? If they're going to not follow our founding documents, then they should have a ceremony wherein the papers are burned at the stake. Might as well make it official, eh?

All that data and technology....still can't stop Chinese hackers

BGFalcons82;1453934 wrote:So...because the old parchment was violated previously, it should be violated again and again? If they're going to not follow our founding documents, then they should have a ceremony wherein the papers are burned at the stake. Might as well make it official, eh?

No, not saying that.
Just saying this is not the 1st, nor the last time the Government will do something like this for national security.
This is wrong, but we can't just think it is a recent thing.
It has been ingrained in the national security structure for over 60 years.

gut;1453966 wrote:All that data and technology....still can't stop Chinese hackers

Well, to be fair, they are damn good, and it is an endless cycle of offense and defense.

Where's that libbbberrrralll ACLU been hiding on this?

Computer data on people's personals, including health records will be bought and paid for as well. If you have a family history of early cardio disease or a propensity for cancer, companies will not hire you. Bad risks...are bad risks. Sorry to hijack the thread, but if the government can spy, then the info obtained can and will be used by the private sector against the citizenry as well. Just give it time.

Footwedge;1454071 wrote:Computer data on people's personals, including health records will be bought and paid for as well. If you have a family history of early cardio disease or a propensity for cancer, companies will not hire you. Bad risks...are bad risks. Sorry to hijack the thread, but if the government can spy, then the info obtained can and will be used by the private sector against the citizenry as well. Just give it time.

Hey, at least we will become more efficient with only the best workers getting jobs

Footwedge;1454067 wrote:Where's that libbbberrrralll ACLU been hiding on this?

https://www.aclu.org/secure/stop-massive-spying-program

Right out in the open. How clever of them.