Government Agency to Sift Through All Personal Data to Prevent Future Crime

Discussion in 'Politics' started by PJ1783, Dec 17, 2012.

  1. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    Counterterrorism Agency: Every Citizen A Suspect

    Effectively the government has given itself the power to bypass the 4th Amendment.

    Sadly, this doesn't surprise me at all, but it does surprise me how so few people seem to be expressing any indignation (or even any awareness) about the fact that the government wants to intrude into every aspect of our lives with no suspicion of wrongdoing.

    This isn't about terrorism. Essentially the government wants limitless power to spy on us so they could potentially predict who at some point in the future may or may not commit a crime. I knew it would be inevitable before counter-terrorism assets would be used without restraint for routine law-enforcement use, though anybody with half a brain will realize that this isn't really even about law-enforcement.

    I assume most people here will see that this isn't this exactly as what it is -- a rather transparent attempt to dispose of every last vestige of the Constitution for good so as to allow powerful government, corporate, and banking interests to identify who at some point may pose potentially some kind of threat to their status quo -- This certainly isn't about some notion of a greater good and surveillance of this assets

    To make it worse this offers up so many possibilities where innocent people can be arrested, convicted, and punished for crimes they did not commit

    1: Computer glitches and errors in data-analysis could easily make it flag innocent people as potential criminals even when they're not

    2: Information can be manufactured so as to make people look guilty of crimes they weren't guilty of (that actually happened in the Minority Report). Probable examples of people that would be likely to be subject to this would be critics, dissidents, protesters, and victims of political vendettas

    3A: The exact algorithms are probably classified so if anybody did claim they were falsely being flagged, they could not prove it. While this could pose problems in court, it might not

    3B: Should Constitutional issues present themselves, there is the possibility of extralegal action. There's the NDAA and the government's assertion of the right to kill people it deems to be potential terrorists (the primary reason the targeted-killing program was stepped up was NOT due to an increase in terrorist activity, but because of the issues of torture, indefinite detention, and military commissions -- so they figured "hey, we'll just kill 'em instead and we won't have to worry about that)

    4: Government, and powerful interests could probably keep any data about themselves out of the database

    I would not be surprised if the CT Elementary School shooting will be used as one of the justifications for a system like this: After all crises can never be allowed to go to waste, everybody is horrified by crimes against children and want their children to be safe -- even more than they want themselves to be safe -- and a number might even be willing to part with every last protection the Constitution affords to ensure the safety of their children.

    It's time to contact the following groups: ACLU EFF, EPIC which are aimed at protecting people's rights online and offline; Congressmen and Senators, particularly those of a libertarian bend, those who have demonstrated a past concern of civil liberties, you will also want to contact people on the following committees

    House

    1: Homeland Security
    2: Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
    3: Armed Services

    Senate

    1: Select Committee on Intelligence
    2: Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
    3: Armed Services

    Because they have a say in things.

    While you cannot e-mail or write Congressmen and Senators outside of your state (you can if they are IN your state so if you have that luxury great), you can call any of them which is listed on the House and Senate page.

    Of course we need not just to contact them once, but frequently -- I'd say whenever you can, preferably twice or three times a week.

    We also need to contact everybody we know who cares and get them to do this and then forward it to more. The more people do it, and the more people we contact the more people can then do the exact same thing and effectively have their phones ringing off the hook.

    As usual be courteous and respectful, under no circumstance make any threats (real or veiled) because that can be criminal and counterproductive.

    Everybody here should be acting as if this is were an existential threat to the Constitution because it is.
     
  2. indydude

    indydude Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,078
    Likes Received:
    5
    Just like Orwell wrote about in '1984', a govt agency will have a master file on each of us. Data collected from school, doctors, employers, driving record, etc.. will funnel into this database. Probably under 'Homeland security'. They will try to convince us itsa tool to keep us safe from terrorists or 'insane mass shooters'. Hell, already the credit tracking agencies know all about us.
     
  3. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    And as you'll remember in 1984 the party seeks power entirely for it's own sake -- it is not concerned in the good of others, long-life, or hapiness, just power-pure power. Power is not a means, it is an end.
     
  4. indydude

    indydude Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,078
    Likes Received:
    5
    Like north Korea.
     
  5. 56olddog

    56olddog Member

    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    3
    As we expect government to provide more and more, we should also expect the government to possess more information about us and have more control of our lives.
     
  6. Tyrsonswood

    Tyrsonswood Senior Moment Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    34,216
    Likes Received:
    26,332
    This isn't really anything new, it just makes it "legal"
     
  7. Lafincoyote

    Lafincoyote Member

    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    2
    They didn't do such a good job in Connecticut.
     
  8. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    That's right


    And that could easily justify using this which is something that's very bad.
     
  9. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    Government to sift through all personal data of every citizen in the U.S?

    Is this true?
     
  10. newbie-one

    newbie-one one with the newbiverse

    Messages:
    9,448
    Likes Received:
    1,738
    what I object to is not fundamentally the government acting to prevent horrific crimes.

    the problem, as I see it is

    a) not dealing with the reasons why people want to commit these crimes in the first place, just tightening down the screws on the lid


    b) catching up a lot of completely innocent people in a very wide dragnet


    c) the potential for blatant abuse of these powers, for example, simply to suppress political dissent
     
  11. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    Has that happened previously?
     
  12. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    odonII

    Yes. With high speed computers and datamining this is now becoming a possibility.


    e7m8

    Which is entirely the problem and why I'm opposed to it's use.
     
  13. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    I didn't ask if it is possible, which I know it probably is.
    I asked if that is what they were doing. From what I have read it is 3-4 data sets, and it isn't a 'live' trace of everybody at all times. If you are saying it actually is, that's what I wondered about - I obviously got my facts wrong.
     
  14. Tyrsonswood

    Tyrsonswood Senior Moment Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    34,216
    Likes Received:
    26,332
    Yes, they have given themselves the right to do that.
     
  15. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    So, they are not doing it, they just could if they wanted to?
     
  16. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    odonII

    From what it would seem they're in the process of doing it
     
  17. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    From what evidence?

    So the thread title and OP is slightly stretching the truth?
     
  18. PJ1783

    PJ1783 Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    4
    odonII

    Did you read the link? They have been assigned the task, generally that means they will perform the task
     
  19. Piney

    Piney Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    5,076
    Likes Received:
    674
    All the kings horses

    And all the Kings Men

    Couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again
     
  20. odonII

    odonII O

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    26
    Yes I did read the link. I didn't read anything that resembled 'They have been assigned the task'. Assigned the task to do what? Was that in the WSJ article? It's behind a paywall now.

    ...many others? Such as?

    If they are searching through specific and limited datasets - how are they placing every American under the constant surveillance of the federal government? Given that not everybody works for a casino (I think that one is wrong, tbh), not everybody flies and not everybody hosts foreign students - do they?


    Too much speculation and not enough facts, imho.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice