Big Brother Obama: US to spy on Internet messaging

Regulations to target Skype, Facebook, Blackberry

The Obama White House is backing new regulations that would compel popular Internet messaging services like Facebook, Skype and Blackberry to open up their systems to FBI surveillance, the New York Times reported Monday, citing federal law enforcement and national security officials.

The threat to democratic rights goes far beyond anything envisioned by the Bush administration. The goal is to make all forms of electronic communication that use the Internet subject to wiretapping and interception by federal police agencies.

Source: here

So much for Hope and Change....Bye Bye civil rights.  I wonder if we should just burn the Constitution now and put it out of its misery. 

Nothing new here.....been going on a long long time, way before Obama was in office.......Those in power have always wanted to know what was going on....you know the...."information is power" thing.....I am wondering though....can´t there be an overload?

"stack overflow"

 I was wondering the same thing.  Big Brother is about to become Big Busy Brother!  I wonder what they will do when someone mentions "key words" in their emails or on their facebook....should I be expecting a visit from the feds??   

I must defriend all bed Amerikan or their nosy intelligence will know everything about my cooking, trips, fighting with terrible twos and pregnancy scans.

What a cunning way to check potential threats, everybody knows that terrorists are straighforward and use the "key words" on the internet just like we can see in CSI. After all, filling in the US visa application you have to answer the question about your plans to conduct a terrorist attack

 Yes, I love this question on the visa application!   

...and isn´t it so tempting to fill in the section ´do you have affiliation with any terrorist group´ (or whatever it actually says) with ´yes´? - just to see what happens  

Scary America right? Do people realize how much they are "spied" in every day life? You know the client-card at the Tansas (or any other supermarket)....it has your name on it... and thus "Big Brother" knows what you buy, and when you buy it... Oh, Miss X bought tampons again, it seems to be that time of the month. And look, it seems Mister Y is on a diet. He always bought full fat products but has now turned to lighter things.

When you go to the ATM machine (cash machine) there is a little camera there that tapes you. Handy for when somebody steals your card. They can use the video-tapes to get the criminal. However, those images are stored for several months... why so long? And everytime you take cash from the machine, it is also registered somewhere. Ahhh...Mister Y took cash out close to the MacDonalds... is he failing is diet?

We are already checked out every where we go. I have a pbulic transport card that irritates the hell out of me. Now some central system knows when I travel, and to where. But if I don´t have this card I pay more than double for my travel I guess my privacy does have a price.

Those fiedlity cards offered by supermarket chains are used for data mining by using data warehouses. I don´t have any of them just because they ask so many questions about me. No thanks I don´t want them to know much about me.

I guess many of us already realise that Google too use data mining to understand what kind info we are after.

We use credit cards to pay or ATMs to withdraw some cash and that makes a good tool for data mining to know about our whereabouts.

The same thing is valid for mobile phones. They know everything about the exact locations we visit. This is one of the reasons for the fact that I don´t have a mobile phone.

They know much about us anyway but I am doing my best to not give much away.

I actually don´t mind being spied on for market purposes. I do not do anything illegal and have no skeletons in the closet so I don´t care if my operator knows where I am or who I talk to if the benefits of having a mobile outweigh the loss of privacy.

I have a market loyalty card but always forget to take it with me when going shopping, and I´m not a loyal customer. Even if I were, I don´t think I would mind somebody I don´t know knowing when my period is.

I sign online petitions with my real name but I never give home address or other details to sites other than shopping ones, and I have one email that I use for registering to sites and one that is my private official one.

That is the problem.....Look at what you said? You don´t do anything illegal...like as if anyone who wants privacy is doing something shady, or illegal. Just the fact you want privacy is enough to cause suspicion. It´s not about doing illegal or shady things, it´s about being private. It´s nobody´s business what I do in my private life.

Maybe I´m working on an idea that I may want to patent, or copyrwrite. Maybe I have a secret like of something I´d rather not everyone know....what ever it is, it´s my business and nobody elses´, unless I willingly divulge it.  Artists are very secretive in their creative process, particularly when working out an "idea". You should have seen the studios where different dancers were working on their choreography.....their special "bits". The release of new designs by the haute couture designers.....top secret.

I prefer to reveal myself in my own way. People´s lives can even be endangered by what is "thought to be known" about others when inacurate conclusions are come to by what it thought to be known about people.

This constant tracking of everything we do is annoying. I sometimes talk with elders (people in their 80´s+) who are shocked at the lack of privacy accepted by the youth of today.

Unless there is strong probable cause...no such searches (spying) should be done...the US 4th amendment It comes down to the question do we have a right to privacy?

Here is an interesting article on that matter...

I am thinking if US gov has enough power and tools to do the big brothering. Wouldnt it be boring and waste of money to spy on DD, alameda and lemon?

....

That´s exactly my point lemon, I mean, i have no idea if Alameda´s life is as boring as mine, but I´m pretty sure nobody would like to spy on me (but for my Mum but that´s another story ). That´s why i don´t mind being spied on - au contraire, i believe monitoring increases my safety, cctv systems may help to identify who stole my bag in a shop or where my stolen car went. People distributing child pornography have often been caught only because of their online searches, the same for people visiting dodgy sites or inciting hatered on the Internet.

If you´re concerned for privacy, don´t use the Internet, if you´re an artist, I can´t imagine why you would put your rehearsals online or post an idea you want to patent. you wouldn´t publish it in a newspaper, would you? Internet is like a global message board - there´s plenty of messages, ads and discussions - and it´s up to you what you pin up there.

Sure, there have been numerous cases where people published other people´s private things online (like intimate videos on youtube), which resulted in suicide. But these things are prosecutable (is that a word?)

I´m not saying that people who protect their privacy do something illegal, but most of us would not interest anybody with our lives even if we wanted to. I understand the American praise of individualism and making everyone believe they´re unique and special. it´s simply not true. Most of us are boringly alike and even Bollywood would not buy our lifestory...

Hegel said something which could be instrumental in reaching a verdict about governments´ use of new opportunities offered by technology to gather information on their subjects:

"... the State ´has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State... for the right of the world spirit is above all special priveleges.´"

Now you might say, ours is a capitalist regime and we are in favour of personal freedoms. Yet, behind the curtains, there is an ever existing tendency which dwells upon the true nature of humans which is utterly selfish and highly opportunistic as per explained by Hegel.

We can continue quoting from Hegel, he famously proposed that all processes follow a THESIS & ANTITHESIS clash. It is stated that terrorist activity could serve an antithesis of a government policy. Through the clash of these strings of theses and antitheses a SYNTHESIS is reached. When that syntheses comes about, a discernable progress will have been accomplished only to be eroded by further clashes between new pairs of thesis and antithesis.

That the governments tend to act like big brothers at times of conflict and chaos must be associated with the interaction between thesis and antithesis. Remember the cold war era, the two mighty nations closed their doors to one another and advocated two entirely different political systems. When the clash between their theses was over, Russia emerged as a fast growing capitalist economy and the US, once the land of freedom turned into a nation dominated by xenophobic ideals. Don´t take offense at these words, I believe the US is still way more liberal than many other countries.

...but for a better world, the US must be the champion of freedom not that of ethnic or religious hatred...

Well I can help the system find out one thing about us all if they are spying on anyone here: We are here to learn turkish/english or help others learn... hence it´s called turkishclass.com ...  what moron would really spy on someone when they realise they are a member of a particular site when the site so obviously states what it´s for :/

Si++ this is not news!!! It goes on in every country in the world - its just that some countries are more "up front" about it.

Most people think that only serious national threats are an excuse for surveillance, but (shockingly) it is surprisingly easy for people to spy on you for very little reason.  For example, in the UK, every local authority (Council) has powers to monitor all activity from your IP address (including your emails) for the most lame reasons, i.e. fly tipping, attending a school that is not in your area etc.  However, phone lines are considered a bit more private and only police and the home office may listen to them.  Even so, every single phone call made (mobile or land line) and every text message sent is recorded (although not listened to unless for a reason).

People in the UK may be shocked to discover the UK rules on such things:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000

If you feel strongly about it, you are entitled, under the Freedom of Information Act, to ask for a list of people that your local council has spyed on, who authorised it, and the reason why.  You would be amazed at the results!!!

I agree with you Alameda.  If you are ever in the position of discovering, say, wrong doing or illegal activity from someone in a position of power, it is very scary to find out that you are being investigated in this way, simply because that person has the power to do so.

I speak from experience ...

 Totally agree. and thank you for bringing thesis and antithesis. Wonderful post!

Lets not exaggerate!

Exactly! and you are being monitored everyday "for your own security and safety".

All this spying business reminds me of entrapment. Not because the law etc is inducing a person to commit an offense that the person would otherwise have been unlikely to commit but in other ways like the law/government wouldn´t have known if anyone was commiting an offence without spying on them in the first place. (They also wouldn´t have known if a person would commit a crime without entrapping them in the first place).

The biggest one of them all though is that if they catch someone watching/dowloading something illegal, whether it be child pornography or even the recently released movie, they shouldn´t just go for the person who is downloading it for personal use but the person who is running the site itself and they would be able to do that a lot quicker if they wasn´t spying on every tom, dick and harry they pleased but just simply have some common sense and type in something on google or some other search engine to find an illegal act going on and then do the work they was meant to do.

Yeah, the thing is countries have different policies towards illegal downloads - some sites are in countries that do not protect copyright. If I´m not mistaken, it is perfectly legal to download music/films in Poland, provided you erease them from your disc within 24 hrs. Upload, on the other hand, is illegal

 Hmmm as interesting as that is, somehow I don´t see anyone dowloading something to a disc for just 24 hours

I do the same. 

I don´t get any spam through my private email address and didn´t get a great deal through the one I use for registering on sites.  In fact, I don´t register on many sites.  I don´t visit dodgy sites either. So. . . now I am wondering just how effective the "Big Brother" system is because recently I have been receiving a great deal of spam (about 5 a day) through the email address I use for registering . . . "Do I want to buy Viagra?" "Do I want to acknowledge my application to join the Yaho Group´sexy Miss Webcam´?" etc. 

I don´t know who they employ to spy but they are definitely not secret service material.lol

The "big brother" system is very effective, if even someone in your local council has powers to read every email you write, every post you have written on a website, every msn conversation you have?  They should not have such powers! 

They do this for such minute reasons as "not attending the correct school in your area" or "fly tipping" or making elected people feel a bit uncomfortable when you start to question their motives.  Unbelievable!

It is unbelievable that a person from a local council, who might know you in person, has the right to read your private correspondence! I´ve never heard of something like that. It´s a whole way different from a computerised system looking for "key words." And it definitely has a potential to result in abuse

What rock have you had your head under? Who knows who reads your stuff? ...but I can´t say I really have had any illusion of privacy online....you are probably less private online than anywhere. After all, it is an invention of DARPA.

I do object to having my very body invaded by things like the backskatter xrays now being used at many airports. I wouldn´t want to walk around naked, or do I in any way like to have photos of my naked self anyplace. Besides the invasion of my privacy and there are health concerns. It is an xray and there IS radiation.....

I also question the collection of DNA as a crime fighting tool. The problem with DNA is it involves one´s whole familial lineage, opening up another can of worms. Then....it really isn´t fool proof.

There have been incidents where one person carried more than one set of DNA, say one in the mouth and another in the blood. Intersex persons have multiple sets of DNA. So, say DNA is collected from the inside of the cheek, but there is another in the blood?

Then there are cases of chimeras, such as the case of Lynda Fairchild, a chimera (....read the twin inside me.) To make it brief, she was tested for proof of maternity. When her sons were tested, (several times) they didn´t match. In fact the DNA was so off, her maternity was questioned and she was about to be prosecuted for fraud and loose her children, when a lawyer who handled a similar case stepped up and was able to bring to light the fact Lynda was a chimera.

I value my privacy. If you do to, you may like to check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation´s website. There are some interesting questions to consider.

I´m sorry Alameda, but you´re sounding a tad paranoid. I don´t know why this obsession of your very self being watched instead of billions of other Internet users. Like I said, I do not have any skeletons in my closet and I don´t really give a rat´s tutu whether somebody chooses me over all other users to read my emails to friends, in which I tell them about my son´s development.

DNA discrimination? Are you for real? You mind alleged DNA tracing but you´re ok with women being openly treated like dirtbags in the Middle East? How about being against finger print based evidence since it may happen that one person had them surgically removed...

See, people don´t need to go as deep as DNA goes to discriminate, in most cases it´s enough to have a visible quality - like age, gender or race.

You may choose to disagree with me, but Internet surveillance has more benefits than actual threats to the freedom of individual. Besides, you´re free to stop using it if you value your privacy that much.

Daydreamer, I don´t think I am singled out. It is the commonality of the matter, it´s everyone....like when 12 year old girls are subjected to body scans, I find that objectionable. 

In the end it´s a waste of resources to be scanning everyone and monitoring everyone. Then....those scanners cost a lot of $$$...maybe security isn´t the real issue. Who profits from the sale of the scanners? I don´t want to be subjected to the indignity of being photographed nude...and I don´t like being exposed to the radiation they emit and I would not want my loved ones exposed to it either. It is dangerous and untested technology.

The potential harm that can come from being exposed to them is yet unknown. Those ill effects are not only for those who get the scans...radiation travels.

If you don´t care, fine, that´s your business, however I don´t think your choice should be the standard for everyone. I am trying to raise awarness of tghe issue.

On an other matter....if you read carefully my former post...you will realize I didn´t expect a lot of privacy online. Please read my post again. In particular this:

"I can´t say I really have had any illusion of privacy online....you are probably less private online than anywhere. After all, it is an invention of DARPA. "

.........and where did I ever say  I am OK with women (or anyone) being treated like dirtbags in the ME (or anywhere)?....That is your assumption...based on what I don´t know. I am against anyone being treated like dirtbags... anyone.... I believe in respect for all creation.

and vice versa

Full body scanners have been discussed here and it is again your choice to fly or not. I reckon a body scan is less traumatic for a 12 year old than a full cavity search.

We´ll never see eye to eye here, so let´s agree to disagree

 OMG!!!! You go from an arbitrary body scan to a full cavity search on a 12 year old child in the blink of an eye? Unless there were a valid reason, why should any such search draconian measures be done?

I stand by the fourth amendment....

I´m not American so I don´t need to

On a serious note, full body scanners give quick security-related answers. They are means to avoid tragedies like the one that happened on 9/11. If you don´t want to be scanned, don´t buy a plane ticket. Do you think your right not to be scanned overrules my right to be safe?

It´s a nice idea to assume everybody is innocent unlessproven otherwise. Too bad this approach doesn´t really give me much reasurrange as far as my personal safety is concerned. Why else would we have security gates at airports? Why would starangers go through your personal stuff? Isn´t that a violation of 4th Amendment as well? If you consider luggage searches at airoprts are neccessary, then why do you consider body searches unnecessary?

You know, before I put my child on a plane, I´d love to know everybody was thoroughly scanned and no idiot got an idea it would be nice to blow everybody up just because he thinks there´s 72 virgins waiting for mass murderers in the afterlife.

Full body scans are against so many peoples values. It is injustice to discomfort billions of people who has to use the planes, just to catch one terrorist.

Scientists of the technology age are able to find more acceptable security solutions.

It  is injustice to risk lives of thousands of innocent passengers just because some people are not comfortable with being scanned.

But I sure hope more acceptable means  of security controls will be found. I´ll be first to applaud ways of providing safety without forcing people do something they are not comfortable doing.

I am not a great enthusiast of body scanners. I just think nothing better has been invented yet. And I look forward to something that will put the scanners to the long forgotten past

Actually, as far as American laws are concerned, when a person buys a plane ticket they are agreeing to certain conditions which can include the inspection of your luggage and perhaps a body scan.  Once you agree to this and complete the transaction of buying your ticket, then you are no longer protected by the 4th Amendment for these types of searches. (At least this is what my smarty pants lawyer friend told me when I complained about it on my last trip to Turkey). 

Yes, it stinks...but I am with DD on this one...better safe than sorry.  For me, my need to travel overrides my need for modesty.      

 Bravo Elisabeth....this is the most useful comment in this thread so far! I think this will probably be contested sometime in the near future though. It´s interesting to see how laws can be twisted and turned into things that hardly resemble what the intent was....

I think there has to be a better way. What we are doing is dehumanizing and humiliating people, as well as exposing them to health hazards. Not much good comes out of policies like that.

I love Ann Richards take on airport security.... may she rest in peace...a Texan and one of my favorite ladies....watch this...it is so funny....

OMG....I miss Ann <---<  this link is for any who don´t know who she was

I totally agree that there should be a better way...I certainly didn´t appreciate the pat down I got in Charles DeGaule (sp?) Airport in Paris!  There was an older lady in front of me that was so humiliated that she began to cry.  I felt horrible for her.  I was traveling with my infant daughter and I had to hand her over to another airport security person so that I could get my "pat down." I was horrified! 

I would love to be a stubborn American and say, "you know what, you can take your airline ticket and stick it where the sun don´t shine!"  but I love visiting my family...so I don´t have much choice.  I think that is what bothers me most...I don´t REALLY have a choice.  Its not like I can drive to Turkey!!!     

This makes me think of a quote by Benjamin Franklin:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Aren´t these quotes lovely?The funny thing they may be interpreted two-ways

essential liberty might be the right to travel safe and temporary safety might be being saved from a body scan

Ha! that gave me an idea - have separate airlines for people who are concerned for their privacy more than safety. Thus everyone will have a choice - i mean, if they´ll find a crew willing to go with passengers not having gone through security

My personal opinion on this is that govs are slowly but sternly taking over your freedom for your own safety. I think ,or better, I know the whole 9/11 thing was orchestrated in order to create new laws to control the people telling them the fairy tales of terrorism. Fear does the job.

 Don´t matter whether it is a council or not, I know that any one of my emails or communicator calls is recorded in our IS "dark room" and can be retrieved and held against you at any time..... Equality Act 2010 or not

Oh and not to mention all the "security" cameras watching your every move!