Easy way for Americans to help stop spying

[Canuck]

Not one person here complained to their Rep.? Shame on you!
They aren't looking for terrorists with this bill, they are SPYING on the normal US citizen. You deserve to lose your privacy if you don't do anything. Pathetic how effective propaganda works on the Public. Get some b*lls and complain to your Representatives before you lose your rights to do that too. I cant believe how easy that site makes you voice your opinion but still no one has complained? Disgusting and shame on you. Well what should I expect from a Country that elected George Bush... twice.

Hope you enjoy losing your rights daily.

[Bet51987]

Bet, thats nothing I'd hold a grudge over, although I would appreciate a straight answer.

Thanks.

I'm afraid I can't give an answer withoug bringing out the "why didn't you join the service" response which I explained once before in detail. So, I'm done with this thread. Again, thanks for putting up with my outburst.

Wait..you're legal now? Hot damn!

Yep. But not to daddy.

Bet, please! We are not little 10-year-old kids. If you want to apologise like that, you say it in a mature way, such as "I'm sorry for my harsh comments recently, I'm currently taking medication to try to stop it".

Yeah, that was kind of lame wasn't it.
"I wish to apologize for my collapse of civility and manners in this thread. I can offer no valid excuse but I sincerely hope that those I hurt will see fit to forgive me."

Either way, I am really sorry for acting the way I did no matter how I wrote it.

Top Wop... I'm 19, but what brought that on?

Check PM.

I sent you one back :)

Bee

[Kilarin]

Private telecommunications company getting immunity for assisting government wiretapping/monitoring.

It's a touchy issue. The problem is that it's VERY difficult for a private company to figure out which way the law is going to fall on this kind of thing.
If a company cooperated, how can you determine if they KNEW the action was illegal and just caved in, OR, if they looked it over and said, "Sheesh, its coming from like, the PRESIDENT. It's got to be legit, right?"

Since the legality of the issue is still being bounced around in the political arena, I'm not certain it's fair to bring LEGAL action against any companies that cooperated.

PRIVATE action would certainly be OK though. If you are unhappy, move your business elsewhere. There HAVE been companies who resisted when they thought they were being asked to do something illegal. Such as the case of the Google Records Subpoena. We should all encourage doing business with companies who take stances like that.

[Canuck]

Private telecommunications company getting immunity for assisting government wiretapping/monitoring.

It's a touchy issue. The problem is that it's VERY difficult for a private company to figure out which way the law is going to fall on this kind of thing.
If a company cooperated, how can you determine if they KNEW the action was illegal and just caved in, OR, if they looked it over and said, "Sheesh, its coming from like, the PRESIDENT. It's got to be legit, right?"

Since the legality of the issue is still being bounced around in the political arena, I'm not certain it's fair to bring LEGAL action against any companies that cooperated.

PRIVATE action would certainly be OK though. If you are unhappy, move your business elsewhere. There HAVE been companies who resisted when they thought they were being asked to do something illegal. Such as the case of the Google Records Subpoena. We should all encourage doing business with companies who take stances like that.

Kudos to Kilarin for showing some thought on the issue.

Your assuming Corporations have souls or ethics... you assume wrong. If they did your line of thinking would have a chance of working. The only way we can achieve some semblance of privacy is asking our Governments to respect the rights and wishes of its citizens.

If I lived in the USA and was proud of it I would fight to keep that right.

Nuck out.

[Kilarin]

Your assuming Corporations have souls or ethics... you assume wrong.

In the case of Google, I think they are young enough that actual ethics MAY come into play there. But I doubt if that will last.

In the case of large telecommunications companies? Nah, I wasn't thinking they were ethical. I work for a large telecommunications company, I KNOW how they think. They want to avoid being sued or penalized. Attempting to follow the law and be "ethical" is a good way to reduce your chances of being sued or penalized.

So what I said still stands. legal penalties for companies that cooperate with the government in shaky legal situations like this is kind of an unfair trade practice. If the government TELLS them to do something, and they cooperate, it would have to be a VERY clear case of an illegal order for me to be convinced the company should be held responsible.

AND, doing business with companies that take stands you approve of is a good way of encouraging them to continue taking those kinds of stands. Money is what they are about. Reward them with it, or penalize them by taking it away. You are absolutely correct that it's not "ethics" as individuals think of it, but it's the way to get the behavior you want out of large corporations.

It still comes down to what foil has been saying, its an issue of accountability. And in this case I think the government may be held accountable, but probably not the corporations.

Just to point this out as clearly as possible: as I said, I work for a large telecommunications company. They keep making us take "ethics training". We laugh because we think upper management needs it, not us peons. But the courses are very interesting. The focus is BLATANTLY that unethical behavior is behavior that will hurt the company.

Now don't misunderstand, the company recognizes that illegal behavior might help the company in the short term, but causes much more damage in the long term, so the course emphasized at every point that no employee was EVER to break the law. But it was quite clear WHY. Breaking the law will cost the company MONEY.

The company gave us repeated courses on avoiding discrimination in the workplace. But why? Not because discrimination was wrong, but because discrimination hurt the company in two ways. 1: Discrimination will keep the best workers from rising to the level where they can do the company the most good, and therefore discrimination costs the company money. 2: Discrimination will result in legal action that costs the company money.

So yes, it's all about money with most large corporations, but being a capitalism, we need to give them the fairest chance we can to avoid losing money to legal penalties. And penalizing a company that followed orders coming from the very top of the government is just not very fair trade practice.

[Canuck]

And those orders are illegal? Without a warrant or due process? Man the public has been sleeping. Reminds me of a large scale McCarthy communist hunt but instead its Arabs and everyone is being monitored. More like Nazi Germany if you ask me. Matter of fact search for NSA in NHB and you'll see my post on the subject.

[edit] Is search broken? [/edit]

[Ferno]

wiretapping a party without a warrant is illegal. plain and simple.

In my book, those who try and excuse that behaviour come off just as bad as the people who get wiretapped.

[Genghis]

On the off chance that Bettina reads this...

Here's a story that might put your views into conflict:

http://www.jonholato.com/2007/09/22/gov ... irlfriend/

I say this because you appear to be pro-surveillance, but also pro-womens' safety and -women's rights. Here's a case where a government official uses a government database to stalk his ex-girlfriend.

Warm up your rationalization engine! End the cognitive dissonance! (I'm just needling you in good humor...we all do this; the key is recognizing it in ourselves)

[Bet51987]

On the off chance that Bettina reads this...

Here's a story that might put your views into conflict:

http://www.jonholato.com/2007/09/22/gov ... irlfriend/

I say this because you appear to be pro-surveillance, but also pro-womens' safety and -women's rights. Here's a case where a government official uses a government database to stalk his ex-girlfriend.

Warm up your rationalization engine! End the cognitive dissonance! (I'm just needling you in good humor...we all do this; the key is recognizing it in ourselves)

Thanks for that link but I can't comment anymore. I did read it though...

Bee