It is all about AT&T. This company has been proven to be a governamental agency, rather than a commercial one. How do you people have never seen it coming?

I have only tried AT&T few years ago for a short time. What made me quit? The fact that this company arrogantly was imposing fees not related to my business with them, but fees collected on behalf of governamental programs.

The company is arrogant and dictatorial. As free citizens of the United States, refuse to do business with it. Is all that simple.

This is great, it will be easier to identify Yanks in future by the Barcode tattooed of their forehead. Wondeful stuff indeed!

AT&T does business in Canada.

That policy will NOT apply here.

If the company attempts to implement it, they will be liable under the Privacy Act and WILL be prosecuted at the Federal level.

And they WILL lose.

We do not tolderate BS like that in this country.

That is exactly right, roj. Good to know that I live in a country that supports and upholds the rights and freedoms of it's citizens. Terrorism will NOT stand in Canada, that is for damn sure. But neither will we, the citizens of this country allow ourselves to fall into the situations that those very terrorists want us to fall into. They want us to be afraid, they want us to cower and hide, and give up everything that we work hard for. I say that I will never do such a thing, and I will always continue to live freely, and not submit to some money hungry corporations gov't pressured requests.

It is foolish to listen to someone " Congress"
who does not listen to you.
Think about that.

Why don't you explain it before anyone else interjects their opinion? I'd like to know your line of thinking.

Right you are, let me explain.
We have the elected officials in congress telling us were safe, that there not spying on us, that they didnt train Osama bin laden; but yet we want our borders secure, higher minimum wage, and the illegal Tidal wave to stop. Have they passed anything to resolve those issues, no,just a patch here and there. That sir is my point.

run for congress then!
make the changes you see fit.

Sir, I am running for mayor in a certain county in North Carolina. I Am trying to make a difference.
How about yourself?

i'm not complaining,
but i'm glad to hear you're willing to make the effort to make a difference.
that's what america is all about

you a mayor? hahahahha

you sound more like an opinionated 12 year old

Wow you sir are more like the reason this country is the way it is, you dont have your own opinion yet you Creativly bash on me for what reason? Are you someone that was put down in the past by me and now come out of no where at the END of a dissucsion and say something a 12 year old would say.
Oh your probably looking for a stupid argument but you wont get on from me.
Unless your post a comment pretaining to this thread.

As a american who how served in the military I feel gilted. I understand the need to protect the people, but not at this cost. The majority of us american's are trustworthy and patriotic. I would take a bullet for america. But I am feeling america is getting less and less worthy of such a sacrifice. The government and now the scared business world just needs to get it together. We the people deserve better then this.

"We the people deserve better then this."

lol
you, the people, make it happen

Nobody is disputing what the NSA and other agencies HAVE BEEN DOING. What we are disputing is whether it is legal and ethical. My local paper today had an article from the LA Times stating that they have been intercepting and tracking financial data such as account numbers, money tranfers and persons that you accept or distribute money to. It went on to say that this was being done without the knowledge of the banks and financial institutions. It said that this was being done "administratively", without review or permission of any court or judge. The point being that absolute power corrupts absolutely. There is no oversight or judicial review. This is almost the exact opposite of the words freedom and democracy. No checks and balances and no way to defend yourself because nobody knows who is investigated or what happens to any data intercepted. Frankly this is very Un-American. Due process is one of the rights of citizenship.

I suppose if someone printed it then it is the truth. Yeah, okay, right...

I am disputing what has been going on, the media won't be my proof. Is it okay to just assume guilt in this case?

Maybe you should read the article before insinuating that it is false or just hype. I believe that the government spokesperson did admit that it was being done, but that it was within "administrative policy". Of course being with in policy makes it entirely legal and acceptable. Citizenship carries the burden of both supporting our nations goals and policies and questioning them when they are not open and in line with democracy and the Constitution. People who blindly follow will surely never understand the depth of our freedoms and blessings of living in America.

People who blindly follow will surely never understand the depth of our freedoms and blessings of living in America.

It is amazing how many people cannot distinguish the difference between nationalism and patriotism.

stop giving your private information out to public companies

besides, the government should have access to all public service information
how exactly do you people expect the gov. to conduct investigations?
hire a p.i.?
call the local police department?
let's get real, the gov. needs to have special privilages when dealing with public security. letting the public know what they're doing, would only undermine their efforts.

I wonder, are you some kind of FORMER agent for a government agency? Cause it sure sounds like it.

i wonder, are you some kind of CURRENT idiot? cause it sure sounds like it.

UH who are you and what rock did you crawl out from?
When you post a comment make sure it is relevent to the thread and makes sense.

Ahh, I see. Government agencies should skirt the law because it is in our best interests? Now that is a real hoot.

People give their private information in the belief that the purpose of giving that information is not a subterfuge.

If you give your doctor information you do so with a trust that the information is confidential and personal. Even if the doctor tells you he may provide general information to your insurance company, you should have no reason to believe that your information will be handed over to the government by the insurance company. However, under our present operating proceedures I guess it would be ok to many that this information is handed over for national security purposes. So if there is pending legislation or mergers in the business interest of the company...and the company needs government cooperation then it would be inclined to hand over your information to serve its own purposes.

It seems intersting to me that AT&T and the Bells were broken up by the government because of monopolizing and the inherent risks of one corporation having so much control. Now that AT&T is back sucking up the baby Bells again, and needs the governments OK to do so, we suddenly see this great spirit of cooperation between AT&T and the government (at our expense). Besides, it is so much handier to have a central point from whitch to draw this information. Nothing wrong with this picture right? Sheesh

You guys need to research just what the NSA's charter is (always has been). Nothing new here at all. Nothing except that you guys appear to be naive about the NSA. AT&T is only confirming what has always been.

I suggest starting here: http://www.nsa.gov/about/index.cfm

And then reading here: http://www.nsa.gov/about/about00003.cfm

The charter and mission of the NSA seems innocent enough. I just can't believe that legislators believed, on conception, that the NSA would be collecting records of millions of American citizen's activities including, credit and banking records, patterns of credit card and band card expenditures, phone and other personal records (or that other government agencies would also engage in some of this activity). I am pretty sure that it would be tough to find legislators that believed that the NSA would intentionaly create secret (if not rogue) schemas designed to skirt Congressional and Judicial oversight. Yes...naive to believe that (without stringent oversight) an agency with so much power would not abuse it.

"Yes...naive to believe that (without stringent oversight) an agency with so much power would not abuse it."

to what end?
the protection of American citizens?
you have a problem with that?

Anytime my rights are diluted under the subterfuge of a secret and aloof National Security agenda I have a problem with it.

You can not destroy the freedom and liberties you are claiming to protect, then puff your chest out and brag about how prowd you are at the job that is being done. The end does not justify the means.

The govenrment is accountable to the people...not vice versa.

"The govenrment is accountable to the people..."

the government ARE the people
you do live in a democratic country

You misspelt plutocratic.

you my friend are under there control.How naive are you sir. Do you really believe that info that they gather on you,"protects you?"
How about this, invite them to put camaras all over your house so they can watch you for your own "protection".
Because that is what they are doing. Its called SPYING, not PROTECTING.

"you my friend are under there control.How naive are you sir. Do you really believe that info that they gather on you,"protects you?""

Is it a stretch for him to believe that a government of the people, for the people, by the people would use this information to protect him? Or is it more realistic to just assume the worst? You are under the control something far worse than he is...

yes REALISM> YOU should try it

YOU are not realistic
you're talking about conspiracy theories whithin your own government, set against the people.
stop watching TV, it's not real life
your government is there to protect you, not destroy you

i agree,
but that doesn't effect me in regards to terrorism

In typical fashion you didn't answer the questions asked, but you were sure to comment on my conclusion.

OH, sorry about that. Yes he has every right to believe what he wants. Thats what America is all about

First, I dont watch TV I watch the world around me. What the hell was Watergate, huh buddy. A CONSPIRACY THEORY that was later proven true.
So get YOUR HEAD out of the sand.

I realize that can believe what he chooses... that wasn't the question.

READ CAREFULLY Waterboy,
It is a stretch for him to believe the THIS government is for the people. THATS ONE.
Second, yes it is more REALISTIC To assume the worst, because 9 times out of 10 the worst does happen.
NOW, do you want to explain your short sighted conclusion on myself, or are you stuck in the 70's with your TV still playing the propaganda that has apparently brainwashed your mind.

" because 9 times out of 10 the worst does happen."

i feel sorry for you :-(

i'm sure most of us don't see life that way, i don't.
:-)

I don't really see the need for the condescending attitude, this is a forum for discussing different views. When you didn't answer the questions, it was difficult to understand your point of view.

I think you yourself have shown that my conclusion was not short sighted, to always assume the worst is terrible way to live and difficult for those you effect.

Check out the AT&T / NSA documents here:

http://zxo.blogspot.com/...-att-nsa-documents.html

You could have just linked wired.com instead of trolling for a place to promote your blog.

...and now back to our regularly scheduled discussion.

This week executives from many providers, including AT&T, were called to testify in front of our congress. Anyone who witnessed the deameanor and evasiveness should wonder what is wrong with a scenerio where these corporations sit there like the mob protecting factions of government that are clearly out of control.

Do you really want to live in a country where agencies operate like the KGB and construe the power to advise their corporate puppets to hedge and avoid questions of a legitimate Congessional committee - as if they are fulfilling a duty involving National Security?

When there is no legal basis for accountability we have a serious problem.

You know...I think it is about time I finally welcomed myself to these forums...I have been reading the comments of all of you for the past year, and I certainly know by now who I like/dislike, and whom I agree/disagree with...to "rijp", I have to say that if you believe that, for some reason, the employees of AT&T are "an agency whose goal is protecting national security"...then you sir, are a f***ing idiot... Seriously? Wow...okay then, this might explain why you cannot intelligently respond to anyone else's comments...they are a PHONE COMPANY...a coporation whose sole interest is to take your hard earned money, and give you a crappy service in return. That's it. Period. They do not care about your security, they don't even care if you die, as someone else here pointed out. Innocent until proven guilty is the way it works, and that should not, CANNOT ever change. Guilty till proven innocent seems to be how you were brought up, and that is really rather sad...did your parents just ground you right away, before you did anything wrong? Just in case? Should police officers start arresting teens who wear bandanas, just in case they are gang members? Your logic astounds me, as it astounds most people here. Oh, and by the way...here in the great white north (that'd be Canada, eh!), we don't have these problems...you plucky Americans seem to be the only ones who have trouble realizing that the loss of rights and freedoms is NOT the way to fight terrorism...isn't that really what the terrorists want, in the end? For you to lose everything that your country stands for? Here...we realize that our freedoms, and rights are something that cannot be questioned, not ever...and our mighty Polar Bear army will decimate anyone who tries to take them away ^_^ Thank you, this has been my first post here...hope you all enjoyed :D

I did very much, actually. But I'm Canadian too. :P

OK let me take a crack at this one. Being part of the great white dope people, I Agree with most of what you say. IT is true that we do in fact value life over natural born rights, but that is the way we are raised sir. Look at our school systems, these people cant even read but yet WE graduate them. Why? For one simple reason, they do what they are told. End of Story. As for logic what the hell is that, were talking about America; a country that I live in so I can talk smack all I want thank you.We are to complacent to do anything so we just sit here on threads like these and b**** about it.
No one has the BALLS anymore to stand up for what is right here in America or Canada.

Very, nicely stated! And thank you for posting the truth, even though it will always fall on deaf ears.

I personaly think your an idiot from Canada you can't see the difference of right or wrong.

Your country is so chicken sh*t you can't make a decision on much of anything.

Don't sit there knocking America, you plucky Canadian chicken sh*t.

It just had to be said!

What tamahome320 said! I wish America had 1/10th the problem-solving skills of Canada. If you compare the two countries' histories, you quickly notice how Canada manages to avoid every single major crisis we experience in the US. There's a reason for that, and having visited often and lived in Canada on and off, I can say I love that country, but not the US. Just wish I were a Canadian citizen.

I'm ashamed to be American with the criminal we have as president now.

Apples.

Oranges.

so when he states how it is different and how he thinks it is better, you reply with a personnal attack against the entire country instead of defending ours with reasons why its better? either we have no defense or you are an opinionated d***head, who i hope to god doesnt represent the rest of our country.

Thank you... my sentiments exactly.

private information is NOT a business asset, when will people do something about stuff like this? this is ridiculous! i challenge anyone to not side with a company that treats their consumers information as an asset. this information is private and should be kept in the private domain.

I wonder if AT&T lets you get out of your contract if you don't agree to the new terms without having to pay the ETF.

This is all part of a greater plan to Dig there greedy little fingers into every aspect of OUR lives. We could have a revolution, but people are to complacent whith the way things are already. This kind of crap has been going on since the 70's but it wont stop because we just sit there ( with a remote in our hands) and say" hey its still not as bad as Cuba.
Maybe not,but we are so self-diluted with the way thing are, That it wont take long for us to become a 3rd world country.
LOOK AT CALIFORNIA. Gated communities are becoming such a part of our culture that it is enevitable we will fall

Yeah... every time I drive pass a gated community I always wonder how much longer our nation will hang on.

Once again, time to expose rijp for the troll he is. Where's a plonk feature when we need it? I gave you that list in a previous post and you ignored it. Thereby, you are the biggest troll on BetaNews. So do us a favor and remind yourself that while your opinions are posted, we could care less that you reply to every one of us every 30 seconds. Get a blog, dude, and just post the link. Then get a life.

As I've said before, if you disavow privacy so much, why not share your personal information with us? Tell me your real name, where you live, your phone number/s, your parents names, your relatives' names and where they live, too; your kids' names, where they attend school, your wife's name, where she works, what kind of cars you drive, what you purchase online and at the grocery store, upload a copy of your W-2 statement, your tax returns for the last ten years, your grades from junior high through college, your voting records, your drivers' license number, your social security number, what sites you surf online, what movies you watch, what medications you take, and so on.

We're waiting, Mr. I-hate-American values anti-privacy! See what a hypocrite you are? C'mon, start making all your excuses again. We won't read them. As for AT&T, they're just another despicable corporation which shares no values, holds no principles, and thinks breaking laws with the Bush Administration's blessing is not destroying the foundations of this country.

________________________________________________
For the record, here it is again:

[rijp]: Tell me *ONE* , JUST *ONE* Liberty or Freedom you have lost or given up as a result.

Obviously you haven't read the USA Patriot Act. How about the 5th Amendment? You CAN be detained indefinitely and not charged as an "enemy combatant" — even on American soil.

The republicans declared war on the Constitution in response to 911. Unlike the Founding Fathers who created the document amidst war to declare our freedom from tyranny and to increase liberty, the republicans instead used it as an opportunity to destroy America by eroding the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments.

1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF SPEECH
The Patriot Act broadly expands the official definition of terrorism, so that many domestic groups that engage in nonviolent civil disobedience could very well find themselves labeled as terrorists.

— The Government may now prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they reveal that the government requested information on their clients or members in the course of an investigation. It has become a crime for these individuals to try to safeguard your privacy or to tell you that you are under investigation.

1st AMENDMENT FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
Government agents may now monitor the First Amendment-protected activities of religious and political institutions, and then infiltrate these groups with no suspicion of criminal activity. This is a return to domestic spying on law-abiding religious and political groups.

— You may now be the subject of a government investigation simply because of the political, activist, or advocacy groups you are involved in, or the statements you make within these groups.

1st AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ACCESS GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
A U.S. Department of Justice directive actively encourages federal, state, and local officials to resist and/or limit access to government records through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Not even Congress is allowed to see information regarding the NSA spying program because the republican administration says "it's classified." Throw out the principle of checks and balances and we'd have no reason for the Revolutionary War with King George, and thus the very reason for this country's existence.

Finally, do a google search on Hamdi and Padilla, two people who were detained for years, not allowed an attorney, nor even told what the charges were against them, only that they were "enemy combatants."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=awICSSpNTAOM&refer=us

I suppose you're now going to come up with another defense of why Americans should not have the rights the Constitution guarantees them. Go ahead. We're waiting. And in the meantime, if you hate America so much, why don't you leave?
________________________________________________

vERY WELL thought out.We have given up so much at such a critical time, that it almost seems like it was meant to be this way. there's no doubt that is is a trool by the way he conves himself, But we are to blame also for letting congress and the pres for signing that damn patriot act. Were all to blame, so now lets try and fix it, even though it might cause us scrafice our creature comforts.

P.S. For you Trools out there, you have sold yourself to a company that could care less if you died tomorrow

Complete agreement with zriding on (Over)rijpe. Thing is, (s)he lacks intellect to understand.

The whole US affair of handing over personal data, to include the blackmail applied on airlines from allied nations to hand over 34 pieces of information including credit card data is beyond incredible....be aware US citizens have forfeited their rights!

Nice editorial...

You have still never answered the question the way it was asked, and I am quite sure you never will.

There would be no point in posting your personal information in an open forum, and you look like a fool comparing that to sharing information with an agency who's goal is protecting national security.

*edit* decided not to go there.

Just because you don't like the truth of my response doesn't mean I didn't answer the question. The fact that you won't share YOUR OWN personal info with the world confirms that you believe some things should be kept private, which reveals your own concern for privacy, and a rejection of the phony "If-you-have-nothing-to-hide" rationale.

Otherwise, pony-up. And "go there" all you want. I don't care. I'm arguing a point with a conservative troll who can't back up his faux arguments. He's either a frustrated little teen or a frustrated little middle-aged man who thinks calling people names on a public forum wins an argument. That's what lifelong cowards like d*** cheney and george bush believe, but not me.

The illegal actions of corporations like AT&T have nothing to do with national security. If so, then why don't they and the government reveal exactly how many terrorists have been arrested, charged, and convicted by spying on us using this "total information"; that is, spying bull? AT&T and other telcos are saying it's okay for us to spy on you, but you're not allowed to know any information about us.

Liberty is being eroded unilaterally, and though I rarely use a phone, that shouldn't matter. I should be free from being spied on, period.

While I agree that AT&T and others have broken the law in regards to their sharing of information. It is certainly within their rights to claim ownership of the data about us that they collect. We as consumers may elect not to do business with them as a result. That is capitalism...and liberty. I certainly will never do business with AT&T if doing so requires agreement with that orwellian (lack of) privacy policy.

I don't think of rijp as a troll. He usually has a point and though I disagree with it most of the time, he does not normally post just to watch the fur fly. That may change as it seems he has got your spin buttons mapped out pretty well.

The simplistic arguments you offer like "post your info here or your point is invalid" are just ridiculous. These things have nothing to do with one another and your argument proves nothing. It is good sense to not share your personal info on a public forum where weirdo stalkers like me hang out. Recognizing this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. These self-proving circular statements reveal a shallow type of thinking and an incredibly naive approach to logical discourse.

And just so rijp does not feel left out. His arguments do not hold up. I do not have to point out harm for a right to be violated. Our rights existed before the constitution was written, they exist even if the constitution is ignored. The only difference is that since we have a constitution now and we can clearly see how it has been trampled upon by our government in so many ways even simpletons can understand it when it is spelled out. In this particular case, we have seen several recent ways in which our rights have been violated by our government:
1. Eminent domain - they can take your property and give it to someone else with no real reason needed.
2. Privacy - multiple violations. The case at hand about harvesting phone records and tapping overseas calls. Also it was recently disclosed that the government has spent millions of dollars buying consumers personal data from brokers that use several illegal (even for private companies) methods to obtain it - so in essence we have the government paying people to illegally obtain data about americans...and we should trust them? http://www.chron.com/dis...p/politics/3993936.html
3. The recent supreme court decision that refuses to punish police for doing illegal no-knock entries to serve warrants...these even for non-violent offenses.

So, just because I have not been carried off to jail and roughed up due to these transgressions upon our liberty does not mean that they have not occurred. From your responses, you would prefer only to have liberties that your shortsighted view of the world would deem necessary to prevent immidiate harm to you. Fortunately the framers of the constitution took a longer view and having just experienced the tyranny of a runaway government put in place a constitution designed to prevent such things from re-occuring. Perhaps your view of liberty has some fellow adherents in the federal courts...it would seem that way.

As for name calling, yes that is quite immature and indicates a frustrated and insecure person, but really aren't we all to some extent. I would like to call several people names and only barely restrain myself from doing so.

Finally, you are correct that liberty is being eroded. A diatribe about this posted here, while entertaining and possibly satisfying to type, is of limited value. I would encourage you to seek out those in your community who feel as you do and become active in politics. Perhaps run yourself. We had an 18 year old run for state representative because he felt that his elected officials were not fixing the problems that he was passionate about.

Finally, something rational. I want to get bas****s that want to harm us as well, but I don't want to loose that which we hold high, but seem to give away so easily..our freedoms.

I saw a lot of opinion in your post, but you'll have to point out the truth in it. You clearly feel strongly, but have proved nothing. As has been pointed out already, your "post your info here" argument doesn't make your opinion valid. I do value privacy, and disagreeing with you here does not discredit that.

Calling rijp "Mr.I-hate-American values anti-privacy" and a "troll" is immature and unfounded. Now YOU have tried to use the name calling tactic for winning an argument and it didn't work for you either.

I don't think it has been determined if AT&T's actions were legal or not. Listing how many terrorists have been arrested, charged and convicted at this point, would be showing our hand as a nation. Telling us would be telling the enemy at the same time.

We should always have one eye on our freedom and liberty, but I am not yet convinced we are being spied on. A computer sifting through millions and millions of call records looking for specific numbers does not constitute a violation in my eyes. Do the telco's have computers process the data and then turn over call information for calls that correlate with known terrorists? I don't know. If you don't want anyone looking at your call records, cancel your service. Phone companies use that information all the time.

You have been informed more than once that the governmental intrusions including those by the NSA, go far beyond the misguided concept of a computer trolling through phone records.

It is not simply about a pool of accessible and handy information.

If you think todays breaking news on banking and financial records is exciting...just wait and see what is coming. There are serious abuses that are about to be exposed.

I hope you are arond to defend them too. *smiles

"You have been informed more than once that the governmental intrusions..."

Actually, stop right there. What "governmental intrusions"?

"inclusing those by the NSA, go far beyond the misguided concept of a computer trolling through phone records."

So you are smart enough to uncover classified information and infiltrate the US Government? How can you know? We don't know--not you, me, CNN, Fox News, Betanews, AT&T, or even President Bush know everything that the NSA has access to. Your arrogance has destroyed your ability to reason it appears.

Did you even read what he typed or did you just scan it for fuel?

You make a convincing speech, unfortunately, you write many words that do not answer any of the questions you claim to answer.

You finally gave an attempt of an answer for the all-important question, but your answer is not an answer to the question asked. Question was:

"Tell me *ONE* , JUST *ONE* Liberty or Freedom you have lost or given up as a result..."

Answer: "Obviously you haven't read the USA Patriot Act. How about the 5th Amendment? You CAN be detained indefinitely and not charged as an "enemy combatant" — even on American soil."

Since you're the vigillante, why not give us the answer? I've read the 5th Amendment and the Patriot Act and came to a different conclusion. Show me something I must have missed.

"The Patriot Act broadly expands the official definition of terrorism, so that many domestic groups that engage in nonviolent civil disobedience could very well find themselves labeled as terrorists."

That's the TV speaking, not you. I seriously doubt any of us have read the entire Patriot Act, most of all, you. Why do you belive what SOMEONE ELSE says about the Patriot Act? Read it yourself first--oh, and get ready to set aside a day and a half to do so.

You, sir, are more gullable than the majority of the American public. It is not the government making fools of us "Conservatives", it is the media making a fool out of you. Read an article about this subject from O'Reilly. Now, write a paper that DEFENDS his view. That is how you determine truth--not by bellieving O'Reilly, or believing Larry King/Dan Rather/whomever, but by hearing BOTH SIDES. Willfull ignorance is no defense.

If you do this, I will read something about this from the liberal of your choice and write a paper defending his/her views as well. We will both learn. I might even change my mind. Are you willing to change yours? Or perhaps it is that very fact that will prevent you from doing such a thing? If you can't lose your pride willingly in private, you will lose it publically in the future. Mark my words.

P.S.: On the subject of AT&T, I don't believe they did the right thing by changing the privacy agreement. They were covered under their existing agreement, and lacked the balls to prove it. They are cowards--but only for changing their privacy agreement now.

"Just because you don't like the truth of my response..."

This whole comments section is about opinions, all of this is subjective. Criticising rijp and using personal attacks doesn't help to prove your point either. It makes you look desparate.

"What "governmental intrusions"? "

Some of us who are less credible or informed than you might consider:

1) The ones that include those spuring members of the FISA court to protest the deliberate side stepping of the judicial process by exagerating information in affidavits supporting warrants.

2) The "back room" projects involving the process of tracking credit card purchases and banking transactions of American citizens where no ties to foreign intelligence had been established.

3) The practice of taking cases that would routinely be subject to the judicial and traditional tests of law enforcement activities and then, through the use of symantics, making them national security issues so that due process is circumvented...along with judicial scrutiny.

"We don't know--not you, me, CNN, Fox News, Betanews, AT&T, or even President Bush know everything that the NSA has access to"

It would not matter if we knew, because under the present system any illegal activities resulting from directives of "executives" immediately render government agents immune from criminal prosecution. There is something wrong with a "so called" Patriot Act that anticipates criminal activity by the government and seeks to shield government agents from the consequences of those activities. Doesn't take much knowledge to see a serious problem here.

"Your arrogance has destroyed your ability to reason it appears."

Oh, I think there are plenty of informed folks who can see through what you are attempting to do with that comment. *smile

Wrong...read the Virginia State Terrorism Manual, it clearly states that terrorists are:
"Environmental and Animal Rights Groups", "Property Rights Activists", "Street Gangs"

You are totally wrong in that the definition of terrorists has not been expanded..it has!

You said Environmental and Animal Rights Groups, you meant, Environmental and Animal Rights Extremists.

That manual is awareness training. The definition still defines terrorism as premeditated, politically motivated violence. Read it, it's in the same manual that you misquoted.

Still doesn't fit the defintion that we went to war for, therefore I am correct, the meaning has been increased to include other groups.

Those people in the caves are 'not' doing what they did to save the whales.

This is ridiculous... those groups can be considered terrorists if their actions meet the definition of terrorism.

I feel so sorry for you, in that you just don't get it. I hope you wake up someday, hopefully before your pulled out of your house by police because you called a wrong number or vice-versa. If that happens, I'll fight for your rights, unfortunately I can see you'll not be doing the same.

What's ridiculous is your eagerness to accept what is as is without any thought or question.

Do you truly believe that calling a wrong number would be enough to get me hauled away? It is likely that it wouldn't be enough to have the NSA take a second look. Lets assume I unknowingly or otherwise talk to a suspected terrorist on a regular basis, do you think that alone would be enough?

I have a little more faith in the system that has brought our country this far, and I prefer to see this play out more before I condemn anything. The fact that I don't agree with your views I no way means I have not looked at your side of the argument.

go back to watching the x-files
you're a paranoid delusionist

"Since 1996, AT&T and the AT&T Foundation have distributed more than $439 million to enhance quality of life and to strengthen communities."

http://www.sbc.com/gen/c...te-citizenship?pid=7736

There are plenty of records available. Perhaps you should do a little research into the subject and educate yourself. A mind is a terrible thing to waste!

What in the **** does that have to do with my post!?

Isn't AT&T the company you were referring to when you said they wouldn't care if you died tomorrow?

Haven't read the comments yet. Read about this earlier, and frankly, I think AT&T has lost their nerve. If you ask me, the previous agreement should have covered the controversy. The one's who are sueing AT&T could care less about the privacy policy, in fact, I bet they may sue them now for forcing customers to agree to an "illegal contract".

Why? Because there is nothing to lose even if the ones sueing lose, due to our screwed up government paying the lawyer's fees. Yup, they have nothing to lose--except our tax money.

Your tax money goes to protect us. Did you miss that part? Did you sleep through september of 2001? Did you not follow the events over the last few years?

you know I can get information about you, just from your email address.. How long would it take to get your email, trace the source, find out who your ISP is, call the ISP, get your IP address, and pretend to be you. Maybe it takes several calls, but after a few of them, I got everything I need to get any amount of info. Do not discount the ability of social engineering..

And you have a problem with AT&T submitting a list of lousy phone numbers just so they can eliminate THOSE callers and recipients from a Terrorist watch list?

C'mon! do you realize what you are saying?

Well, I realize what you are saying.so First anyone can enter you name on a scearch engine and find out where you live, work, if you own and or rent etc...
Then we come to you mister rijp. What side do you repesent? After reading you garbage I find that you are not what you appear to be also.
"And you have a problem with att submitting a list of LOUSY NUMBERS-mind you, Your phone number.( which is why mine is unlisted)believe me it does help. Well than post your phone number so i can make a few phone calls and find out everything about you.For otheres all you need is a social security card number will give you entire life away. Just like the illegal immigrate that stole yours yesterday.

Your tax money goes to protect us. Did you miss that part? Did you sleep through september of 2001? Did you not follow the events over the last few years?

How is our tax money making me safer again? How did it protect us "september of 2001"...when there was forewarning? What has been done over the last few years that makes people hate our country less and me safer from anyone other than smokers and boyscouts?

Wow, with your hero Howard Stern being such a champion of free speech, those remarks seem to contradict it.

Or is Sirius becoming a mouthpiece of the government?

Oh, here we go, part 10 of our coverage on NSA/Security/Liberty/Freedom/Fallout from 9-11 Act.

Personally, I would have NO problem submitting my info. They have it anyway. This is like telling your insurance company ALL your accidents when you get a quote, rather than having them finding out.. if you LIE you are in bigger trouble than just telling all up front.

If you aren't calling the taliban, or have terrorists connections, it doesn't go further than that. You think these people have time to listen to EVERY conversation and record them? Technology is good, but its not THAT good.

And I am *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL* *STILL*, *STILL*

WAITING for a justification for EXACTLY what FREEDOM, what RIGHT, or what LIBERTY you have lost. I am not seeing ANY good answers to this, ALL I keep seeing is "It's a violation". Well, so is speeding, but if the cop pulls you over and says "You are in violation, wouldn't you want to know what you are in violation of?".

It's not breaking the law if OTHER people like me think that *YOU* people should freely tell those protecting our interests about WHO you are contacting. You say you aren't breaking the law, PROVE IT!.

If AT&T didn't suck so bad, I would switch based on principal. If you have a problem with it, TELL ME why you feel violated. I dont' want to hear/see "security and privacy".

That's a damn cop out. Give me SPECIFIC examples of what you GAVE UP. I already know, nothing.

You are b****ing because you THINK this is for ulterior motives, but its NOT. WAKE the **** up!

Methinks you confuse freedom for liberty. It's the latter that conservatives want to take away from Americans once and for all.

Guess Osama is laughing so hard he's crying over what guys like you have done to this country — all because two commercial buildings fell down. Were you hiding like Bush and Cheney on 9/11, too?

Chicken Little became Chickenhawk and is now Yellow Elephant. (STFW)

"what RIGHT, or what LIBERTY you have lost."

From the Bill of Rights,
Amendment IV

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 basically says the government cannot investigate me directly without a court order, which can only be given if the judge believes their is sufficient evidence for me to be suspected.

In 1984, prior to FISA, virtually every judge who addressed the issue ruled that with regards to the gathering of intelligence for the purposes of national security, the 4th amendment, specifically the requirement for a warrant, did *not* apply.

Many judges, some of them whom wrote the FISA law, testified this Spring before the Senate Foreign Intelligence committee and concluded that Congressional legislation (such as FISA) can NOT limit a President's Constitutional powers. To accept this premise would result in an unconstitutional Congressional power grab.

Basically, they said FISA was BS because it allows congress to limit the Constitutional powers of the President.

Since, as stated above, prior to FISA, data gathering in relation to national security was legal without a warrant, the NSA data grab would likely be as well.

...just sayin.

I am *not* commenting in this thread as to whether or not it *should* be legal. I am simply stating that it looks like FISA's days may be numbered and that past case law appears to favor the NSA in regards to this current situation.

Dude, the government pulled this kind of thing *long* before 9/11...

9/11 just brought media attention to it.

Where have you been?

Again, not making any judgement as to whether it is right or wrong, just stating facts as I read 'em. Others may interpret them differently and are quite welcome to do so.

Isn't that pertaining to foreign surveillance though? That would in keeping with the school of thought that the president manages our relations with outside nations, while congress handles domestic affairs.

Congressional legislation (such as FISA) can NOT limit a President's Constitutional powers
I hope they specified FISA with more emphasis, otherwise that is one step from illegalizing impeachment. Didn't a president have to approve FISA anyway?

Dude, the government pulled this kind of thing *long* before 9/11...

I really doubt(or at least I hope not) many people here think the government was innnocent before 9/11. I think is more how much more, how blatantly, and how unapologetically the government has being doing these kinds of things since 9/11.

Innocent until proven guilty...

WTF don't you get?

...and the loss of the Constitutional right of citizens to simply FEEL secure in their personal effects is not loss enough???

To be put bluntly-ur a****ing piece of government controled crap. have a nice day. RIP____RIJP

Forget your meds?

I think it's still got more to do with Media coverage. They would have been just as unapologetic 9 years ago.

A lot of folks seem to blame the current administration, but could they honestly say another would have handled it better? You can be *damn* sure they were doing the same things with regards to the gathering of intel... They just didn't have to deal with the media about it.

Again, I'm not judging any administration, or saying one might be better than the other. In fact, I'm actually lumping them all together in stating that I really don't think it'd be handled any differently were it any of our recent administrations.

"This basically says the government cannot investigate me directly without a court order, "

what american is being investigated directly?

besides, national security agencies should be above the law, else others would use it against them.
i would prefer protection agencies as such, should take action immediatly (bypass legal venues), for my safety and yours.

Go live in Iran and Iraq and have little to no rights where the gov takes all and dictates what you can and can't do. Oh, wait it's like that here too. They can take your house to put a store up and they can hold you in a cell for years without a court hearing. We have little to no rights left. We the people are no more! It's us the GOV that owns you all.

what american is being investigated directly?
Anyone whose phone records were looked at for no reason that would make them specifically suspected.

national security agencies should be above the law

Papers please.

I'm not even sure what he was trying to censor there; but then again, he couldn't be bothered to spell half the uncensored words with the right amount of letters, why should I expect to be able to understand his censorship?

100% correct! We do not control our GOV as it was meant to be, but it controls us!

Yeah, I am sure the government did alot of shady things before 9/11; but they kept them hidden as the illegal activities they were. The problem is that 9/11 gave them an excuse to try to legalize all the illegal things they were doing. After all, if we maintain our freedom and protect our rights, "the terrorists win"...but I suppose we're getting a little off topic here. :)

He needs to take a look at things like this:
http://volokh.com/posts/1127427178.shtml

"unreasonable searches and seizures..."

Not a clear-cut issue as you make it out to be. It isn't even one hint of a millimeter to being close to one iota of being unreasonable to me. It's subjective at best.

"what RIGHT, or what LIBERTY you have lost"

I'm still waiting...

Because I no longer trust my government not to abuse power, they infiltrate groups that are antiwar and minorties and even internet chat rooms...ya think for a minute tehy wont or have not used this in a immoral way?? Like their war?

You've been told. If you can't figure it out by now, you don't deserve the rights or freedoms anyway.

good point, and one that seems to be ignored here.

lol
grow up
none of us are truly free

"To be put bluntly-ur a****ing piece of government controled crap"

of coarse you're government controled, go buy your own country if you don't want to be.

OMG. I dont censor anything the admin does.

Well, just roll over and take it then. No sense in fighting the inevitable right?

What? A person has to buy a country to have an opinion?

Thats right. The problem with people is that they have no guts.

lol, thats why sometimes you just dont say anything back to these people.

Does this also include any records involving leased lines that other providers are using for "Last Mile," connectivity?

That could have serious implications if you use a provider that leases AT&T's last mile or backbone. You may be agreeing to their privacy policy by agreeing to your provider’s policy that may not be a strict, but may include a clause to the effect that you agree to all of their "business partners," policy's.

In effect your information could be possibly be disclosed by AT&T, even though your not a direct customer.

I'm concerned if the BellSouth - AT&T merger go's through. Think of all the new customers affected. Cingular and Bellsouth customers. I hope the merger is blocked.

hey, dumb ass. Cingular *IS* Bellsouth, numb nutz. That's how it got started. There is no more Bellsouth mobility. They are merging companies under 1 name, its administrative, so it *CAN'T* be blocked.

Actually Cingular is owned by both ATT and Bellsouth. The merger can be blocked and is awaiting pending approval from share holders and regulatory approval.

U tell that jackass know it all. ) so he thinks)

cingular is partly owned by the new AT&T

Are we still discussing the change in the privacy policy? Do you get get your Internet or television service through Cingular?

I have forwarded this story to everyone I know and most of them are already dropping AT&T.

AT&T sucks.

I'll never use their crap again.

Remember that SBC is AT&T, and that Yahoo! is tied to SBC.

So they are all idiots.

ohman...you dissed Yahoo.

See that dark cloud on the horizon?

rijp's coming....

Remember that SBC is AT&T, and that Yahoo! is tied to SBC. So they are all idiots."

I like that logic. It makes you look really, really smart. So if somebody commits a crime we should hold the whole family responsible?

SBC is *NOT* AT&T. AT&T is a corporate name.. Wait let's back up.

AT&T wireless was just a name. They merged with Cingular. AT&T customers were taken in by Cingular. AT&T then took their name back. So AT&T is STILL a separate company. Those customers that were "AT&T" are now Cingular, because of the merger.

Now AT&T is forming their OWN wireless, called AT&T mobile, which is coming. AT&T is separate.

SBC is Southern Bell Corporation, which is Pacific Bell, Nevada bell, and some other RBOC's. Now Yahoo is just a brand. Kinda like when you buy a generic mouse at the store, you may see logictech's name on it, and you may see Microsoft on it.. but SOME OTHER company makes those products (usually) and they just brand it to make it a package deal.

Yahoo! is *NOT* tied to SBC. They are basically a reseller, but Yahoo! doesn't have their own Telephone company, they encourage their own customer base to *USE* SBC DSL, and give discounts, because of their large customer base.

SBC/AT&T and Yahoo may be idiots, but they are ALL separate idiots.

And I don't think they are dropping AT&T when they have to pay a $250 dollar cancellation fee, its just a knee jerk reaction, but its not very smart.

For one thing, you signed an agreement, with EVERY Telcom company, T-Mobile, Verizon, cingular, it doesn't matter. We aren't talking a 3rd party with Access to your accounts, we are talking the National Security Agency, which reports to Homeland Security.

As a simple COURTESY they are notifying customers FIRST to volunteer the information. Even if they don't ASK for it, they can STILL get it!.. Do NOT kid yourself.

Of the 1% people that have a problem "voluntarily" submitting their call list.. they will be CAREFULLY scrutinized because they OBVIOUSLY have something to hide, otherwise, why wouldn't you simply go along with it?

I ask you, WHAT is the BIG Deal? What information are you so protective of? Call whoever, whenever, however, as often as you want.. this DOES NOT CHANGE. All they want to know is *WHO* you are calling and that *THEY* are not on a damn watch list.

WTF is this so hard to understand?

He is entitled to his opinion.. even if it is wrong.. lol

Yeah, and you *still* hit like a freight train.

Gonna start calling you 'Old Reliable'.

You don't have to pay $250 to cancel home service dorkboy. :D

Only a fool would use AT&T for their cell phone.

Dee Dah Dee

Also, what are all the commercials saying that AT&T is now SBC or SBC is now AT&T?

I am also in total agreement with those who disagree with AT&T's actions. I wonder if they would be willing to let their (company) phone records be made public!!
It may be too late to do anything other than boycotting SBC/AT&T products & services, but it's equally important to make it clear to other companies:try this and you will lose my business!

So basically, instead of doing it behind your back, they are telling you that they are doing it. Nothing has really changed.

I definately think one is a *great* improvement over the other.

It's not behind your back. Don't you ever read contracts? It's on there, would you like me to print it out and SHOW it to you?

You agree to submit ALL your information that they may "use for business purposes". I think the NSA/homeland security qualifies as PART of your background check.

Why are you so protective of your call list? Is your pimp or drug dealer a terrorist? How about your parole officer? Is he giving you "special" privledges or something?

If none of this is true, QUIT worrying about it.

It's not behind your back. Don't you ever read contracts? It's on there
Just because something is written in a contract does not make it legal. I can have you sign a paper promising me the liver of your firstborn child, it that doesn't make it a legally binding contract.

Actually rijp, since you seem to have so much time on your hands...yes, please do print off the contract and show me where it says that any business or government body has the abilty to circomvent Amendment 4 of the bill of rights. Particulerly the part noting that "against unreasonable searches and seizures" does somehow not apply to them. Yes, I would like to see that. You see, its not that I am concerned they are looking at my phone number and call logs, I'm concerned that next time it may be Amendment 12, or 14 that goes to the wayside. Have you ever heard the story about the the person who gave the mouse a cookie? It just keeps taking more. You are fairly good at disputing facts but anyone is capable of doing that. It doesnt require having anything of their own to stand on...they just throw facts around. The old saying goes is that, if you dont stand for something you will fall for anything. Which you have done. The founding fathers of this country had principals and used them to build this country. Now, thanks to people like yourself principals and morals are gone. All that you have are personal convictions, more often then not they are based on personal gains. You think ah...oh well its only a phone number list and you dont realize what effort was made to make that very phone log private in the first place. Instead of only doing reserch before you speak (which is a good thing to do) also do a little thinking on your own.

Have you *ever* bothered to read a list of logic errors? It would save us a lot of grief.

Normally privacy rights are still kept intact when changing to new privacy policies. AT&T has done a complete 180 and actually started eating away at such rights. Normally I wouldn't care, but AT&T's blatant disregard for the customer makes me glad I don't have them as a voice/data provider.

I hope it's not monkey see, monkey do. Let's hope other telecom companies will respect their customers.

Wishful thanking, once one does it, others will follow. If they do anything 'bad' with the data I think this could be challenged, since in some places only AT&T provides service and in that case this could be considered a strong-arm tactic.

Guess which company is no longer my carrier. I am now a Verizon customer.

Guess who cares? not AT&T. They have hundreds of thousands of customers, and probably business products you use use an AT&T account.

AT&T will care when they see significant customer loss due to policies like this, but that is unlikely, they are big and widely used because they own the wires and the tech.

"AT&T will care when they see significant customer loss due to policies like this..."

They will care when BIL is one of many fleeing AT&T. If I am not mistaken, since the dissolution of Ma Bell, no company owns the wires or the tech; but instead lease the permission to use it in exchange for helping to manintain it.

AT&T will care because its customers will care. Using customer information for targeted advertising is something that bothers people a little already, a company blatantly saying "you have no privacy with us" is asking for a mass exodus.

Lets welcome 1984 back.

I dont know who in their right minds will continue using AT&T.
Dump it, end of story. That will teach them a lesson

I'm typically not real concerned about privacy issues, but I must agree that AT&T has crossed way over the line this time.

Glad I'm not an AT&T customer!

What the hell happened in '84? Did you miss something?

simple time line.

AT&T has customers. AT&T is a *PUBLIC* telephone company. AT&T has a customer base, that *AGREED* and *SIGNED* a piece of paper that said You as the customer AGREE to give AT&T (and every other Telephone company) your information, to do a background check and to make sure you are not a criminal. You ALSO agreed that since its a *PUBLIC* utility, there are certain terms of use.

Where on that contract do you see the words *PRIVATE* use? Go ahead, open it, read it.. (since you evidently didn't read it the FIRST time) and go over it. AT&T has legal right to submit (upon request from the Government) your information.

Do you live in Iraq? This isn't some spammer asking for your info, this isn't some damn sales call, bonehead, its the NATIONAL security agency? Do you know what that means? It means they are protecting *OUR* rights.

You have rights, *I* have rights, and *MY* rights stipulate *I* Have freedom of information, and that MEANS I have a right to *KNOW* you are not CALLING a damn terrorist!

WTF! Why are people so damn bull headed to see what is happening? **** the government, I want to know that my neighbor hasn't been organizing a hit on my area. This isn't even about the NSA anymore, *I* want to see your damn phone records, because that's my *RIGHT*.

Its a *PUBLIC* utility, and *I* DEMAND to see who you are calling to verify, *YOU* are not a damn terrorist. **** you and your damn privacy, we are talking SECURITY here, lame ass.

I have a right to *KNOW* you are not CALLING a damn terrorist!
Well, not really, no you don't. Why, because I could be confirming his order of PIZZA!!! Besides that, if the government or any other person needs to see who is calling a terrorist and who the terrorist calls, they can look at THE TERRORIST'S phone records!!!

This country was founded on the idea of freedom over security. Following your logic, why don't we all just climb into cages, just in case one of us somewhere down the line thinks slightly the wrong thought, or gives you a funny look.

Technically, AT&T has more of a right to abuse my customer information than the government does. The Bill of Rights and Constitution were written to protect me from the government who I have to deal with, not from companies I choose to deal with. As such, I choose to not deal with AT&T.

You are an idiot...

Innocent until PROVEN GUILTY! YOU have no RIGHT to have someone PROVE their innocence. At least not yet..

"Technically, AT&T has more of a right to abuse my customer information than the government does. The Bill of Rights and Constitution were written to protect me from the government who I have to deal with, not from companies I choose to deal with. As such, I choose to not deal with AT&T."

This is the first correct statement I've seen. However, I don't know if they gave this info to government without supeona if it would hold water in a 'normal' court.

You make me laugh with your primitive logic, you dont even know about 1984, I rest my case.
Here, go read it first, then we can continue our little chat

http://www.amazon.com/gp...773715?%5Fencoding=UTF8

Well, one of the ways they are free to abuse it is to give it to the government without any sort of court order. AT&T has as much right to their customer information as their customers do. As far as I know, there are no grounds for client confidentiality outside of doctors and lawyers. AT&T giving the government information is like your friend testifying in court that he saw you steal a tv. He may choose to testify of his own free will, otherwise the courts must subpoena him through proper channels.

I don't know if they gave this info to government without supeona if it would hold water in a 'normal' court.

Courts schmorts, who needs courts besides bleeding-heart liberals that believe in things like rights, due process, and innocent until proven guilty. If we just assume everyone is guilty we don't need courts, trials will just get in the way of punishing the non-believers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hterrrorists.

" The Bill of Rights and Constitution were written to protect me from the government "

ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

man, where did you get your warped way of thinking from?
what the hell is wrong with you?

and where did you get your mindset???? What is apparently wrong is that his opinion isn't the same as yours. *laughs

We all forget one simple, yet powerful fact; AT&T controls government regulation with the large amounts of "CAMPAGIN FUNDS" that it gives out each year.
So yea, they found a loop hole MAN.