Surveillance Is on the Rise, Straining Carriers

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "The number of telephone wiretaps from 2000 to 2004 authorized by state and federal judges increased by 44%, the Wall Street Journal reports, in part because of a rise in terrorism investigations after 9/11, and because the Patriot Act extended surveillance to Internet providers. All the surveillance activity can put a strain on carriers. 'Smaller telecom companies in particular have sought help from outsiders in order to comply with the court-ordered subpoenas, touching off a scramble among third parties to meet the demand for assistance', the WSJ reports, adding, 'Government surveillance has intensified even more heavily overseas, particularly in Europe. Some countries, such as Italy, as well as government and law-enforcement agencies, are able to remotely monitor communications traffic without having to go through the individual service providers. To make it easier for authorities to monitor traffic, some also require registering with identification before buying telephone calling cards or using cybercafes.'"

Comments

Is it Fascism yet?

[Paraplex]

USA: Put a stop to this NOW.
Watch as dissent becomes a threat to national security.

Do you really believe this is to stop terrorism?

What side are you on?
No I don't mean "With us or with the terrorists" trite.

I mean what side are you on?
The side of freedom, self-government, equality, tolerance?

or the side of oppression, protection, surveilance, revenge?

There are people from all nations who represent both sides. Some are fighting for the "terrorists" and some are fighting for the "freedom fighters"

People like Bush & Osama have tried to polarise this for their own agendas by hijacking the english language with doublespeak like "Freedom", "Honour" and "PATRIOTism" and the "With us or against us" rhetoric, but don't be mistaken.

If you don't put a stop to this *Now* you will regret it.

Re:It is the balance of fears

[mi]

Do you really think that someone determined to kill alot of people won't be able to pull it off, even with the violations of liberties?

So, what you are really arguing for, is the abolition of all law-enforcement efforts. Because if someone is really determined to commit a crime, they'd pull it off, wouldn't they?

Re:Careful.....

[Ghostx13]

Rhombic called me an idiot. I didn't insult him. If Cindy Sheehan were here and she called me an asshole I'd say I deserved it for insulting her first.

I don't like Sheehan because she's an attention whore. She's done nothing but dishonor the memory of her son to make herself a political celebrity. Thats dispicable. If she's willing to exploit her dead son this makes me feel she is un-trustworthy. Thus anything she says I hold suspect until incontrovertible evidence shows otherwise.

About Hugo Chavez she said : "I admire him for his resolve against my government and its meddling". She admires a man who has been identified as a human rights violator by both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. She admires a man who is involved in a case in the International Criminal Court for human rights violations.