U.S. Threatened Massive Fine To Force Yahoo To Release Data

Advocatus Diaboli writes The U.S. government threatened to fine Yahoo $250,000 a day in 2008 if it failed to comply with a broad demand to hand over user data that the company believed was unconstitutional, according to court documents unsealed Thursday that illuminate how federal officials forced American tech companies to participate in the NSA's controversial PRISM program. The documents, roughly 1,500 pages worth, outline a secret and ultimately unsuccessful legal battle by Yahoo to resist the government's demands. The company's loss required Yahoo to become one of the first to begin providing information to PRISM, a program that gave the National Security Agency extensive access to records of online communications by users of Yahoo and other U.S.-based technology firms.

Comments

"Gave"

[Anonymous Coward]

I like how this is all phrased to imply that it's no longer going on and this is all a thing of the past.

Re:"Gave"

[pr0t0]

I think the OP's inference is justified. A rephrasing of the sentence should be used to describe an ongoing program. Also, the article clearly states that the program ended in 2011, lending some support to the inference.

I also do not believe for one New York second that the program is suspended, or if it is, it is only because it was replaced by an even more Orwellian (and dare I say, anti-American) program with a different name.

Re:"Gave"

[xdor]

I think this had to do with all traffic getting routed through the NSA servers. There was a minor indication of their co-opting of the the system back in 2012: http://blog.icann.org/2012/12/...

It's a bad sign

[x181]

It's a bad sign when these types of reports no longer invoke any sort of shock. It's a part of "Americana" now.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Travis Mansbridge]

Snowden calls this "NSA Fatigue"

Re:It's a bad sign

[theshowmecanuck]

I call it shitty.

Re:It's a bad sign

[rmdingler]

Knowing as much as Snowden does about the abilities and vulnerabilities of an online presence,

even he is on record as saying, "I'm going to slip up and they (American intelligence) are going to hack me."

Though the public has seemingly grown tired of revelations regarding the misdeeds of government, the government has not tired in its pursuit of of the prosecution of Mr Snowden. Does the government win because of their persistence or due to our short attention span?

Re:It's a bad sign

[Charliemopps]

It's a bad sign when these types of reports no longer invoke any sort of shock. It's a part of "Americana" now.

I'm shocked every time.

People choose apathy as a defense mechanism. "I always knew the government was doing this." "This is what I told you all along" etc...
You predicted it so it's not so bad? Screw that, this is shameful and a sad point in American history. It's sad that the people doing this don't even realize future generations will look back on them like we now look back on McCarthy, Stalin, Nixon, etc... They bring shame on themselves and our country.

Re:It's a bad sign

[anmre]

Indeed. It's striking when Americans care more about Ray Rice than we do about methods of tyranny that would make the Stasi cream themselves.

Bread and circuses, and so forth.

Re:It's a bad sign

[easyTree]

Welcome to Amerikkka; land of the free; free as in slavery, not as in beer :P

Re:It's a bad sign

[fred911]

I call it "The Patriot Act".

Re:It's a bad sign

[easyTree]

Hint: they do realize but don't care. Shame doesn't mean anything to the wolves - that's for the sheep.

Re:It's a bad sign

[demachina]

Note the date, 2008, not 2002. Approximately the time financial markets started crashing and the Occupy and Tea Party movements started building. Ya think the U.S. government was more worried about Islamic terrorists or ordinary Americans who would soon be fed up with massive corruption in D.C. and Wall Street. Were they trying to prevent another 9/11 or building the capacity to suppress the backlash when millions of ordinary people would soon be thrown out of their jobs and homes, while Wall Street would get massively bailed out, and return to business as usual, getting rich.

The U.S. did a spectacularly good job of crushing Occupy. Did they use domestic spying to do it.

War is when your government tells you who the enemy is, revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

The government wins because most of the voting populace does not feel pain from their evil.

At least not directly enough that they can connect the dots.

People feel the pain of an economy in which jobs are few and prices are high, but they don't see how government corruption directly keeps it that way. They think they have nothing to hide so they don't care about being spied on, not realizing how that data is used in aggregate to power decisions that keep the entrenched wealthy elite entrenched and wealthy.

The government is very effective at wagging the dog. So effective at it that even when their lies are made public, people still don't understand, and still don't respond appropriately.

The few of use who do are outnumbered by the tremendous numbers of people who don't.

And that's why the government wins, and always will.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Bite The Pillow]

Who said there's no shock? It wasn't me, and it wasn't the article. And the only one in between is you.

You had, apparently, the first post.

Is it really that hard to shout, "Ha, ha, no one is shocked." when no one has replied with at a minimum the requisite, "I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you."?

Beyond illustrating why quotes belong outside the punctuation, this shows that you are either:

1) Minimizing the possibility of a public backlash, of which there clearly is evidence due to the number of anti-responses

or

2) Functionally retarded

Choose wisely: troll or retard, which is it?

Re:It's a bad sign

[Bite The Pillow]

I don't get your point, nor why you are at +5 currently. Has Snowden been hacked? Is there even any question?

He appeared supportive of Russia, and explained his reasoning. The government has apparently not been successful at hacking Snowden. The public has tired, as Snowden said, of the constant reports of misconduct.

The government does not win, because lots of people have not, individually, tired.

Did I adequately answer your question? Regardless, will you answer any of mine?

Re:It's a bad sign

[rmdingler]

First two questions: Snowden's own words Bro.

I immediately discount any claim of peasant-like fealty to Russia as the vernacular of a man with few options.

Beware /. poster, your experience as one who has not tired of revelations of the corruption of government is not indicative of the public at large.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Sperbels]

I suspect you don't make it very far in politics if you don't toe the party line.

Re: It's a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

How can you tell what the general public's reaction is? Can you really believe what is said by the politicians, pundits and talking heads on ABC, CBS, C-Span, CNBC, CNN, UBS or The NY Times, News Corp, Tribune Corp, Washington Post, etc., when they are owned and operated by GE, Disney, Time Warner, Rupert (Fucking) Murdoch, Jeff Bezos and their ilk, can you? We're continually bombarded with FUD and even PBS airs the paranoid war mongering of Dick Cheney telling us of the poverty of the administration's foreign policy. All this is done in the absence of any credible evidence of the 'intelligence' by which a reasonable person might assess the situation for themself. Asimov was right about advanced technology appearing magical, and as such, what should we expect when the government's long term results help create the very morass our elected officials are supposed to protect us from in a culture which reveres the good side of the sword that is used to poke us in the eye, blinding us to the dark side? Snowden has been vilified while Cheney is allowed to kibbitz from the side lines. At least Bush finally displays some good sense by remaining quiet. Of course he's off with daddy warbucks pursuing more evil as part of the Carlysle Group anyway. Hrrrmph.

Re:It's a bad sign

[demachina]

When you are about to have an economic crash groups like Occupy and the Tea Party are an inevitability, whatever the names or politcal leaning may be. When you are about to have an economic crash the powers that be prepare to suppress revolt and domestic spying is job one. Militarizing the police is job two.

During the Great Depression Fascism was where economically desperate people turned as they are doing in Greece today.

Re:It's a bad sign

[ShanghaiBill]

I call it shitty.

Is it shitty enough for you to DO something about? There are two things you can do about it:
1. Vote Libertarian on November 4th
2. Vote Green on November 4th
Both the Libertarian Party and Green Party have promised to put a stop to the spying.
98% of the people don't care much about the spying, and will vote for business as usual.

Re:It's a bad sign

[FlyHelicopters]

No, I care, but there isn't anything I can do about it...

Getting upset about something I can't do anything about is a waste of energy...

Or were you planning to revolt? Let me know how that goes...

Re:It's a bad sign

[chihowa]

The government is very effective at wagging the dog. So effective at it that even when their lies are made public, people still don't understand, and still don't respond appropriately.

The few of use who do are outnumbered by the tremendous numbers of people who don't.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss everybody else as useless sheep. This entire situation is engineered to be difficult to escape.

How are you responding appropriately? You're complaining anonymously on a backwater echo chamber website. Have you actually done anything to fix the situation or would all of the other concerned, but helpless, people see you as just another one of the idiots who still don't understand?

Re:It's a bad sign

[easyTree]

And that there is the problem: "We are powerless should should not care. "

Re:It's a bad sign

[FlyHelicopters]

Oh, don't misunderstand me, I do care...

But until a large number of people care, my caring doesn't change anything...

And I don't get any sense at all that most people care...

Re:It's a bad sign

[bill_mcgonigle]

There are two things you can do about it: ...
98% of the people don't care much about the spying, and will vote for business as usual.

So, voting 3rd-party isn't actually doing anything about it because it's an action guaranteed to not have a result (electoral NOOP). Maybe it makes you feel warm inside, but it will have no effect on the spymasters. We don't even need to drag out Duverger's Law.

"If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it." - Sam Clemens

Re:It's a bad sign

[easyTree]

Once again, I've got to disagree at a basic level with this reasoning. This is a cog in the machine of disempowerment; the belief that consensus is needed. The will of one mind is enough to keep am ideal alive and effect change.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Kjella]

Well even if you got most people to agree this is a bad thing there's also the small problem of what line of action would ultimately make things better and not be horribly much worse in the meantime. It'd be an awful shame if it ended up being "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".as they too are corrupted by the establishment, now you have a third party whose politics you feel is nuts as well. Or perhaps I should say that the other way around, chances are they'd have to sell out to get to power otherwise they'd be fought tooth and nail every step of the way. There will be a massive gloom and doom campaign about all the horrors that would bring and people get scared. Even if what they have isn't fair the world isn't unicorns and rainbows and it could get a whole lot worse.

For example many of the people in the Arab spring, they topple a secular dictator in the hope of freedom and democracy and end up with extreme religious fundamentalists taking over the country. Granted, it probably wouldn't come to that but even if we take the Civil War that ended slavery and whatnot there's probably a whole lot of injured or dead soldiers and civilians, people who had lost someone or all their belongings or property who'd rather wish they'd let the Confederacy go. It's easy to point out the flaws in the old system. It's hard to make people believe in change. It's much harder still to make change. And no, I'm not trying to point out one politician in particular they all tend to backtrack on their promises once they get into office. What is going to make people believe you're actually going to be different?

Re:It's a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

If I was an American I'd ask "don't they teach civics any more". As it is, I suspect your civics were always a bit badly thought out anyway.

America is effectively a two party state. In a one party state, every possible view has to be hidden in one party. In a two party, semi-democratic, partly free state like yours each party has to be a broad coalition of different views.

This means two things; if you have a very strong view on something then you should work, independently of party, with any local candidate who supports your views. Call your representatives; get their views. Vote for whichever one comes close to yours. Fine. Each of the parties has to take many different points of view in otherwise the two party situation may be threatened as has happened in the past.

The second thing is that, if you have no major party representatives that come close to your views then you should vote for another completely different candidate. This doesn't win directly, but it signals to each of the major parties that if they move a bit closer to your view then there are votes available to defeat their opponents. The major parties are very afraid of any third power base forming. That's why the tea-party has been defeating the republican party.

The effect of voting for a third party is not direct but it is a much better signal than not voting. You went to the election booth. You were avaliable. With just a few sops in your direction the losing candidate could have becone the winner. That does eventually make a difference.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Richard_at_work]

Both the Libertarian Party and Green Party have promised to put a stop to the spying.

Of course they have, its called pandering to the masses. The masses want the spying to stop, so promise that. These parties know they will never have to actually do anything about it because they know they will never make the landslide gains needed to actually govern - but then their goals are not to form a government, but to increase the parties reach, so even a single additional seat does that.

And you are falling right into their hands.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all Americans....but enough to be extremely troubling. A number of my co-workers are more conversant in what media whores like the Kardashian clan are up to or the latest football scores than pretty much any aspect of domestic or foreign policy.

Re:It's a bad sign

[slimshady76]

And you are falling right into their hands.

Show me how it's any different nowadays. You've basically given your entire free will to a certain class or cast, the upper one. The whole justice system was meant to segregate the masses from the decision making part of the populace. That's because back in the day, when the Union was barely formed, any John Doe could run for a representative seat. They were folks you knew, and whom you could go talk if any of the moves the Government did affected you in any negative way to try to change his point of view. Then, the Justice branch of the Government was born, and with it the possibility to take the masses effectively out of the Government, simply because to pursuit a career in the Justice system you'd have to be rich, and pay your way through University.

It's no different today. Super PACs and all, the system is designed to allow just those in the oligarchy to gain access to positions with enough power to make any substantial change. And guess tho who's well being are those folks lean towards?

Re:It's a bad sign

[Frigga's Ring]

That's okay. Just take some time to call the candidate you ARE going to vote for and let them know how you feel about this. If enough voters take this effort, your candidate will change their stance.

Re:It's a bad sign

[drainbramage]

It's a bad sign when people blame long dead politicians for the actions of people they just voted for.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Wootery]

This kind of thinking is why you're all screwed, even if there is some truth to but if I vote for the good guy, the even-worse guy will get in.

If a third party started getting a non-trivial number of votes, that would serve as a wake-up call to the two big parties, even if the third party is crazy.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Dragonslicer]

Both the Libertarian Party and Green Party have promised to put a stop to the spying.

Didn't a bunch of Republicans and Democrats make that same promise? What kind of results have we gotten from that?

Re:It's a bad sign

[s.petry]

Well, the answer can't be to maintain the status quot or nothing changes. The answer also can't be "do nothing" or nothing changes. I have, and will recant the importance of people to get people they know and trust on ballots. It does not matter how "political" they are, just that they have a high level of ethics and morals.

Sure, the puppet masters fun more than just the D and R candidates, but they don't fund all of them. In fact they don't fund all of the D and R candidates either.

If massive changes get made at the lower level it will start to change the upper levels, but obviously takes time. Educating neighbors, friends, and family is the strongest tool in the toolbox.

Re:It's a bad sign

[DarkOx]

I read this argument often and here is my response.

Provided you are going to vote for someone you can:
Vote for the guys who made the mess in the first place. Taking them at their word that they really mean to clean it up. You must do this knowing that they thought these things you are so outraged by where good ideas at one time. Which should make you question if they truly share your values and lead you to wonder if their solution will be worse than the problem is today.

Or

You could vote for someone new. Who also says they want to fix it. Can they who knows, might they prove to an even worse disaster than current crop sure. Then again they might be a whole lot better, we don't know unless we let them try.

So the real question is if you are going to vote for a main stream Republican or Democrat both groups having a pretty solid track record of FAILURE for the past 20+ years what result can you expect?

Re:It's a bad sign

[Bob the Super Hamste]

[Citation Needed]

While I would like to believe that this is the case reality seems to differ. I have been a fairly active citizen when contacting my elected representatives and the various candidates. Problem is that far too many people don't care and spout the anything for safety or if you have nothing to hide bull shit so they don't really care.

Re:It's a bad sign

[matteorr]

...that would serve as a wake-up call to the two big parties, even if the third party is crazy.

Especially if the third party is crazy

Re:It's a bad sign

[magarity]

1. Vote Libertarian on November 4th
2. Vote Green on November 4th

When will the Libertarians and Greens learn the lesson from the Teas? If you want to get elected, work from WITHIN the establishment. There are multiple Tea candidates in office via running under the Republican umbrella. The Libertarians could do the same except all they seem to want to do is siphon votes away from a potentially winning Republican. The Greens need to work from within the Democrats the same way instead of siphoning off. Then we COULD get real change but it's doubtful either the Libs or Greens can get off their ideological high horses.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Anonymous Coward]

Please give me an actual option as an ordinary citizen.

I do care. I always look up issues and votes and why someone in office has voted the way they do, and if they broke their promise, they don't get my vote again.

I call the senator to voice my opinion. I do not kowtow to any party. I am an Independent voter and no one can take my vote for granted.

I am smart and take no BS speeches that paint a rosy picture.

I know many people who are also just as smart. They are also just as tired as everyone else is about all these revelations.

Now, please tell me my options on how to get rid of the two party system. I know about 50 people in my immediate circle that are willing to help make a difference.

It is easy to say "Everyone is an idiot and has a short attention span", but give me an actual viable option.

-SK

Re:It's a bad sign

[kaatochacha]

I eventually grew tired of debating the whole "but does it even matter". Eventually, I simply decided to do/vote whatever I think is right. Do the correct and moral thing based on my beliefs. In the long run, it may not change anything. But I've stayed true to myself, and hopefully if enough people do that, things may change.

Re:It's a bad sign

[kaatochacha]

Yeah, there's too many "eventually"'s in that...

Re:It's a bad sign

[zieroh]

1. Vote Libertarian on November 4th

If Libertarian candidates were electable, they'd already be elected.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Magius_AR]

You're part of the problem and you're wrong, because you're only focused on short-term thinking. Change is slow, and a vote matters even if you don't win "today's election", because it's public opinion and sentiment that matters. The parties _mold_ themselves around it. If they know they can get you to continue to vote for them without changing, they'll never change. The entire fact that libertarians are on the rise now in the Republican party is because a movement was started and maintained back then, even knowing they weren't going to sweep/win any elections: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Re:It's a bad sign

[david_thornley]

No, that's not going to work. Grassroots/astroturf organization is about the only way to make changes like this. That, unfortunately, requires work.

If somebody isn't going to get a party endorsement unless they act against the surveillance state, they'll listen.

Re:It's a bad sign

[theshowmecanuck]

I call it shitty, because it is shitty that people don't care enough. I don't know how you can take it that I don't care just because I think it's shitty that other people don't and/or are fatigued about it. So don't bitch at me. And the reason your suggestions won't work is because most people in the U.S. (and in many western countries) are too fucking apathetic to actually try to pressure their representatives to do something about it or vote for someone who will. Personally I eschew libertarianism, And as for Green Party, it depends what their platform is. Some, maybe many among them are too socialistic for my tastes. Some realize that business is important and try to strike a sustainable balance. Those I could go for. But without a populace willing to learn about their own systems of government and will to do something about it, it won't fly.

Re: It's a bad sign

[cpaalman]

Maybe it's time for some bat shit crazy.

Re:It's a bad sign

[Wootery]

I suspect you're best off with a third-party who embodies the changes the people want to see, so that the encumbents can be forced to lean that way, rather than just get generally desperate.

Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[JoeyRox]

How can you fine someone for not cooperating in activities that the government refused to even admit existed?

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy: be the government.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Rick Zeman]

How can you fine someone for not cooperating in activities that the government refused to even admit existed?

You send the shadow court a shadow check?

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[scotts13]

How can you fine someone for not cooperating in activities that the government refused to even admit existed?

...by having lots of people with guns on hand. They can do whatever they want, ESPECIALLY if the programs are covert.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[theshowmecanuck]

FTFY

Easy: have an apathetic electorate. We the people by the people and all that.

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." - John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election for Lord Mayor of Dublin, 1790. (Speeches. Dublin, 1808.) as quoted in Bartlett's Familiar Quotations

If you don't do something, then people that will do something, will get what they want. And it won't necessarily be what you like or even want; and you will have to live with it until when and if you do something about it.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Euler]

Would have been interesting, paying the fine would require disclosure to shareholders? Is that a violation of 'super secret stuff'? Who wins SEC vs. NSA?

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[AHuxley]

re "How can you fine someone for not cooperating in activities that the government refused to even admit existed?"
The 'The One Telco Exec Who Resisted The NSA Has Been Released From 4+ Years In Jail" (2013/09/27)
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Bite The Pillow]

Has the government, and keep in mind this relates to all three branches, refused to admit that a FISC exists, or that the FISA was passed?

Specifically, which parts do "the government" refuse to admit exist?

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Redmancometh]

That's a tough one. I'd put my money on the SEC, but if it was prison rules it'd be the NSA.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[gl4ss]

no.. you just announce what they want and why you're now paying 250 000... maybe announce it by accident. but you pretty much would need to announce it somehow to shareholders that you're paying 91 mil a year for keeping secrets.

of course, then they might announce secretly that you're in contempt of the secret court. ..anyhow didn't the fucks just a while ago try claiming that prism didn't exist? and why don't these companies just move the servers out of USA too? I mean, Microsoft, Google, etc already pretend to be Irish(or varying other country) companies for taxation. So why stay technically American then at all - why not just move over the borders? probably easier in the long run anyways since now they're breaking privacy laws of other countries and are being put into catch22 by the yanks. would be easier to just move than to comply with secret laws that contradict secret laws of other countries that contradict the public laws of both countries.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[JoeyRox]

I used the past tense, "refused". Yahoo was threatened back in 2008. PRISM was highly classified then.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[dbIII]

and why don't these companies just move the servers out of USA too

I seem to recall a view being pushed hard that if an American company is involved somewhere then the servers are American even if they are in New Zealand - but it's till being tested in various courts. Such a thing tends to get very political however and the rule of law is unlikely to apply - only appeasement and deals.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[X.25]

How can you fine someone for not cooperating in activities that the government refused to even admit existed?

Because people in "free world", over the course of last 40-50 years, allowed governments to heavy regulate every aspect of their lives. That includes companies too, obviously.

So, whether you know it or not, you are breaking laws and regulations every single day. Literally.

All it takes is for them to have a reason to go after you.

This is one of the reasons why "I don't care if government spies on me, I have nothing to hide" attitude is beyond retarded. But people don't understand it until shit happens to them.

Then it's too late.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Rich0]

Yeah, I was wondering that as well. How does that show up on the balance sheet? Do you put in the annual statement "Risks may or may not include failure to cooperate with a request to disclose data that the government may or may not have made, which may or may not have resulted in millions of dollars in fines?"

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[countach]

It's a legitimate question though.... If Yahoo had held out and paid the fine, what do they say on the next financial conference call to Wall street about where the money is going? Do they say they are being fined by an unspecified government agency that they cannot specify for reasons they are not allowed to state? Are they allowed to say that? Are they allowed to NOT say where it is going under public company financial disclosure laws? Me thinks these laws would come head to head.

Re:Yahoo knew fine was a bluff

[Vertigo Acid]

OR, look at telco Qwest as they refused to cooperate with the Government over specific contracts almost a decade ago. Are they even alive today as a company?

You may be more familiar with them as Centurylink

Steve Earle said it best

[ShaunC]

Fuck the FCC, fuck the FBI, fuck the CIA, I'm living in the motherfuckin' USA.

Maybe someday this total information awareness nonsense will stop.

Re:Steve Earle said it best

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would it stop? The guberment loves it and the people don't seem to care.

Re:Steve Earle said it best

[cheater512]

Then again, maybe you Americans will pull your head out of the sand.

Whenever I read stuff like this

[BringsApples]

I wonder why the constitution ever had any power at all over the laws. Why did 9/11 bring such a change in our freedoms? We were told that 9/11 was a failure attempt at removing our freedoms. Yet that's exactly what happened. We lose our freedoms all in the name of not losing our freedoms?

Happy 9/11 anniversary!

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[troll -1]

The law is meaningless when there is no one left to enforce it.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder why the constitution ever had any power at all over the laws. Why did 9/11 bring such a change in our freedoms?

Bad shit has been going on since the very beginning. Remember the alien and sedition acts?

The difference with 9/11 is that computers made it scalable so they could do it to everyone and keep it relatively secret at the same time because computers don't blow whistles.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[s.petry]

Why did 9/11 bring such a change in our freedoms?

How much time do you have to study on issues and events?

The "accidental theorists" will tell you that this all came as a big shock. Those same people will tell you that despite having massive think tanks and the highest levels of education available, politicians "never saw that coming" on just about any event in history. You know, like Reagan never realized that "Trickle Down" would benefit the rich much more than the poor that was just a big 'Whoops!' which has been policy since the 1980s. None of them ever guessed that arming, funding, and training "terrorists" would come back to bite us in the ass so we continue that policy for at least the same duration of time.

None of this was surprising, except that people have had almost no reaction to it. People have been warning about the state we are currently in since I was a little kid. The take over of media was planned, and took time. People warned about the dangers and were silenced. I'm sure that the accidental theorist would claim that was yet another "whoops" but lets be real. Accidental theory is completely irrational and illogical.

If you really and truly want to answer your question, jump back and read a book by Gary Allen called "None Dare Call it Conspiracy". Take every fact he provides in the book and check it for truthfulness, you will find nothing inaccurate. That book will point you to other sources to read, which will begin to map out a nice web of people that will answer your question.

You can choose the red pill or the blue pill, but if you take the red pill there is no turning back and your life will never be the same.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[Livius]

When terrorists hate Americans "because of their freedoms", it's not about Americans having freedoms, it's because Americans believe freedoms are theirs and no-one else's. If someone thinks your freedoms don't count for anything, you become annoyed at them.

But with Americans falling over themselves to give up their freedoms, maybe that issue will resolve itself.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[AHuxley]

Re 'change in our freedoms?"
"It takes a lot of money, you have to build up Bluffdale [the location of the NSA's data storage center, in Utah] to store all the data. If you collect all the data, you've got to store it, you have to hire more people to analyze it, you have to hire more contractors, managers to manage the flow. You have to start a big data initiative. It's an empire. Look at what they've built!"
Binney: 'The NSA's main motives: power and money'
http://www.dw.de/binney-the-ns... (9.08.2014)

Signals intelligence was to "collect it all" and then sort. The next step was some lock box law for phone records to get around parallel construction in open US courts.
The UK understood if people know about signals intelligence they can move away from telco products.
The US seems to hope that all people will enjoy the freedom of buying and using that next tame consumer grade telco product.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[Bite The Pillow]

Because of fear.

Yes, we lost freedoms, and people forecast that we would.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Yeah, he was a smart mutherfucker.

Why did the Constitution have any power? Because it was the description of how we put the country together. It was the description of who had power, and which powers they had. Was is the operative word.

That stopped when people shit their pants because a few small percent of people died.

And yes, I know someone who had a lifetime of earnings in boxes that were destroyed from fire. Screw the conspiracy shit, even without that they would still be at zero earnings as of 9/11. It was a major impact for a very large number of people. I'm not minimizing it. But there were a small number of people affected, unless you count the number of people who knew the dead. And even then, the percentage is still small.

You paraphrased Franklin, yet did not learn from him. You don't understand the basic human psyche. Yet you ask of us some answer?

It is because of people like you. Go share your knowledge among the people you know personally. Then get back to us.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[BringsApples]

I think this is as good an answer as I'll get, thanks (and I will check out that book). It seems like since Regan (and don't take me as a left or right, I think that stuff is where all this shit starts anyway) took office, politics has been focused on a single world power. That power seems to be taking over all countries, America included. I used to wonder what it was like in Nazi-controlled Germany. How did the people put up with it? Now I know. It's that we're torn between following these insane laws, and either a civil war, or martial law. And frankly I can just barely see the difference anymore.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[TitusC3v5]

It changed it because the 9/11 attacks targets the two pillars of American power: the banks and the government. It scared them shitless that may actual be attacked (oh, wow, apparently they have a much different reaction when it's not other people they're sending to die). At which point they said screw everything in order to give themselves the illusion of their old safety.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[eclectro]

Thank the 'patriot act' and all the ilk that drove for it. I'm looking at you, Senator Hatch.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[gnu-sucks]

And all the rest of them. For once both parties "worked together", and indeed, they accomplished their goals. Now we rely on and fear of big brother more than ever. Job well done.

Source: http://educate-yourself.org/cn...

357 from the house, and these wonderful 98 from the senate:

Akaka (D-HI), Yea,Allard (R-CO), Yea,Allen (R-VA), Yea,Baucus (D-MT), Yea,Bayh (D-IN), Yea,Bennett (R-UT), Yea,Biden (D-DE), Yea,Bingaman (D-NM), Yea,Bond (R-MO), Yea,Boxer (D-CA), Yea,Breaux (D-LA), Yea,Brownback (R-KS), Yea,Bunning (R-KY), Yea,Burns (R-MT), Yea,Byrd (D-WV), Yea,Campbell (R-CO), Yea,Cantwell (D-WA), Yea,Carnahan (D-MO), Yea,Carper (D-DE), Yea,Chafee (R-RI), Yea,Cleland (D-GA), Yea,Clinton (D-NY), Yea,Cochran (R-MS), Yea,Collins (R-ME), Yea,Conrad (D-ND), Yea,Corzine (D-NJ), Yea,Craig (R-ID), Yea,Crapo (R-ID), Yea,Daschle (D-SD), Yea,Dayton (D-MN), Yea,DeWine (R-OH), Yea, Dodd (D-CT), Yea,Domenici (R-NM), Yea,Dorgan (D-ND), Yea,Durbin (D-IL), Yea,Edwards (D-NC), Yea,Ensign (R-NV), Yea,Enzi (R-WY), Yea,Feinstein (D-CA), Yea,Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea,Frist (R-TN), Yea,Graham (D-FL), Yea,Gramm (R-TX), Yea,Grassley (R-IA), Yea,Gregg (R-NH), Yea,Hagel (R-NE), Yea,Harkin (D-IA), Yea,Hatch (R-UT), Yea,Helms (R-NC), Yea,Hollings (D-SC), Yea,Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea,Hutchison (R-TX), Yea,Inhofe (R-OK), Yea,Inouye (D-HI), Yea,Jeffords (I-VT), Yea,Johnson (D-SD), Yea,Kennedy (D-MA), Yea,Kerry (D-MA), Yea,Kohl (D-WI), Yea,Kyl (R-AZ), Yea,Leahy (D-VT), Yea,Levin (D-MI), Yea,Lieberman (D-CT), Yea,Lincoln (D-AR), Yea, ,,,Lott (R-MS), Yea,Lugar (R-IN), Yea,McCain (R-AZ), Yea,McConnell (R-KY), Yea,Mikulski (D-MD), Yea,Miller (D-GA), Yea,Murkowski (R-AK), Yea,Murray (D-WA), Yea,Nelson (D-FL), Yea,Nelson (D-NE), Yea,Nickles (R-OK), Yea,Reed (D-RI), Yea,Reid (D-NV), Yea,Roberts (R-KS), Yea,Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea,Santorum (R-PA), Yea,Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea,Schumer (D-NY), Yea,Sessions (R-AL), Yea,Shelby (R-AL), Yea,Smith (R-NH), Yea,Smith (R-OR), Yea,Snowe (R-ME), Yea,Specter (R-PA), Yea,Stabenow (D-MI), Yea,Stevens (R-AK), Yea,Thomas (R-WY), Yea,Thompson (R-TN), Yea,Thurmond (R-SC), Yea,Torricelli (D-NJ), Yea,Voinovich (R-OH), Yea,Warner (R-VA), Yea,Wellstone (D-MN), Yea,Wyden (D-OR), Yea

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[s.petry]

Oh no, it goes way beyond Reagan. He was an easy example for me since the I started to wake up to how corrupt things were under Reagan (I was in the military during his last term). The Gary Allen book was published in I believe 1972, and will open your eyes to corruption going back to at least the very early 1960s..

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[BringsApples]

I found that book here. Thanks for the heads-up!

Cheers!

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[Cardoor]

a piece of paper never has nor will it ever have power. it is only a physical manifestation of a broader reality which may or may not be in-line with the written word. i think the bigger question it raises is, were we ever really 'free'? or were certain things just 'permitted' so long as they didn't represent a threat to the extant power structure?

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this

[Anonymous Coward]

Terrorists ( or the soon to be ) don't hate Americans for anything other than the fact our government likes to stick its nose into everyone's business across the planet. Justified or otherwise.

They hate us because we like to fly drones overhead and bomb the sh*t out of anyone we feel needs some bombing today. With zero accountability because we are, after all, only practicing with our new toys . . . er . . . um .. . killing terrorists.

I'm guessing they hate us because of the overall cowardice of the American population who can't see the forest for the trees and by our inaction, allows such bullsh*t to continue unchallenged.

It's naive to think that protests, petitions, and camping out in a park for a few weeks will ever impact the engine that has effectively become the American Empire. Attempting to use law to fight those who write the laws is an exercise in pointless, mind-numbing bureaucracy. They are united and essentially have unlimited resources to throw at the problem. You have a protest sign and sleep in a tent in a park :|

This only gets fixed when the current government is completely replaced with a new generation that isn't yet corrupted by greed and power. When the rules are changed to reflect the needs of a Nation and its people in the 21st century. When we quit fighting over silly sh*t such as invisible lines drawn around some part of the planet or the resources than can be found within it.

Before this gets fixed, folks will have to realize that playing by the rules will never work because our governments certainly don't. Then, and only then, will we see some true changes.

Re:Whenever I read stuff like this .....

[Anonymous Coward]

James Madison said it!

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
- James Madison

Classic conflict of interest

[troll -1]

The judges in these kind of cases are appointed by the executive, the same branch of government they are supposed to keep in check. This is a problem because the executive has a tendency to appoint only judges with views similar to itself. So it's not surprising these judges often rule in favor of the executive.

Re:Classic conflict of interest

[Bite The Pillow]

Really?

Are they instead nominated by the Executive and then confirmed by the Legislative?

Or are they

made up of 11 federal district court judges who are selected by the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Maybe they are given magic powers by Leprechauns and allowed to vote by the number of Trolls they fellate?

Re:Classic conflict of interest

[DamnOregonian]

I just came.

Re:Classic conflict of interest

[pla]

The judges in these kind of cases are appointed by the executive, the same branch of government they are supposed to keep in check.

Remember, kids - Nothing says "legitimate democratic government" like extortionate secret courts!

Un-fucking believable. Well, no, entirely too believable. On the bright side, federal judges get appointed for life, so we have a very straightforward recall procedure.


/ 28 USC section 375, of course - What did you think I meant?

Re:Classic conflict of interest

[countach]

I agree it's a problem, but what's the alternative? Politicising the judiciary with elections has problems too.

Re:Classic conflict of interest

[whoever57]

Maybe they are given magic powers by Leprechauns and allowed to vote by the number of Trolls they fellate?

How do you think routinely ruling against the executive branch affects the prospects for a judge who wants to be appointed to the higher courts?

Correction

[ewhac]

...federal officials forced American tech companies to participate in the NSA's controversial PRISM program.

You misspelled "illegal." HTH. HAND.

Re:Correction

[DoofusOfDeath]

...federal officials forced American tech companies to participate in the NSA's controversial PRISM program.

You misspelled "illegal." HTH. HAND.

You misspelled "treasonous".

Re:Correction

[sexconker]

...federal officials forced American tech companies to participate in the NSA's controversial PRISM program.

You misspelled "illegal." HTH. HAND.

You misspelled "traitorous".

Re:Correction

[NoImNotNineVolt]

You misspelled "cheeseburger".

Hm, what? Oh, sorry, wrong thread.

Re:Happy 9/11!

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, I'm not in the US, and I constantly read two sides of the story:

"Oh no, America is falling apart! Our freedoms are being taken away and our government is engaged in surveillance that Stalin could only dream of! Let's complain about it online, that'll help."

"America is great and we're all free! Damn those foreign towel heads, non-Christians, and sand niggers! Kill them all, they'll work out they were wrong when they meet God!"

You can either do something to fix it or you can accept it, simply complaining to the rest of the world will achieve nothing. Make your choice.

hold the government responsible

[silfen]

That's from 2008. You know who the guy responsible, the head of the executive branch, was at the time. Punish his party at the polls next presidential election.

Re:hold the government responsible

[Anonymous Coward]

In fairness, this is pretty bipartisan. There are a lot of Democrats and Republicans who love the police state; there are a small number of Democrats and Republicans who oppose it.

(Of course, the Libertarians universally oppose it. Pity they're not a player.)

Just remember

[epyT-R]

A vote for democrats and/or republicans, whose parties increase the state's reach for ideological reasons and to corner the market, is a vote for more of the police state mentality, taxation, and deficit spending required to enforce it all. Don't let the left divide with stupid social justice and single issue shit, because a free country has liberty and justice FOR ALL, not state forced 'privilege' for specific castes at the expense of others (labeled as 'hate groups'), and choosing who 'wins' and who 'loses' in life based on attributes that weren't supposed to matter. Don't let the neo-right tell you that corporates care about steady jobs or lower taxes for the working class either. Ironically, those "he's worse than me" ads are perfect at showing that neither party has an objective or functional solution for what ails the country. Fuck them. The gubernatorial elections are coming up for many states. For those of you advocating 'working within system' style change, here's an opportunity. If you can, vote against both and send a message.

All doublespeak

[Pollux]

Terrorists did not take away our freedoms. They were only successful in killing 2,996 people and causing about $19 billion in property damage. We gave our own freedoms away.

And in more doublespeak, Obama shared this with us today:

“We carry on because as Americans we do not give in to fear. Ever."

Nope. Americans never give into fear. We also don't allow virtual strip searches at airports, we don't allow the federal government to spy on our private cellular communications, and we guarantee all political whistle-blowers immunity from criminal charges.

Re:All doublespeak

[gnu-sucks]

Big brother gave a speech and named the latest/newest foreign enemy of America. The crowds cheered. The inner party clapped feverishly. The media (ministry of truth) immediately launched new stories and interviews supporting big brother's speech. The lower class bought it hook and sinker.

There were no laws needed. Big brother decided what was right and what was wrong. If you had an independent thought and were deemed too intelligent, you simply vaporized. You could never tell exactly when they were listening...

Go read 1984.pdf. NOW.

Re:All doublespeak

[sconeu]

I recently visited the Reagan library to take in the baseball exhibit. Since I was there, I took the tour first. It ended with a multimedia presentation that included the quote:

"Whatever else history may say about me when I'm gone, I hope it will record that I appealed to your best hopes, not your worst fears; to your confidence rather than your doubts."

While I may not be a fan of the man, I believe he really did try to do that.

Nowadays? Let's face it, neither Bush nor Obama could say that with a straight face

Re:All doublespeak

[dbIII]

I don't think he tried to do that at all. His first act as President was to do a deal with terrorists, which of course he'd been setting up behind the scenes for months in a conspiracy with people inside intelligence agencies that comes pretty damn close to treason. Later he sent warships to support Iraq. He supplied weapons to Hezbolla less than a year after they blew up more than a hundred marines. He kicked the dying Russian bear to try to look tough and came very close to provoking a nuclear war. He was an actor putting on a show that was hiding that he was working against the interests of the USA.

Don't like what I've written? Try looking at it from the perspective of Hillary Clinton doing a deal with ISIS and getting intelligence agencies to stall official efforts while a Republican is in the White House and then announcing the deal some months later on election day. Do you think such a thing would be the right thing to do?

Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[mentil]

If they decided to eat the fine and get sucked dry, they could spend every last dying breath telling everyone on the internet how injust this was. It would've gone on long enough for something to happen.

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[BradMajors]

The US government could not fine Yahoo. Only a judge can do that.

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[MildlyTangy]

If they decided to eat the fine and get sucked dry, they could spend every last dying breath telling everyone on the internet how injust this was. It would've gone on long enough for something to happen.

Do you honestly think the shareholders would in any way accept this? Any CEO of a company the size of Yahoo!!! who pulled a Lavabit would be replaced with a CEO who is more concerned about increasing shareholder value. At the end of the day, that is all that matters for any publicly listed company.

Just be thankful that Yahoo!!!!!!!! have a CEO who can balance keeping the shareholders happy while doing his bit to defend his country against a dangerous and insidious evil.

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[MildlyTangy]

The US government could not fine Yahoo. Only a judge can do that.

What is the difference again?

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[Bite The Pillow]

I can't find LavaBit stock quotes. I can find Yahoo stock quotes very easily back 5 years and more.

That makes a huge difference.

Initially, Yahoo was betting on public perception to buoy the reputation and therefore the stock. That failed with the threat of fines, because those losses are reportable to investors.

Initially, LavaBit was betting on public perception. They apparently folded before fines could be levied.

Yahoo was public, and could not "pull a LavaBit". There are vast differences between the LavaBit options and the Yahoo options. You are comparing apples to SchrÃdinger's cat because of ignorance. Stop that.

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[pla]

It would've gone on long enough for something to happen.

For what to happen, exactly?

"We the People" count as fucking sheep, more concerned with Kardashians than the Constitution. What exactly do you think more awareness of the problem would have gotten us?

The general public now knows about the NSA's spying programs, just like they learned about Bush (senior)'s CIA running the global drug trade to arm the Taliban 30 years ago, just like they learned about J. Edgar's FBI's CoIntelPro 30 years before that, just like they put Joe Kennedy in charge of the SEC 30 years before that. And yet... Do you see Keith Alexander's head on a pike in a conspicuous public place? Do you see the entire agency disbanded for breach of public trust, and everyone who ever worked there rendered unemployable due to the taint on their resumes?

No. No, you don't. Because we deserve the government we have. We exist as a nation run by bread and circuses, and we like it.


/ Dear $Deity - You can send that asteroid any time now... Perhaps the intelligent dragonfly empire 100 million years from now will do better than the domesticated apes did.

Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit

[Lunix Nutcase]

Federal judges are part of the government. You've made a meaningless distinction.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

You call it a fine

[Pete Venkman]

I call it extortion. Can the federal government be prosecuted for racketeering?

^^ This. Also, that's why its all about metadata

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is why metadata is so important.
If you're trying to manipulate politically a group of people, the data is already public: people voice their opinions aloud. Now, if you've got the metadata you know who influences who, and you can game that.
Reminds me of Pratchett on Nigt Watch:

"If they had been in a position to put a red spot on the heads of those people who were not friends of the Patrician, and a white spot on those who were his cronies, and a pink spot on those who were perennial waverers, then they would have seen something like a dance taking place. There were not many whites. They would have seen that there were several groups of reds, and white spots were being introduced into them in ones, or twos if the number of reds in the group was large enough. If a white left a group, he or she was effortlessly scooped up and shunted into another conversation which might contain one or two pinks but was largely red. Any conversation entirely between white spots was gently broken up with a smile and an 'oh, but now you must meet-', or was joined by several red spots. Pinks, meanwhile, were delicately passed from red group to red group until they were deeply pink, and then they were allowed to mix with other pinks of the same hue, under the supervision of a red. In short, the pinks met so many reds, and so few whites, that they probably forgot about whites at all, while the whites, constantly alone or hugely outnumbered by reds or deep pinks, appeared to be going red out of embarrassment or a desire to blend in. Lord Winder was entirely surrounded by reds, leaving the few remaining whites out in the cold"

Re:It is Well Past Time

[Bite The Pillow]

Did you read the article? Yahoo tried it, and pretty much failed.

Yahoo is a public company, and did not want to have a $91 million loss in addition to their already failed everything else.

How do you have a successful business with every page redirecting to static text?

And no one uses Yahoo, at least intentionally. How the shit do they fight back with a barely captive audience?

It's almost like you took your barely functioning understanding of the economy, and applied it to a minimalistic understanding of how economics actually works.

So Yahoo takes the burden, what happens to the rest of the companies? The competition? They learn not to oppose the government. Yahoo, from the article, was the first to comply. If they did not, and died as a company, would anything be different other than fewer @yahoo.com email addresses?

This Country Is Fucked

[sexconker]

This country is fucked. Move on to the next one, ASAP.

and yahoo is not done paying yet

[Dan667]

The damage the US has done to US Tech Companies has just started. International companies are dumping American Companies even though they tried to do the right thing. Something needs to be done to reign in the US government and in particular the military and nsa.

Re:and yahoo is not done paying yet

[pijokela]

I work on business software projects in Finland. We'd like to use AWS on many of our projects, because it's very convenient and a lot of PaaS and other tools are provided on there. However, I have not met a single client that would allow us to use AWS or some other US based service for storing data. So we use the local clouds that only offer IaaS servers and not much else.

And this has changed a lot in just a couple of years.

SEC filing: "Millions lost. No Details. Ask NSA."

[Fencepost]

I wonder how charges like that could be reported on legally-required documents for publicly traded companies.

"USA Federal gov't fines: $10M*

* Details not available. Ask the NSA, maybe they'll tell you."

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:It is Well Past Time

[Lunix Nutcase]

How naive. If the CEO did that they'd be promptly fired and replaced.

definitely Obama's fault

[globaljustin]

n/t

Wrong

[s.petry]

It changed it because the 9/11 attacks targets the two pillars of American power: the banks and the government.

Absolutely false. Those two groups have benefited the most from the attacks, the banks and government were not targets of the attack.

Cui Bono becomes very interesting when finding out that numerous officials provided false information to the press and public about what we knew regarding the attacks. For example Bush flat out lied that we never considered such an attack, the FAA and military ran a simulation a year prior regarding the exact scenario of a plane being flown into WTC in an act of terrorism. The Secret Service also ran simulations about planes being flown into the White House prior to the attacks.

So then why didn't they threaten Apple?

[ayesnymous]

IIRC, Apple did not participate in PRISM for several years until Tim Cook took over as CEO.

Re:SEC filing: "Millions lost. No Details. Ask NSA

[ayesnymous]

I wonder how charges like that could be reported on legally-required documents for publicly traded companies. "USA Federal gov't fines: $10M* * Details not available. Ask the NSA, maybe they'll tell you."

Yes, that's exactly what they should have done.

If it happened in China or North Korea or Iran ...

[Taco Cowboy]

we understand that it is a normal behavior for totalitarian regime

Has the United States of America become a member of The Totalitarian Club ?

Illegal as hell

[JimSadler]

In order to issue a fine the action should have required the courts and appeals process up even unto the Supreme Court before any fine could be started. Frankly the loss of 4,000 people, several buildings and and three aircraft did not and does not constitute a threat to national security. The US is strong enough to take quite a few similar attacks without collapse of the nation. All that was really proven was that some clever Arab lunatics managed to do some harm. It shows that they have no real ability to mount a serious attack. Conversely we have the ability to exterminate the entire Arab region with relative ease if we like, Perhaps these people should consider the fact that the efficient way to handle them is to kill all and let God sort the good ones from the bad ones. Playing silly little battlefield games uses up money and American lives. Maybe we simply need to do a demo and just eliminate one nation down to the last living creature.

Re:Illegal as hell

[countach]

I was wondering about that. Do the Supremes hold secret court too under these circumstances?

I thought part of the whole point of the Supreme court was to establish important legal precedents. Can you do that when it is all secret? Because to use the precedent, the whole legal community needs to know all the juicy details.

Secret courts are the biggest threat to a functioning democracy that one could possibly conceive of.

Life was fine when the Internet didn't exist...

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to purge the Internet from our lives....life was fine before it became part of the culture, it'll be just as good once it's gone. Between the psychological manipulation done by the likes of social media companies on their users, to the constant threat of "being hacked", fuck it...time to switch off and get back to outdoor activities and interacting with living people and animals.... remember when the sky was actually blue instead of hazy gray due to all the chem trails being sprayed? Everyone is looking down at their devices, too busy to notice the planes spraying poison on them and their food supply. When I was younger I ran BBSs (Bulletin Board Systems for you born after 1990) to get money to fix and customize my gocarts and dirt bikes. My $2500 Packard Bell computer was just a tool to make a little spending money, it had nothing beyond that to do with my life. Now, shut people's computers down and they will go into an angry fit as they withdraw from their addiction. Although I'm in the IT business today, I could seriously give two fucks about computers, the Internet, or anything else electronic. I could do away with all of it today. I fixed shit before Google, and I can fix shit without it now. A simpler life will add years to your life expectancy and probably let you be a little healthier and happier in the process. Switch off the wifi radios, go back to hard wires...quit cooking your cells while you sleep. There...your life has been improved. Buy me a beer and we'll call it even.

Report fine vs. secrecy

[colfer]

As a public company, Y! would have needed to report the fine eventually. How would that go?

Re:It is Well Past Time

[countach]

It would have been nice to see them try that, but realistically, it would be in contempt of court to just say, it's ok we'll pay the fine, so go away. The executive would end up in jail, and someone would be appointed to tow the line. Nothing would have changed in the end.

Re:SEC filing: "Millions lost. No Details. Ask NSA

[countach]

It's not quite the same thing. Disclosing that the fine is from the NSA is not incriminating. It ITSELF is the crime. In your example, revealing your source of income is not a crime. Rather it would reveal a previously committed crime. So I'm not sure that failing to reveal financial information in line with public company laws falls under the heading of not incriminating yourself, because your having paid government fines is not a crime, so you can't incriminate yourself in that way.

You could just as much argue the opposite way. Revealing financial information about public companies is required under the law. Free speech is allowed under the constitution. Therefore, the NSA can get fucked with their secrecy orders. You're still left with one legal principle against another.

This is in part

[justthinkit]

This is in part because we can sense that future, even worse, shocks are coming.

Now that they have all the money AND have devalued the currency by a factor of 100 AND have all the power and control over every aspect of our lives, there is only one way for things to get better for THEM.

And that is to find ways to get rid of most of us.

People randomly pulling us over and stealing from us is designed to provoke a backlash. There will be more of it, and worse. It is time to stop using the "Welcome to the..." phrases. It is all about goodbyes now.

Apathy

[phorm]

Americans seem to have a better chance at shaming the NFL into dealing with Ray Rice than they do at shaming the government to do something about the NSA.

Pissed off customers have the potential to lead to empty seats and lost profits. Pissed off citizens... well, you might get less votes if the "other guys" seem a little better, but the "other guys" are really part of the same system and many of the entrenched interests don't actually change when a different party is voted in.

Re:If it happened in China or North Korea or Iran

[Pharmboy]

Has the United States of America become a member of The Totalitarian Club ?

Yes. Each President has been moving in this direction more and more, but Obama has managed to overreach even more than those before him. Take the IRS, for instance. I personally know of people who have been getting involved with Tea Party politics and now are getting audited. Like their politics or not (it doesn't matter), that is totalitarianism, which means the next time a GOP'er gets in, he can do the same thing. It isn't a good time to be an American.

Re:If it happened in China or North Korea or Iran

[whitroth]

Give me a break. This happend under *your* guys, W and Cheney, who brought you monstrous deficits via an illegal and immoral war of conquest (see the papers the US and the UK signed around, what, 05?), and tax breaks. Of course, you didn't get the real payback, but you imagine that Any Day Now, you'll be rich, and so they won't spy on you, or tax you....

                mark

Re:If it happened in China or North Korea or Iran

[Pharmboy]

As you point out, not all birds of a feather stick together. I'm not a Tea Party guy. I'm just not closed minded enough to judge a friend by their politics. If you only have friends that agree with your politics, you are probably narrow minded or take politics too seriously.