jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (37 posts)

Have you used a cell-phone in the last three months?

  1. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    The government is illegally seizing your phone records. The NSA is forcing all mobile providers to hand over all their data on every single call, outgoing and incoming, for a three month period.

    But don't worry, The Voice is on, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

    1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      If the government knows I talk to my mother ever day for a half an hour, I'm not sure how that upsets me.

      Sorry Jaxson, I can't get that worked up over this one. I'm literally the most boring person in the world, so such things never affect me seriously enough to take them personally.  I guess I should be upset about it on a global level but there are so many other things that upset me more.  The fact that the government cares about my phone calls is slightly less perturbing than the unhealthy interest they show for my uterus, for example.

      1. janesix profile image60
        janesixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        This might be good news Melissa. Just tell your mom the goverment is listening in, and you won't have to talk to her for a half an hour a day anymore.

      2. innersmiff profile image80
        innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Your tacit acceptance sets the precedent that government is entitled to watch and control every aspect of our lives. You are allowed to give up your liberties, just so long as you don't give up other peoples' as well.

        1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
          MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          My outrage is not required for your outrage to exist. Nor does my apathy on the matter in any way detract from anyone else's attempts to protect their "liberties"

          The fact that I don't have to care IS one of my civil liberties... and it's one I take quite seriously. Please, go forth and fight the good fight.  Just remember that I am not, in any way, bound to join you... nor does my complete and utter indifference constitute me giving up anyone else's rights.

          1. innersmiff profile image80
            innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Let me repeat: Your tacit acceptance sets the precedent that government is entitled to watch and control every aspect of our lives.

            In other words, the more people who say that they don't care/mind, the more the government is going to be convinced that it is OK, and can continue to do it. Whether you like it or not, it is a violation of liberty and you are culpable if you do nothing about it.

            "First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

            Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

            Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

            Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me"
            - Pastor Niemoller

            1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
              MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I am not culpable if you are too weak to change a situation you don't like. I don't care about the situation... why should I fight a battle I don't care about just because you don't like it?

              I fought my battles and made all the changes to the world that I needed to.  I didn't see you marching beside me.  I didn't complain on an internet forum... I actually got off my butt and worked for change.

              Your turn.

              1. innersmiff profile image80
                innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You don't understand.

                You pay tax for, and vote for, governments that affect me and my family's privacy. It's your fault not just because you're ignorant, it's your fault because you're paying for it.

                1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Wow... Ignorant because I don't agree with you... nice.

                  I'll jump right on your bandwagon now.

                  1. innersmiff profile image80
                    innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You are ignorant. You hold the false belief that voting for people that invade others privacy does not make you culpable for invasion of privacy.

                2. Josak profile image60
                  Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Simply excersizing her rights.

                  1. innersmiff profile image80
                    innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    So murder and rape are OK just so long as you vote someone in to do it instead of doing it yourself?

                    OK.

                3. PrettyPanther profile image85
                  PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  And you probably vote for those who would dismantle social programs that I value.  So?

                  1. GA Anderson profile image86
                    GA Andersonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    So, you don't like the government, you don't trust the government, you want everyone to vote to change the government... EXCEPT for the GOVERNMENT Social Programs you like?

                    As my son would say, "Really!"

                    GA

                  2. innersmiff profile image80
                    innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Theft funds those social programs, so cutting them simply represents reclaiming stolen goods.

            2. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              The apathy expressed by some is not a surprise as the sheeple have been asleep for many years. We give away so easily what was fought for so vehemently by our fathers and friends. My father always said that we should never give the government such latitude with our rights as they are never returned as easily. He was a staunch liberal.

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                There's a difference between sheeple and not getting irrationally angry over everything else than anyone else might be angry about.

                It's so cool that those who don't care about an issue are ignorant sheeple.

                So tell me, I'm sure you've written letters to your representatives and staged rallies against this gross violation of your civil liberties? Right?

                A letter to the editor of you local paper at least?

                Tell me you've at least bought a burnable cell phone to use so that the government can't gather your data?

                Armchair activists are loud, yet largely ineffective.  They don't change anything. They just draw attention to themselves yet do nothing with that attention.

                But sure complaining about it on a writer's site in forums maybe 100 (tops) people read helps.  That means you're not a sheeple because you certainly aren't giving the government any latitude with your rights by doing absolutely nothing of consequence to stop a situation you don't like.

                In addition, just out of curiosity, what are people who follow ever single other person who gets angry about anything called?

                1. rhamson profile image76
                  rhamsonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  The acceptance of an impingement on your rights dictated the response I gave to your post. I was not referring to your intelligence by saying you were ignorant, you took that as you wished. Sheeple refers to someone who just goes along with the pack and doesn't question those who would take something away or hurt them.
                  On your other note I am very active politically and editorially in my locale and I attend county meetings as well as vote as an independent. I also belong to a few civil rights organizations as well if you must throw the accusations of being a web only participant on these types of topics.
                  There is a difference between being apathetic to this right to privacy and having an alarmist attitude towards anything that comes down the pike. If they are able to take away your privacy, can you feel confidant that they will not next come after you for what you say?

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                    MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    No one has taken away my privacy or infringed my rights.  No one has taken away yours either... you make the choice to own a cell phone that is subject to those issues.

                    You responded in support of someone who did call me ignorant. I assumed you shared his views since you were so vocally supportive of it.

                    I know what sheeple means and I know it's origin.

                    My observation leads me to believe that it's not the act of following along with the pack that concerns you but the act of not following YOUR pack.  The implication that I am under some obligation to agree with you or fight a battle that you believe in even if I don't strengthens that observation.

                    As there are certainly ways to get around this "invasion of privacy", then obviously no one's rights are being compromised.  If you don't take these measures, then it is your choice to have your right to privacy taken away.

                    You belong to organizations... good on you.  So what are your organizations doing about this issue? If nothing, then it is you that is the sheeple, as it is YOUR battle and you aren't doing anything about it. 

                    My battles lie elsewhere.  Are you a sheeple for not fighting them with me? 

                    Lastly, I never cared if "they" came after me for what I say.  If I wasn't willing to have that happen I wouldn't say anything in the first place.

    2. profile image0
      Beth37posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It's probably not a popular opinion, but this never really bothered me much.

      edit: after having read the rest of the posts, it appears Im not alone.

  2. PrettyPanther profile image85
    PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago

    Just curious, have you been outraged for at least 7 years and just now decided to post about it?  Or, have you been too busy watching the other guy pay attention to the man behind the curtain who started the whole thing?

    NSA has massive database of Americans' calls - dated 5/11/2006

    For those who don't want to click on the link:

    "The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

    The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

    "It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, this person added.

    For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made — across town or across the country — to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.

    The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the NSA, which launched the program in 2001 shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the sources said."

    1. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yep I was outraged then. Didn't like it, didn't agree with it.

      I'm sure your voice was one of the many calling for the head of George Bush when this, among some other elements of the Patriot Act, were passed.

      But, let me guess, it's a Democrat now so it's okay that this Administration doesn't see a problem with it? Right? It also might interest you to know that the continuation of this practice came from this Administration in 2011.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image85
        PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I've never called for the head of anyone.  No, it's not okay with me now, either.  We already had one conservative on these forums admit they like the Patriot Act except when Obama is in charge.  I'm sure there are many more who just won't come out and say it.  I base this upon conversations with my conservative friends back when Bush was in office, as well as the almost universal support for the Act at the time among conservatives in the media, in political office, and online.

        I recognize that the reverse is undoubtedly true, too.  The point I've been trying to make is it's hard to stay outraged over something that you've known about for years and it's ridiculous to be accused by conservatives of not caring when most conservatives didn't care back then.

  3. Zelkiiro profile image83
    Zelkiiroposted 4 years ago

    Did I just travel back to 2003 or something?

  4. FatFreddysCat profile image93
    FatFreddysCatposted 4 years ago

    When I talk to my brother on the phone, we've been known to send out a sarcastic "hi" to anyone from the government who might be listening...

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image84
    Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

    what should we do?

  6. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    This thread depresses me sad

    Americans will learn their lesson eventually.

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image84
    Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

    what should we do?  go back to land lines? do they monitor our land lines too?

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image84
      Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      ...are they looking for conversations about overthrowing the government?
      well I do not want to...
                                                  Overthrow the Government!

      (I am sure they will read this now.)
      ( ulp.)
      I am actually more careful what I say on HP these days.
      ...much more careful.
      ...or is hubPages pretty secure?

    2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      They aren't recording your phone calls, they are simply turning over the list of outgoing and incoming calls for your phone and the length of those calls.

      You know, like the phone company does to bill you...

      And is usually printed out on your phone bill.

  8. Kathryn L Hill profile image84
    Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

    What? they are not listening to our brilliant conversations or looking for our suggestions as to how to change the world for the better? I was going to start becoming more eloquent. Now I will try to find important people to call.  I know I can impress them somehow.
    Just kidding.
    Really... if it bothers us, we can stop using cell phones...
    Just kidding.
    What does Jaxson suggest we do?

 
working