4 ms·

Keep in mind it's scary for the individual to call as well for fear of being put on a list. So 89,000 is definitely impressive. I wouldn't be surprised if I was

by winslow 13y ago

Keep in mind it's scary for the individual to call as well for fear of being put on a list. So 89,000 is definitely impressive. I wouldn't be surprised if I was put on a list yesterday after saying something along the lines of "the government's actions are turning people against the government and creating enemies of their own citizens". Oh well I don't care about being on a list anymore. It's time to stand up.

comex 13y ago
Do you have any evidence that anyone would be tracked or targeted for such a thing, or is this just wild speculation?
- MarkTee 13y ago
  He didn't speculate on anything; he said he wouldn't be surprised if he was put on a list. And given all of the information that has come out over the past few years, would you be surprised that such a list were in place?
- agsamek 13y ago
  You must be kidding. Nobody did a pencil and paper list. But according to Snowden leaks this list is easily retrievable with a few clicks. These might had been speculations in 2000. Today this is a fact.
  - comex 13y ago
    First, the parent suggested that they were put on a list not only for calling, but "after saying something along the lines of" something. That is, that either the content of the call was being recorded by the NSA, or whatever phone system Congress has set up is both recording and being used to compile a list of people. The leaks strongly suggest that there is no mass recording of the content of calls by the NSA; although it is possible that the phone number used to contact Congress is being tapped, this would be illegal (since the NSA is not supposed to target communication between US persons) and there isn't evidence that it is happening. As for Congress itself doing it, I guess it's possible, but I think lawmakers have better things to do than go after random constituents. The leaks do state that metadata about the call, including that it was made between the parent and Twilio, would have been stored in a database, so theoretically the parent could be targeted for calling on that day "with a few clicks", as you say. News outlets have published theories based on the leaks under which this would happen: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/the-nsa-probably-collects-data-on-congresss-phone-calls/283608/ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/the-nsa-... But they sound pretty hyperbolic to me. Note that according to the official procedures, the data is supposed to be destroyed immediately unless it "is reasonably believed to contain significant foreign intelligence information", etc.: http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Minimization%20Procedures%20used%20by%20NSA%20in%20Connection%20with%20FISA%20SECT%20702.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Minimization%20Procedures... and the NSA was/is certainly not supposed to intentionally go after this type of information. But to be fair, I might not have been so skeptical if the parent had only mentioned metadata. The parent responded and brought up COINTELPRO. Yes, if something like COINTELPRO were happening now, then such fears would be warranted. I cannot rule that scenario out, but it's worth noting that the leaks make it significantly less likely, since the NSA would probably be involved in such a program (as it was in COINTELPRO), yet nothing of the sort came up in the leaks. I guess the proven ability of the government to keep misconduct secret in general means that it is rational to suspect that some kind of misconduct is happening somewhere, but I wouldn't say there's enough evidence to rationally specifically fear being targeted for contacting Congress. They and another person also reiterated that the wording was "wouldn't be surprised" that something is happening, which is a more general standard than thinking it is actually likely to be happening. And I admit that even a small chance of it happening can still make it "scary" to call, since the repercussions if it were true could potentially be much larger than the benefits of calling; moreover, some of the people who might call may not be rational or well-informed but still should be entitled to call and state their views on what ought to be happening. Still, I do not think it's unreasonable to ask for evidence either.
- winslow 13y ago
  Didn't claim to have evidence. The reasoning for why I wouldn't be surprised [1]. The source talks about a break in at the FBI during the Vietnam war by protesters who felt the FBI had been targeting them. It turned out that the FBI had indeed been spying on them and compiling documents about these individuals. [1] - http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/06/22205443-after-43-years-activists-admit-theft-at-fbi-office-that-exposed-domestic-spying?lite http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/06/22205443-...

by winslow 13y ago

comex 13y ago

Do you have any evidence that anyone would be tracked or targeted for such a thing, or is this just wild speculation?

MarkTee 13y ago
He didn't speculate on anything; he said he wouldn't be surprised if he was put on a list. And given all of the information that has come out over the past few years, would you be surprised that such a list were in place?
agsamek 13y ago
You must be kidding. Nobody did a pencil and paper list. But according to Snowden leaks this list is easily retrievable with a few clicks. These might had been speculations in 2000. Today this is a fact.
- comex 13y ago
  First, the parent suggested that they were put on a list not only for calling, but "after saying something along the lines of" something. That is, that either the content of the call was being recorded by the NSA, or whatever phone system Congress has set up is both recording and being used to compile a list of people. The leaks strongly suggest that there is no mass recording of the content of calls by the NSA; although it is possible that the phone number used to contact Congress is being tapped, this would be illegal (since the NSA is not supposed to target communication between US persons) and there isn't evidence that it is happening. As for Congress itself doing it, I guess it's possible, but I think lawmakers have better things to do than go after random constituents. The leaks do state that metadata about the call, including that it was made between the parent and Twilio, would have been stored in a database, so theoretically the parent could be targeted for calling on that day "with a few clicks", as you say. News outlets have published theories based on the leaks under which this would happen: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/the-nsa-probably-collects-data-on-congresss-phone-calls/283608/ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/the-nsa-... But they sound pretty hyperbolic to me. Note that according to the official procedures, the data is supposed to be destroyed immediately unless it "is reasonably believed to contain significant foreign intelligence information", etc.: http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Minimization%20Procedures%20used%20by%20NSA%20in%20Connection%20with%20FISA%20SECT%20702.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Minimization%20Procedures... and the NSA was/is certainly not supposed to intentionally go after this type of information. But to be fair, I might not have been so skeptical if the parent had only mentioned metadata. The parent responded and brought up COINTELPRO. Yes, if something like COINTELPRO were happening now, then such fears would be warranted. I cannot rule that scenario out, but it's worth noting that the leaks make it significantly less likely, since the NSA would probably be involved in such a program (as it was in COINTELPRO), yet nothing of the sort came up in the leaks. I guess the proven ability of the government to keep misconduct secret in general means that it is rational to suspect that some kind of misconduct is happening somewhere, but I wouldn't say there's enough evidence to rationally specifically fear being targeted for contacting Congress. They and another person also reiterated that the wording was "wouldn't be surprised" that something is happening, which is a more general standard than thinking it is actually likely to be happening. And I admit that even a small chance of it happening can still make it "scary" to call, since the repercussions if it were true could potentially be much larger than the benefits of calling; moreover, some of the people who might call may not be rational or well-informed but still should be entitled to call and state their views on what ought to be happening. Still, I do not think it's unreasonable to ask for evidence either.
winslow 13y ago
Didn't claim to have evidence. The reasoning for why I wouldn't be surprised [1]. The source talks about a break in at the FBI during the Vietnam war by protesters who felt the FBI had been targeting them. It turned out that the FBI had indeed been spying on them and compiling documents about these individuals. [1] - http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/06/22205443-after-43-years-activists-admit-theft-at-fbi-office-that-exposed-domestic-spying?lite http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/06/22205443-...