Pardon me, may I ask where is my privacy?

by charlesvbm on February 2, 2014 - 10:02pm

 

Spy Agencies Tap Data Streaming From Phone Apps

By JAMES GLANZ, JEFF LARSON and ANDREW W. LEHRENJAN. 27, 2014

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/28/world/spy-agencies-scour-phone-apps-for-personal-data.html?hp

Its funny how today’s technology can be so helpful. It can help us whenever our car breaks down and we need to call a towing company, or we want to stay in contact with our friends and we use this so called texting which allows you to send messages to them without speaking to them and gets in contact with them faster. People can use their cellphones to get on Facebook, look around there a bit see what’s new and then they can go on Twitter. This here is a great way to communicate with people, but did you know that every time you access those apps, you are being spied on! Yes indeed, the American Government and British Government are spying on everyday civilians to end terrorism or avoid as much terrorism as they can. But as they do this, the Government doesn’t realize that they are not respecting civil rights. In the New York Times article, that appeared on January 27th, 2014, the authors talk about how the American and British Government alongside with the NSA are not respecting civil rights, they will use apps such as Google Maps to allow the people to find themselves and where to go but it also allows them (the government) to get the exact physical location of where you are! Scary! The Government say that they do this to avoid terrorism, what are they saying exactly by that? That everyone is a terrorist? As a normal day civilian, to even think that everything I do on an everyday basis could be tracked down. What needs to be changed here is the Government has to stop spying on civilians. Not all civilians are plotting on taking over the world, people that use these apps are normal everyday people who are at Starbucks having a coffee and are bored and they need company. No one can plot world domination through looking at photos on instagram. Initially, what is done here is breaking the right for private life. People are allowed to have their privacy and that right should not be broken. Because not everyone is gonna do harm. We should be able to go on apps and not be spied on. People should be allowed to access their bank accounts and what not without being spied on. Everyone is allowed to have privacy and if the Government spies on the innocent civilians, civil rights are being not respected.

Comments

Hi,

I think that you're on the right track with this article, as the Snowden revelations clearly reveal VERY illegal activity on the part of the government, and you have clearly caught on to that. The only issue I have with your article is that the debate is framed as "privacy vs. security," when in reality security is not part of the equation. The programs Snowden unveiled have stopped ZERO terrorist attacks, but have been used to crush anti-capitalist dissent. The programs aren't in place to protect us from terrorists, they exist to protect the rich from the poor. I wrote an article on this same subject which is available on this site, titled "Mass Surveillance & Social Control." It is heavily sourced, so you can see where I'm getting my facts from.

Don't trust the corporate media!

Jon

Good choice of Article to talk about . It is relevant to our generation and social networking is something everyone does . Being spied on when accessing a bank account or an online site is crazy , there is no privacy and it isn't fair for many. Some don't even know they are being spied on at all. Security is obviously important but invasion of privacy is not right. How can we find a balance between the two , is something to think about. I read an article that speaks about this topic also : http://chris.pirillo.com/social-media-users-no-longer-expect-privacy/ . It talks about people knowing they have no privacy online anymore and brings about the same points and views you did !

I completely agree with the idea of privacy missing from this whole situation. The governments are being way too invasive in this situation. For me, it is scary to think about all the situations that the government could have access to my every move. The idea of privacy in this post also makes me think about the many people, besides the government, that could have access to everything you do and everywhere you go. It is extremely important to be careful with what you are posting because they are many people that can have access to it that could be dangerous. On the note of the terrorist attacks, it is important to consider how effective this technique has been for the governments. Has it actually helped prevent attacks? And how many? If it is having little to no effect then there is definitely even more reason for this to be prevented. Governments need to do everything they can to keep the country safe but to what extent do we allow them access to our personal lives? The line has to be drawn somewhere.

I agree with the general premise of this article. I believe that the government is putting aside civil rights in an effort to stop “terrorism.” However the government is invading our privacy in doing so, through cell-phone app tracking. Although I do not have any personal experience (to my knowledge) with this type of situation, I do see this issue debated highly in the mass media. This idea that we can be tracked doing anything at any time is quite scary. I do however see one issue with the article and my own argument. With incidents like the Boston marathon bombing, surely there was digital communication to carry out the terrorist attacks, and if the government had worked more hardly and centering their “spying” actions they may have prevented the attacks. The problem I was alluding to previously is that the government does have a duty to protect citizens in the domestic land, and if they don’t “spy” on a vast majority of the public, then they are at risk by attack, especially since we live in such a technologically advanced period, where communication is done largely through cell phones and computers. I believe that even though this “spying” is an invasion of privacy, it is a necessary evil in trying to stop terrorism, and besides I am not doing any illegal activities so I have no things to worry about! As far as a field for improvement, you should focus some level on the positive benefits of this technological overview by the government. It is foolish to think that the government would implement something that they saw no benefit in.

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

You mention the Boston Bombing, so I want to point something out to you.

These programs were in place when the Boston Bombing took place. They failed to prevent the attack. They have actually not prevented a single terrorist attack since their inception, according to the government panel on mass surveillance which was appointed to recommend reforms.

So what have they been used for? Small-scale drug arrests, theft of trade secrets from foreign companies, targeting journalists, targeting activists, ruining the reputation of dissidents and murdering people with drones. In short, maintaining the dominance of US and Western corporations over the rest of the world.

All of this is verifiable with the NSA's internal documents. I suggest you look it up. The police-state being built right now would make the East German Stasi blush with envy.

And also covering something which you mentioned, William Binney (another NSA whistleblower) designed a software which would have targeted terrorists specifically while he was working at the NSA. They were not interested. These programs have always been about social control, not security.

Is democracy possible in a military-state? I don't think so. How about you?

This website is not very user-friendly. First it looks like the screen has frozen, so when you click again it publishes the comment a whole bunch of times. We should be able to delete comments ourselves rather than "marking for removal" and waiting for the admin to do it.

About the author