Derek nailed some important points in his first bulleted post.
I believe the government records every single phone conversation, either cell or land line (they're all digital at the hub). Aside from code breaking, many of the most massive super-computers have no other purpose than to run automated voice recognition on every call and store transcripts. The likes of which can then be searched by actual humans with key word searches.
Others suggest that the actual voice itself is stored, and when you use a different line, the software can detect it is you. I'm not certain that the computer horsepower to do that is available for all calls, but I'm sure that can be done on the lines and voices that they've targeted on the "watch list".
I have some interesting insight as to how the Second Amendment would play out successfully in an ultra-Big Brother state (like we have now). The formula for running a successful resistance/revolution/insurgency/freedom fighter war... is actually very simple. It is modeled off of a couple different situations.
One is the former November 17th terrorist organization in Greece. The other is the Mohammed/Malvo D.C. sniper situation.
In the first group, this terrorist group was small and ineffective, but they never got caught or remotely detected in 30 years (until recently). They elluded authorities for a long time, and in such a way that puzzled interpol. Why?
Malvo and Mohammed went on a killing spree and did not get caught until THEY called in their own tip to catch themselves. There's a good chance that if they didn't do that, then ceased their "operation", they'd still be loose today. Why was Malvo and Mohammed so successful in not being caught?
In both of these scenarios, their actions and their group were decentralized. There was no large organization. They were all small member groups (less than 4 people). Their "footprint" was very small, virtually undetectable.
Why do people get busted? Assuming you don't get caught in the middle of an operation or seen, the only other way is to give yourself away. This can be done a lot of way. Rewards. Government puts out $1,000,000 to anyone who snitches out on the "militia"....if you ran a 500 man militia in Montana, do you really believe everyone will be loyal, even with $1,000,000 at stake? HA! You can forget about that.
Another way is the second you get on the phone, use the PC, use the radio, snail mail etc...you're busted. You're "on the grid". So all operations must be done with word of mouth communication only.
By nature, this physically limits the size of an organization. It is impossible to organize more than a handful of people without using electronic or written means. Cannot be done. So, instead, you rely on a pack of 2-3 extremely close people that will not turn one another in. There's no way even a group of 50 people, with 50 mouths, and 50 phones, and 50 lives outside of the "resistance" can keep quiet. No phones, no email, no nothing. All decisions and planning are done in a safe location face-to-face.
There's just too much spying and surveillance to start up a revolution to bring back liberty to the nation. As soon as any small group gains steam, the government will know everything about them-inside and out, and will squash them before they grow.
The Greek terrorist group was a couple of men and a priest. They'd meet, plan, and execute a mission. There were NO warnings. No demands, and no notes taking credit. There was just violence against those whom they perceived as targets. That's all that's needed, is the extermination of those who are attacking liberty. What is the point of making demands? What is the point of taking credit? What is the point of warning? Either you decide someone is an enemy of freedom and the country would be better off with them dead, or you do not. They ultimately got busted when cops found a 1911 in one of the members car. They weren't effective, or popular, but that's not the point. They were successful at sticking around without being caught for decades. Imagine 100 of these groups all at once? All of which are not in communication with each other? That shows the operational structure.
As for the tactical structure, we go back to Malvo or Mohammed. While crude, their methods worked. Anyone with half a brain can come up with a much better system. The point is, tactically, they conducted their mission and no one knew any better. How many law enforcement departments put forth all of their manpower to catch them? Many. They used all their resources and power, and in the end - they didn't even have the correct car description. The incompetence of the State was incredible. They had no clue where to begin. If Malvo and Mohammed were after judges, local politicans, police administrators...they would have bagged many of them. It isn't hard to Google the information of where someone lives...
Everyone envisions a scenario where everyone marches in the streets and resolves the problems. While that is what it will probably take, the initiation of such action cannot take place unless there are precursors, like dozens, or hundreds, or perhaps thousands of tiny groups doing their thing for liberty. That would destabilize the nation, change the political climate and only then can change occur. The key is the breaking of the status quo. One group taking stand is a suicide march. The Branch Davidians said "No! Louder" to the BATFE over full-auto rifles (which we all believe are being unconstitutionally regulated) and waht did they get? Burned to death. Welcome to America.
Like the ARMY commercials say "You can be an Army of one"...that's true. Very true. It is the wave of the future. 4th Generation warfare is the domain of the civilian, insurgent, revolutionary, freedom fighter, patrior, militia man...you name it. These small groups are less effective, but that's the price you pay. When the "movement" grows, and there are many small groups of people or individuals acting, then it is like death by piranas. Death by 1,000 paper cuts. All it would take is each freedom loving American to do away with one socialist gun grabber or UN lover.
It is exactly what Bin Laden has tried to form. Al-Qaeda's core unit is gone, dead, and destroyed. But Al-Qaeda lives on as a "movement" with a doctrinal guide for structure. It is all about unrelated muslim fanatics, forming in small groups, deciding to act for the cause, organizing on their own, and doing their own missions. No centralized effort. In the early days, it was centralized, but it is not anymore.
It's hard to catch people like that. Think about it. It's like a group of 3-4 college kids at Starbucks deciding one day that they want to blow up the local congressman's office because he supports a new gun ban. If they work on their own, they can pull it off. There's no "tip off" for the government to begin suspecting them. Timothy McVeigh and Nichols might have pulled it off and never got caught if he didn't make some very elementary errors (I think he wanted to get caught though)...Again, small group, but they made fatal errors.
This is the only model that would work under the ultra-big brother surveillance state of the future. The State and the establishment has made assembly in numbers obsolete, therefore, modern aggression will be conducted by individuals or extremely small numbers of dedicated people all acting for a common good.
****
DO NOT construe this as the planning or some anti-government proposal. It is merely a discussion about the structure of future State vs. Civilian warfare. I do not advocate any of this. For informational/discussion purposes only.
****