goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: scottwildcat on June 06, 2013, 10:01:09 PM
-
heard people talking in the office today. Did Obama hack Verizon to spy on Americans?
-
yup, exactly what happened.
-
wow.
so what is the verdict?
Boss move or no?
-
Only gets better guys!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data?guni=Network%20front:network-front%20main-2%20Special%20trail:Network%20front%20-%20special%20trail:Position1 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data?guni=Network%20front:network-front%20main-2%20Special%20trail:Network%20front%20-%20special%20trail:Position1)
-
The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top secret document obtained by the Guardian.
The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called PRISM, which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says.
If you think anything that you do on the internet is private you're a rough ridin' idiot
-
thanks Obama :confused:
-
thanks patriot act? :dunno:
-
thanks patriot act? :dunno:
Which he extended. Wow. This Admin is approaching Stalin status. Absolutely disgusting.
-
The only surprise about this is that people are surprised that people are surprised about this.
-
Remember when Havs got questioned for drunkenly threatening to blow up Tuttle?
-
thanks patriot act? :dunno:
Which he extended. Wow. This Admin is approaching Stalin status. Absolutely disgusting.
Not only has this admin extended it, good 'ol Joe is the pioneer! I mean, you can't make this crap up...
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/rhetorical-question
---In the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, Biden did, in fact, champion an anti-terrorism bill similar to the one now before Congress (though it was, as he complains, badly watered down by anti-government conservatives and leftist civil libertarians). And Biden doesn't let you forget it. "I introduced the terrorism bill in '94 that had a lot of these things in it," he bragged to NBC's Tim Russert on September 30. When I spent the day with him later that week, Biden mentioned the legislation to me, and to several other reporters he encountered, no fewer than seven times. "When I was chairman in '94 I introduced a major antiterrorism bill--back then," he says in the morning, flashing a knowing grin and pausing for effect. (Never mind that he's gotten the year wrong.) Back in his office later that afternoon, he brings it up yet again. "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill." You don't say.---
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
lol, link?
-
Did you even read this thread?
Were you alive 7 or 8 years ago?
-
Did you even read this thread?
Were you alive 7 or 8 years ago?
yes & yes
-
I was alive 7 or 8 years ago but I was not living. Thanks Ron Prince.
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Another example of how moderate I am, I was against it then, I'm against it now.
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Another example of how moderate I am, I was against it then, I'm against it now.
that's a solid moderate position fellow moderate bud
-
Pro Tip: Preface all of your e-mails with "I am a woman contemplating my sacred right to birth control and abortion." The government will butt right out. Apparently, it's the only right to privacy that liberals still respect.
-
Pro Tip: Preface all of your e-mails with "I am a woman contemplating my sacred right to birth control and abortion." The government will butt right out. Apparently, it's the only right to privacy that liberals still respect.
:lol:
-
If they try looking at my crap, they'll find a bunch of text messages from my mother that don't make sense, or texts of her trying to forward pictures but she didn't do it right.
america!
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Another example of how moderate I am, I was against it then, I'm against it now.
I feel the same way, but I can justify that and remain the neocon that I am by claiming that Bush was too liberal.
-
Gary Johnson simply would not allow this as POTUS
-
BIG BROTHER! :curse:
WE'RE mumped!!!
-
:lol
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
This may be true in some cases but a liberal writer (grenwald) did happen to pen the the articles exposing this.
Just saying m
-
All this surveillance for years and they couldn't stop the Boston bombing? What good is it then?
-
All this surveillance for years and they couldn't stop the Boston bombing? What good is it then?
Cause Obama's a terrorist. :popcorn:
-
:lolMost Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
This may be true in some cases but a liberal writer (grenwald) did happen to pen the the articles exposing this.
Just saying m
The entire progressive movement has been reporting about Obama's surveillance programs since he took office.
And the most liberalist New York Times penned this, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)
-
Pro Tip: Preface all of your e-mails with "I am a woman contemplating my sacred right to birth control and abortion." The government will butt right out. Apparently, it's the only right to privacy that liberals still respect.
A) add me to facebook
B) post this
C) t-y
-
Pro Tip: Preface all of your e-mails with "I am a woman contemplating my sacred right to birth control and abortion." The government will butt right out. Apparently, it's the only right to privacy that liberals still respect.
A) add me to facebook
B) post this
C) t-y
:lol:
-
:lolMost Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
This may be true in some cases but a liberal writer (grenwald) did happen to pen the the articles exposing this.
Just saying m
Right. Thank goodness for the foreign press. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/06/Mainstream-Media-Did-Not-break-Even-One-of-Four-Obama-Scandals (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/06/Mainstream-Media-Did-Not-break-Even-One-of-Four-Obama-Scandals)
-
Is this gonna be our Master "snowden is full of crap" thread? Cause we're gonna need one.
-
Is this gonna be our Master "snowden is full of crap" thread? Cause we're gonna need one.
Saw your tweets as well and I'm curious as to why you feel that way?
-
Combination of things. Dude's a nutjob. I won't antagonize Dax by "pretending to have inside info". I'll just let the facts of his background and actual position come out and speak for themselves.
-
I mean the US Govt. is likely going to do everything in their power to slander the eff out of this guy to the press so I'm not exactly willing to trust those accounts FR. I'm curious as to why you think he's a nutjob (also see my tweet plx)
-
i'm confused on how the public at large should respond to this if it's as bad as we think. do we send a letter to our congressman or do we take our asses to the streets
-
i'm confused on how the public at large should respond to this if it's as bad as we think. do we send a letter to our congressman or do we take our asses to the streets
Team #burnitdown
-
Vote with your wallet, that's what I always say.
-
i'm confused on how the public at large should respond to this if it's as bad as we think. do we send a letter to our congressman or do we take our asses to the streets
The only people that will do anything about this is the Paul wing of the Republican party and the Wyden/Udall/Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic party.
Good luck on finding a legislator or member of the voting public that cares about this two weeks from now.
-
i'm confused on how the public at large should respond to this if it's as bad as we think. do we send a letter to our congressman or do we take our asses to the streets
It's not as bad as you think, Dlew.
-
I mean the US Govt. is likely going to do everything in their power to slander the eff out of this guy to the press so I'm not exactly willing to trust those accounts FR. I'm curious as to why you think he's a nutjob (also see my tweet plx)
Ok, centraltexasfreak42.
And I'm not real familiar with Binney, but he sounds like a smart dude turned bitter when his pet project wasn't funded (there's no shortage of those).
-
And dlew, if it helps, no one is reading your emails. There's a huge difference between the ominous sounding "intercept" and actual "surveillance".
Imagine if the discovery phase in a case worked slightly different, and instead of requesting documents, you had access to a huge repository of potentially relevant data. But if you used your subpoena to access a document you weren't sure was discoverable and hadn't been vetted, you were thrown off the case, suspended without pay and faced possible termination and criminal charges (even if you discovered an unrelated crime and even if that crime was serious).
No one is haphazardly rooting through your stuff.
-
I mean the US Govt. is likely going to do everything in their power to slander the eff out of this guy to the press so I'm not exactly willing to trust those accounts FR. I'm curious as to why you think he's a nutjob (also see my tweet plx)
Just read his own quotes. Nobody has to waste any energy slandering him as a nutjob.
"Yes, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Triads. Any of their agents or assets," he said.
"We have got a CIA station just up the road – the consulate here in Hong Kong – and I am sure they are going to be busy for the next week. And that is a concern I will live with for the rest of my life, however long that happens to be."
Yep. The CIA is gonna pay the Triads to off him. Yep. Happens ALL THE TIME!
-
pretty obvious felix rex is involved in this.
LOCK THIS crap DOWN.
-
I'll post pics from Hong Kong. Now I just need a combo of this guy :users: and this guy :love:
-
I'll post pics from Hong Kong. Now I just need a combo of this guy :users: and this guy :love:
Pro tip: when tracking human prey, the art of deception comes in to play. May need to create a new user name. Something easy to remember, but also enough to throw the google monster off your scent. Something clever like Professor Plum. Do NOT use that one though. Just a brainstorm/suggesto.
HAPPY HUNTING!
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.costumecraze.com%2Fimages%2Fvendors%2Fforum%2F25190a-large.jpg&hash=81890b8caf82ef96828bc0f89d5f15e6c5312d24)
-
Oh, hi fellow American vacationer. Which way is the nearest Pizza Hut or beer store?
-
Not sure, but you can trade out that sweaty wool suit for some awesome cargo shorts, jackie chan tank and some knock off ipanema flip flops and Ray Bans just up Aberdeen.
-
Yep. This guy sounds perfectly rational. A contractor in Hawaii can pull up to his desk and wiretap the president if he wants. But be careful! The U.S. government kills journalists!
"I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant to a federal judge or even a president," Snowden said.
The U.S. intelligence community, Snowden wrote to [WP reporter Barton Gellman], "will most certainly kill you if they think you are the single point of failure that could stop this disclosure and make them the sole owner of this information."
-
Combination of things. Dude's a nutjob. I won't antagonize Dax by "pretending to have inside info". I'll just let the facts of his background and actual position come out and speak for themselves.
are we now to be given only perfect vessels? shall we insist?
-
Yep. This guy sounds perfectly rational. A contractor in Hawaii can pull up to his desk and wiretap the president if he wants. But be careful! The U.S. government kills journalists!
"I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant to a federal judge or even a president," Snowden said.
The U.S. intelligence community, Snowden wrote to [WP reporter Barton Gellman], "will most certainly kill you if they think you are the single point of failure that could stop this disclosure and make them the sole owner of this information."
There is a certain internal discord between his claims of the omniscience of the government and his ability to thwart their wishes.
-
Yep. This guy sounds perfectly rational. A contractor in Hawaii can pull up to his desk and wiretap the president if he wants. But be careful! The U.S. government kills journalists!
"I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant to a federal judge or even a president," Snowden said.
The U.S. intelligence community, Snowden wrote to [WP reporter Barton Gellman], "will most certainly kill you if they think you are the single point of failure that could stop this disclosure and make them the sole owner of this information."
There is a certain internal discord between his claims of the omniscience of the government and his ability to thwart their wishes.
He pulls his hoodie over his head and laptop when he types in passwords in his hotel.
-
Snowden is a hero
-
Couple good thoughts reactions:
Max Boot:
He claims he is willing to sacrifice a comfortable lifestyle in Hawaii "because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building." In reality, of course, the United States is the greatest champion of liberty the world has ever seen -- this is, after all, the nation that defeated Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, and has championed democracy from Libya to the Philippines, freeing untold millions from oppression.
Is this really the argument being made against Snowden? Maybe I am cherry picking some idiotic things here, but Boot and King make me want to root for this guy. Counterpoint: it doesn't help Snowy that he set up shop in China. Hong Kong is a hilarious distraction.
Matt Yglesias:
On the subject of PRISM and U.S. high-tech exports, here are some facts from Orin Kerr:*
The reality of global Internet access means that U.S.-based Internet services often have a heavily foreign customer base. Consider Gmail, the popular e-mail service provided by Google. Google is headquartered in California, and its servers currently reside there. But Gmail’s business is truly international, and slightly less than 30% of Gmail’s users reside in the United States. This chart shows the percentage of Gmail’s users that are in a handful of different countries as of 2012:
Country % of Gmail Users
United States 29.7%
India 8.9%
Japan 3.4%
Russia 3.3%
Brazil 3.2%
United Kingdom 2.9%
China 2.7%
Iran 2.6%
Facebook’s user base is even more heavily foreign than is Gmail’s user base. To be sure, using Facebook has become as American as apple pie: About 54% of Americans presently have a Facebook account. At the same time, only about 16% of Facebook’s users are located in the United States. The rest, about 84%, access Facebook from abroad. For United States-based services like Gmail and Facebook, United States users form a small subset of its global customer base.
From the standpoint of the National Security Agency the fact that U.S. online services companies have such large foreign customer bases is a huge opportunity. The legislative and judicial frameworks around surveillance do not appear to give foreigners anything in the way of protections. But foreign customers may not be very happy with that arrangement. Over and above the use of PRISM snooping as grounds for formal legal barriers to U.S. Web exports, there's just a great business opportunity here for someone to build a webmail service that's based in Berlin or Paris or Stockholm or someplace else where the local government is prepared to erect a firm privacy framework.
You might ask yourself why a program like PRISM needs to be secret, and I think this is part of the reason. When PRISM is known publicly, then non-participation in PRISM becomes a possible marketing point for non-American online services platforms. That's bad for American companies (who would therefore push for a high level of secrecy as a condition of involvement) and also bad for the NSA, whose ability to collect this data hinges on foreigners not abandoning American platforms.
Good points, I guess, but I do have a bit of a hard time figuring out the harm of the releases in so far as it would seem any terrorist that would be caught using the means so far discussed would not be a very competent terrorist.
-
Well, I have only read three articles on this guy so far, but all three have made their first priority to let me know that he dropped out of high school and never finished his computer science studies at a junior college.
Getting important facts established and out of the way first is a great way to convey the depth of the issue.
-
Other than the damage of companies withdrawing from the program (and of the course the PR issue), it's not as bad as other recent leaks.
That said, I hate leaks and support prison sentences for those responsible. The guy is not really a villain (he's a bit too bumbling for that), but he's definitely not a hero.
-
Other than the damage of companies withdrawing from the program (and of the course the PR issue), it's not as bad as other recent leaks.
That said, I hate leaks and support prison sentences for those responsible. The guy is not really a villain (he's a bit too bumbling for that), but he's definitely not a hero.
You hate leaks because you are a plumber. But there would be no plumbers without leaks.
-
Let's all take a step back and pause and reflect on the last fleeting memories of Hope and Change.
-
Other than the damage of companies withdrawing from the program (and of the course the PR issue), it's not as bad as other recent leaks.
That said, I hate leaks and support prison sentences for those responsible. The guy is not really a villain (he's a bit too bumbling for that), but he's definitely not a hero.
You hate leaks because you are a plumber. But there would be no plumbers without leaks.
That analogy implies I plug leaks. Leaks damage me, they don't keep me busy.
But if I was a plumber, I'd just contract this out to the triads or something.
-
Let's all take a step back and pause and reflect on the last fleeting memories of Hope and Change.
Dax! When we hit this many pages without you, I was worried they found your hotel!
-
Well, I have only read three articles on this guy so far, but all three have made their first priority to let me know that he dropped out of high school and never finished his computer science studies at a junior college.
Getting important facts established and out of the way first is a great way to convey the depth of the issue.
Also, girlfriend!
-
BTW, what a great past year for bumbling espionage coverage.
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
-
Other than the damage of companies withdrawing from the program (and of the course the PR issue), it's not as bad as other recent leaks.
That said, I hate leaks and support prison sentences for those responsible. The guy is not really a villain (he's a bit too bumbling for that), but he's definitely not a hero.
You hate leaks because you are a plumber. But there would be no plumbers without leaks.
That analogy implies I plug leaks. Leaks damage me, they don't keep me busy.
But if I was a plumber, I'd just contract this out to the triads or something.
Fair. You are a compliment to plumbers. Maybe like a suspenders salesman.
-
One of the largest attacks on civil liberties and privacy in U.S. history. Hey, let's attack Fox News!! :lol:
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
Whatevs the link was supposed to be, I am confident it is accurate. Data analytics is rare enough that if you catch two seemingly random events/ppl using them, you can fully guarantee that they are not random and are in fact linked through one boss level nefarious overlord who is no doubt up to no good.
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
Did they mention in-q-tel? Regardless, that sounds great.
-
Other than the damage of companies withdrawing from the program (and of the course the PR issue), it's not as bad as other recent leaks.
That said, I hate leaks and support prison sentences for those responsible. The guy is not really a villain (he's a bit too bumbling for that), but he's definitely not a hero.
You hate leaks because you are a plumber. But there would be no plumbers without leaks.
That analogy implies I plug leaks. Leaks damage me, they don't keep me busy.
But if I was a plumber, I'd just contract this out to the triads or something.
Fair. You are a compliment to plumbers. Maybe like a suspenders salesman.
The American waistline needs the support I provide.
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
Whatevs the link was supposed to be, I am confident it is accurate. Data analytics is rare enough that if you catch two seemingly random events/ppl using them, you can fully guarantee that they are not random and are in fact linked through one boss level nefarious overlord who is no doubt up to no good.
Data Analytics was created to keep black people in the ghetto.
-
One of the largest attacks on civil liberties and and privacy in U.S. history. Hey, let's attack Fox News!! :lol:
Dax, to start, this all pisses me off too. However, if truly all that is going on is monitoring who sent mail to whom and how often, that type of monitoring has been happening for the entire life of our country. Before email, when you dropped a letter into a mail box, get this, it went to a government facility where they analyzed where it came from and who it was going to before the letter arrived at it's intended destination. And get this......YOU PAID FOR IT!
All mockery aside, I have a hard time believing that source and destination are all that was being monitored.
-
One of the largest attacks on civil liberties and privacy in U.S. history. Hey, let's attack Fox News!! :lol:
If only to see the tortured (ha! that works to great effect here.) response from the kinds of people that saw absolutely no problem with Bush-era abuses and expansions of the security state.
I'm pretty staunch in my 4th amendment stances (also 1st and probably stronger in 2nd than most liberals) but I also think that this is not close to the worst post-9/11 story.
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
Whatevs the link was supposed to be, I am confident it is accurate. Data analytics is rare enough that if you catch two seemingly random events/ppl using them, you can fully guarantee that they are not random and are in fact linked through one boss level nefarious overlord who is no doubt up to no good.
Data Analytics was created to keep black people in the ghetto.
Crack cocaine was actually the first thing that was 3d printed by the CIA.
-
One of the largest attacks on civil liberties and and privacy in U.S. history. Hey, let's attack Fox News!! :lol:
Dax, to start, this all pisses me off too. However, if truly all that is going on is monitoring who sent mail to whom and how often, that type of monitoring has been happening for the entire life of our country. Before email, when you dropped a letter into a mail box, get this, it went to a government facility where they analyzed where it came from and who it was going to before the letter arrived at it's intended destination. And get this......YOU PAID FOR IT!
All mockery aside, I have a hard time believing that source and destination are all that was being monitored.
Not a bad analogy. No one is opening your letters and reading them. And are we really storing the entirety of digital communications in a bunker under Yucca mountain, cross-referenced and tagged for easy retrieval? Really? Does that sound like something reasonable?
-
Oh man. Fox News and Jim Pinkerton now trying to link Obama's use of big data analytics and some guy who was a campaign contributor who made an election analytics company and who provided research for Obama's re-election also uses analytics and I'm sorry I couldn't really follow whether that actually made it back to the topic at hand.
Whatevs the link was supposed to be, I am confident it is accurate. Data analytics is rare enough that if you catch two seemingly random events/ppl using them, you can fully guarantee that they are not random and are in fact linked through one boss level nefarious overlord who is no doubt up to no good.
Data Analytics was created to keep black people in the ghetto.
Crack cocaine was actually the first thing that was 3d printed by the CIA.
Obviously. How do you think we paid the triads to cancer-ray Chavez?
-
Dax, if this was your line of reasoning we could be best buds.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-numbers-dont-lie-its-irrational-to-give-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-numbers-dont-lie-its-irrational-to-give-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/)
-
goEMAW Liberals: "I'm so mad I could just spit. Well, well you know, this has been going on for a long, long time (no crap!, Hey, who created via executive order the National Security Agency anyway?). Bush did it to"!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
-
I'm not sure where to go with that.
-
goEMAW Liberals: "I'm so mad I could just spit. Well, well you know, this has been going on for a long, long time (no crap!, Hey, who created via executive order the National Security Agency anyway?). Bush did it to"!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Its @Kat Kid
-
Oops! I guess you weren't talking to me and just used "goEMAW Liberals" because it was a better name for your strawman because no one actually made an argument that fits in to your only "unless a democrat is president" mantra.
-
It's okay resident Liberal's . . . Harry Truman created the NSA, and LBJ (whose entire political career was tied to the parent company of Halliburton) ordered the CIA to set up a domestic spy network to root out foreign influence on the Anti-War movement. So the creation of the entities to execute these orders, and the actual execution of executive branch orders to spy on American's (using other entities besides the FBI) has a long and storied history within Democratic presidencies. Obama is just continuing the legacy.
Cue: But lessor of two evils Dax!!
KK no need to go completely humorless in the face of the final death nil of Hope and Change.
-
It's okay resident Liberal's . . . Harry Truman created the NSA, and LBJ (whose entire political career was tied to the parent company of Halliburton) ordered the CIA to set up a domestic spy network to root out foreign influence on the Anti-War movement. So the creation of the entities to execute these orders, and the actual execution of executive branch orders to spy on American's (using other entities besides the FBI) has a long and storied history within Democratic presidencies. Obama is just continuing the legacy.
Cue: But lessor of two evils Dax!!
KK no need to go completely humorless in the face of the final death nil of Hope and Change.
Dax, see if you can track down where a bunch of liberals were defending obama, let alone Truman and LBJ. Maybe you can use google or some other big data analytics to help you out.
Happy Hunting!
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1281.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa503%2Fsusigo1%2FSherlock-Holmes-Sherlock-Holmes-detective-crime-smiley-emoticon-001232-huge_zpsd643e762.png&hash=7af40fb1a5cbc1ea5c2747587ac68685809b3c38)
-
pro-tip: The fact that you don't defend Obama in the face of one of the biggest assaults on privacy and civil liberties in U.S. history is utterly irrelevant to me.
I've been outlining that the current presidency is nothing more than extension of Bush on many levels (the current administration is just doing it in an even more clandestine manner outside of the purview of the public and its elected representatives) and to most on here, it was nothing but a big joke and/or the classic outing of closeted neo-cons.
-
pro-tip: The fact that you don't defend Obama in the face of one of the biggest assaults on privacy and civil liberties in U.S. history is utterly irrelevant to me.
I've been outlining that the current presidency is nothing more than extension of Bush on many levels (the current administration is just doing it in an even more clandestine manner outside of the purview of the public and its elected representatives) and to most on here, it was nothing but a big joke and/or the classic outing of closeted neo-cons.
Easy dax, the last time a martyr gave a speech like that, they ended up on a cross.
-
whip their asses dax
-
Combination of things. Dude's a nutjob. I won't antagonize Dax by "pretending to have inside info". I'll just let the facts of his background and actual position come out and speak for themselves.
are we now to be given only perfect vessels? shall we insist?
Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Hire the triads to drop him out a window and he'll fall. Hire the triads to set fire to him and he'll burn. Hire the triads to bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage
-
Ok, centraltexasfreak42.
Now that's not very nice. :cry:
Also I did see this guy was a Paultard and made some terrible choices about where he could/should go to avoid extradition, but he doesn't seem nearly as whacked out or reckless as Manning. Bumbling, sure. Nutjob? idk
I mean the US Govt. is likely going to do everything in their power to slander the eff out of this guy to the press so I'm not exactly willing to trust those accounts FR. I'm curious as to why you think he's a nutjob (also see my tweet plx)
Just read his own quotes. Nobody has to waste any energy slandering him as a nutjob.
"Yes, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Triads. Any of their agents or assets," he said.
"We have got a CIA station just up the road – the consulate here in Hong Kong – and I am sure they are going to be busy for the next week. And that is a concern I will live with for the rest of my life, however long that happens to be."
Yep. The CIA is gonna pay the Triads to off him. Yep. Happens ALL THE TIME!
You'll have to forgive me for not really believing that the CIA would have any scruples about, well, anything.
-
I'm sure the CIA has offed people before. This guy is too high profile now though. He's safe.
-
I'm sure the CIA has offed people before. This guy is too high profile now though. He's safe.
:lol: WHOA LOOK AT THE CRAZY GUY CONSPIRACY THEORIST MAKING SOME PRETTY BIG LEAPS IN LOGIC!
-
Ok, centraltexasfreak42.
Now that's not very nice. :cry:
Also I did see this guy was a Paultard and made some terrible choices about where he could/should go to avoid extradition, he doesn't seem nearly as whacked out or reckless as Manning. Bumbling, sure. Nutjob? idk
I mean the US Govt. is likely going to do everything in their power to slander the eff out of this guy to the press so I'm not exactly willing to trust those accounts FR. I'm curious as to why you think he's a nutjob (also see my tweet plx)
Just read his own quotes. Nobody has to waste any energy slandering him as a nutjob.
"Yes, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Triads. Any of their agents or assets," he said.
"We have got a CIA station just up the road – the consulate here in Hong Kong – and I am sure they are going to be busy for the next week. And that is a concern I will live with for the rest of my life, however long that happens to be."
Yep. The CIA is gonna pay the Triads to off him. Yep. Happens ALL THE TIME!
You'll have to forgive me for not really believing that the CIA would have any scruples about, well, anything.
My take on his mental state has nothing to do with his voting history or where he fled. Dumb is not crazy and crazy is not necessarily dumb.
And lol at the CIA hiring triads. "Hiring triads" is the lol there. (but also a small lol at "being too high profile").
-
It's certainly too Hollywood and Keystone Cops-ish for the CIA for sure. Dunno if that makes him nuts or if he's just being dramatic. We all make stupid statements from time to time. Go cats.
-
He claims the government is monitoring your ideas "as you type them" but then pulls his hoodie over his head and laptop when he types his passwords.
Let that sink in.
-
He claims the government is monitoring your ideas "as you type them" but then pulls his hoodie over his head and laptop when he types his passwords.
Let that sink in.
wut?
-
He claims the government is monitoring your ideas "as you type them" but then pulls his hoodie over his head and laptop when he types his passwords.
Let that sink in.
Google does that every time you do a search. :dunno:
-
He claims the government is monitoring your ideas "as you type them" but then pulls his hoodie over his head and laptop when he types his passwords.
Let that sink in.
Google does that every time you do a search. :dunno:
whoops, sounds like you just got roasted rex.
-
Dax, if this was your line of reasoning we could be best buds.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-numbers-dont-lie-its-irrational-to-give-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-numbers-dont-lie-its-irrational-to-give-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/)
Conor is great
-
I'm not sure we're following each other here.
"They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,"
he stuffs pillows against the doors and “puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords.”
-
In some weird twisted way, some of you remind me of this scene from a movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VHKpGJX29s
-
the transformation of the obama democrats into neocons is fascinating
-
I'm not sure we're following each other here.
"They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,"
he stuffs pillows against the doors and “puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords.”
Ok. got it. paranoid + irrational = crazyish.
-
How inefficient must the government be at reading our emails? I mean people I work with (private industry) can barely keep up on email.
-
I'm not sure we're following each other here.
"They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,"
he stuffs pillows against the doors and “puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords.”
ha. Did not read that.
-
why the hoodie? because satellites n' crap :surprised:
really though, it'd be easier to dismiss this guy as completely nuts if there weren't other whistleblowers out there who have said similar things without going to as much detail. Sure, you could argue that these guys all had some sort of motivation to eff the US government, but many of them never did it for profit and often knew they'd get nothing but crap for it (see: William Binney getting FBI'd while taking a shower). Plus you add in the fact that they easily have the technological capability to do the things these whistleblowers are talking about and it's hard to believe that the NSA would really want to rein themselves in on applying the full extent of technology to everyone and anyone they can. Their job is to know everything about what's going on in the world that could supposedly harm the country, so they're going to want to use everything they can to reach that goal. Add in a bunch of rhetoric about the world changing because of terrorism, scare the eff out of the american public and by proxy Congress, and boom. You have carte blanche to do whatever you want behind the scenes. Sounds like a pretty good deal for the NSA, doesn't it?
Honestly, the only persuasive argument that I could entertain stating the NSA isn't sucking in all of our communications is that it could make things inefficient as hell. But that's why they'd have algorithms, to sift through the morass of information coming in and then have humans on duty for quality control. If you expect me to believe that an intelligence agency is going to collectively have a conscience in wanting to respect the civil liberties of the American public or even just the 4th Amendment in general, then you're the one who's nuts.
-
If the government had the technological ability and the efficiency that this guy is claiming, he would never of been able to leak the story.
-
It's like you believe there's a monster in you room and you hide under the covers. Even if there is a monster, you're a moron.
-
many of them never did it for profit and often knew they'd get nothing but crap for it (see: William Binney getting FBI'd while taking a shower).
Bad example (thinthread vs trailblazer). But as a qualifier, I'll again say I no nothing.about binney.
-
many of them never did it for profit and often knew they'd get nothing but crap for it (see: William Binney getting FBI'd while taking a shower).
Bad example (thinthread vs trailblazer). But as a qualifier, I'll again say I no nothing.about binney.
k. i enjoyed this btw:
It's like you believe there's a monster in you room and you hide under the covers. Even if there is a monster, you're a moron.
-
How inefficient must the government be at reading our emails? I mean people I work with (private industry) can barely keep up on email.
The sequester is actually just a coverup to clear our inbox.
-
How inefficient must the government be at reading our emails? I mean people I work with (private industry) can barely keep up on email.
The sequester is actually just a coverup to clear our inbox.
brilliant move by the bilderbergs.
-
How inefficient must the government be at reading our emails? I mean people I work with (private industry) can barely keep up on email.
The sequester is actually just a coverup to clear our inbox.
it was kim carnes' idea
brilliant move by the bilderbergs.
-
If they could organize mine a bit more while they're in there, I would appreciate it.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreepatriot.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F06%2F1555_10151631604339614_1825955496_n.jpg&hash=654242305dad9bc19050cdce9b67bf28ff4032ca)
-
Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Hire the triads to drop him out a window and he'll fall. Hire the triads to set fire to him and he'll burn. Hire the triads to bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage
i could be convinced that felix rex is satan. sweet seducer whispering his literary allusions to the masses.
-
Rick Perry is coming up on Cavuto!
-
"Back there on the campaign trail we talked about getting rid of some of those government agencies."
:lol: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GSmDsAET7I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GSmDsAET7I)
"Culture of intimidation. The idea that this is all about terrorism is a red herring. There is a mentality you go get whatever information you can get."
Also proposed that we should limit the amount of days that Congress meets.
-
Hmmm . . . Inside every Progressive Democrat is a Dictator trying to get out.
-
What is the known budget of our Intelligence Agencies . . . something like $80 Billion dollars a year. Then there's the "black budget".
-
Hmmm . . . Inside every Progressive Democrat is a Dictator trying to get out.
Che T-Shirts!
-
Hmmm . . . Inside every Progressive Democrat is a Dictator trying to get out.
Che T-Shirts!
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJ148geK3OK3tqb-X4yIhmUYlAPfX9jfHBs66cONfswNzlrKDg)
-
:lol:
-
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTSFHaMXh4N6v9VO779H80jXm0UGXHTCvwHGGL3F7YP87GDojryGg)
-
Bluffdale Utah Data mining center. Holds up to 100yrs worth of communications.
Orwelian Discrimination
-
Some of you need to move this to the Facebook thread
-
And dlew, if it helps, no one is reading your emails. There's a huge difference between the ominous sounding "intercept" and actual "surveillance".
Imagine if the discovery phase in a case worked slightly different, and instead of requesting documents, you had access to a huge repository of potentially relevant data. But if you used your subpoena to access a document you weren't sure was discoverable and hadn't been vetted, you were thrown off the case, suspended without pay and faced possible termination and criminal charges (even if you discovered an unrelated crime and even if that crime was serious).
No one is haphazardly rooting through your stuff.
Yeah but that's not how discovery works and there's a reason for that and I think the reason is more than "we've never had the capacity to create a repository of potentially relevant data."
I understand that no one is reading through my email, but it's still troubling, right?
I'd be interested in hearing your take on whether or not this poses some 4th amendment problem and if so, to what degree?
-
Bluffdale Utah Data Mining Center.
-
So obviously 99.9% of people will never be directly affected by this. At least in the sense that Obama is not going to type in "Stevesie60" and see something I did on the internet or my phone that needed his attention. But if this is true, and they do have as much info stored as some have claimed, then what does that mean for the people who hold that information? That would be able to blackmail anyone in the US. That means they could play a heavy hand in elections or getting bills passed that benefited them, etc.
-
So obviously 99.9% of people will never be directly affected by this. At least in the sense that Obama is not going to type in "Stevesie60" and see something I did on the internet or my phone that needed his attention. But if this is true, and they do have as much info stored as some have claimed, then what does that mean for the people who hold that information? That would be able to blackmail anyone in the US. That means they could play a heavy hand in elections or getting bills passed that benefited them, etc.
Orwelian Discrimination.
-
The moral of this whole story is that Chingon runs the NSA.
-
Bluffdale Utah Data mining center. Holds up to 100yrs worth of communications.
Orwelian Discrimination
Hopefully the next 100 years, otherwise storing a bunch of old-timey telegrams seems silly
-
The liberal police state Nazis showing no remorse in this thread.
-
And dlew, if it helps, no one is reading your emails. There's a huge difference between the ominous sounding "intercept" and actual "surveillance".
Imagine if the discovery phase in a case worked slightly different, and instead of requesting documents, you had access to a huge repository of potentially relevant data. But if you used your subpoena to access a document you weren't sure was discoverable and hadn't been vetted, you were thrown off the case, suspended without pay and faced possible termination and criminal charges (even if you discovered an unrelated crime and even if that crime was serious).
No one is haphazardly rooting through your stuff.
Yeah but that's not how discovery works and there's a reason for that and I think the reason is more than "we've never had the capacity to create a repository of potentially relevant data."
I understand that no one is reading through my email, but it's still troubling, right?
I'd be interested in hearing your take on whether or not this poses some 4th amendment problem and if so, to what degree?
My legal background consists of a year as a paralegal in business litigation, so I honestly don't feel qualified to say anything too intelligent on it (as my clumsy discovery analogy suggests).
The problem with the discovery analogy is that, in this case, the "other side" would never willingly hand over documents and would likely destroy existing evidence and adjust their communications to avoid creating new evidence if they were made aware of an inquiry.
And again, despite what Snowden says about being able to wiretap the president with a few clicks from his desk in Hawaii, the process doesn't work that way. Every person with access to or even tangential involvement in the system has to pass several tests each year displaying knowledge of the legal restrictions on accessing such information (and the ramifications of doing so incorrectly or irresponsibly). Requests go through layers of approval and authorization and constant oversight from people whose job (and primary incentive) is to detect errant use and discipline those responsible.
So, I guess my take is that the information is already out there. This system makes the info accessible to the relevant authorities but only after probable cause (and a "foreign factor") are established.
I'd be interested how people with your background view that regarding the fourth amendment. FWIW, in my experience our legal department has been very cautious in these sorts of issues (for instance, government agencies or their contractors absolutely cannot run analytics on social media site users, even for the ostensibly benign purpose of measuring the effectiveness of the engagement efforts of our embassies with foreign audiences).
But again, I am by no means an "insider". Maybe it's as Orwellian as kstatefreak and dax think it is. I'm just going by what little non-classified knowledge I have of the program coupled with what I think is an obvious analysis of the irrational statements made so far from Snowden himself, who doesn't strike me as a particularly reliable source. Of course, perhaps I'm casting Snowden as a Benjy Compson while ignoring my own role as Jason.
-
Comes down to whether you need a warrant to collect this type of information. Under constitutional law, whether you need a warrant depend upon whether it is a "search," and whether it is a "search" depends upon whether you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information.
Without question, people definitely have a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding the content of phone calls, e-mails, etc. But what about the meta data associated with those communications? Anyone who understands how a phone call or e-mail works knows that in order to facilitate the communication, you have to share information with the phone company, ISP, etc.
Read Smith v Maryland (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=442&invol=735). It's available in full online, or you can just read the Wiki summary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland):
Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the installation and use of the pen register was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required. The pen register was installed on telephone company property at the telephone company's central offices. In the Majority opinion, Justice Blackmun rejected the idea that the installation and use of a pen registry constitutes a violation of the "legitimate expectation of privacy" since the numbers would be available to and recorded by the phone company anyway.
-
So, Snowden's disappeared from his Hong Kong hotel. Staff, apparently, described him as good-natured, generous, and likeable. In three days no one could stand him.
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
-
Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
how could it? even if 100% successful, it is bounded by the number of lives at risk.
-
So, Snowden's disappeared from his Hong Kong hotel. Staff, apparently, described him as good-natured, generous, and likeable. In three days no one could stand him.
Triads are Scrooge McDucking as we type. Good for them, I guess.
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
-
Lots of things would save lives. Too easy of a justification.
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
Let's phrase it another way.
Do you think the loss of life is the only or most damaging consequence of terrorist attack, in terms of a country's overall well-being?
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Conservatives 7-8 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the Iraq war is un-American!"
Most conservatives today (after Patriot Act, Gitmo, abu ghraib, 9/11, NDAA, etc, etc): "Obama is the worst President of all-time! He makes Nixon look like a choir boy! He must be impeached - NOW!!!"
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
To clarify, I'm trying to avoid "bait" questions like "would you be okay with the government reading your email if it saved 5 lives in another city?"
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Conservatives 7-8 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the Iraq war is un-American!"
Most conservatives today (after Patriot Act, Gitmo, abu ghraib, 9/11, NDAA, etc, etc): "Obama is the worst President of all-time! He makes Nixon look like a choir boy! He must be impeached - NOW!!!"
That wasn't just conservatives, FWIW.
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Conservatives 7-8 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the Iraq war is un-American!"
Most conservatives today (after Patriot Act, Gitmo, abu ghraib, 9/11, NDAA, etc, etc): "Obama is the worst President of all-time! He makes Nixon look like a choir boy! He must be impeached - NOW!!!"
That wasn't just conservatives, FWIW.
Yes it was, FWIW.
-
Nope sorry.
-
beems: "The Earth revolves around the Sun."
emo: "Nope, sorry."
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
Let's phrase it another way.
Do you think the loss of life is the only or most damaging consequence of terrorist attack, in terms of a country's overall well-being?
Probably. But the resultant sacrifice of liberties may be worse. Quite the pickle.
-
And dlew, if it helps, no one is reading your emails. There's a huge difference between the ominous sounding "intercept" and actual "surveillance".
Imagine if the discovery phase in a case worked slightly different, and instead of requesting documents, you had access to a huge repository of potentially relevant data. But if you used your subpoena to access a document you weren't sure was discoverable and hadn't been vetted, you were thrown off the case, suspended without pay and faced possible termination and criminal charges (even if you discovered an unrelated crime and even if that crime was serious).
No one is haphazardly rooting through your stuff.
Yeah but that's not how discovery works and there's a reason for that and I think the reason is more than "we've never had the capacity to create a repository of potentially relevant data."
I understand that no one is reading through my email, but it's still troubling, right?
I'd be interested in hearing your take on whether or not this poses some 4th amendment problem and if so, to what degree?
My legal background consists of a year as a paralegal in business litigation, so I honestly don't feel qualified to say anything too intelligent on it (as my clumsy discovery analogy suggests).
The problem with the discovery analogy is that, in this case, the "other side" would never willingly hand over documents and would likely destroy existing evidence and adjust their communications to avoid creating new evidence if they were made aware of an inquiry.
And again, despite what Snowden says about being able to wiretap the president with a few clicks from his desk in Hawaii, the process doesn't work that way. Every person with access to or even tangential involvement in the system has to pass several tests each year displaying knowledge of the legal restrictions on accessing such information (and the ramifications of doing so incorrectly or irresponsibly). Requests go through layers of approval and authorization and constant oversight from people whose job (and primary incentive) is to detect errant use and discipline those responsible.
So, I guess my take is that the information is already out there. This system makes the info accessible to the relevant authorities but only after probable cause (and a "foreign factor") are established.
I'd be interested how people with your background view that regarding the fourth amendment. FWIW, in my experience our legal department has been very cautious in these sorts of issues (for instance, government agencies or their contractors absolutely cannot run analytics on social media site users, even for the ostensibly benign purpose of measuring the effectiveness of the engagement efforts of our embassies with foreign audiences).
But again, I am by no means an "insider". Maybe it's as Orwellian as kstatefreak and dax think it is. I'm just going by what little non-classified knowledge I have of the program coupled with what I think is an obvious analysis of the irrational statements made so far from Snowden himself, who doesn't strike me as a particularly reliable source. Of course, perhaps I'm casting Snowden as a Benjy Compson while ignoring my own role as Jason.
I think the oversight is perfunctory with regard to consideration of privacy concerns.
A quick search through the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s nice table on FISA court applications submitted, accepted, and rejected shows that this is no more than a kangaroo court. Between 1979 and 2012, 33,942 applications were submitted. Of those, a mere 11 were rejected. (The difference between applications proposed and accepted is only 7, but I decided to go with the upper bound they report in their ‘Applications Rejected’ column to give the government the benefit of the doubt.) So the government has a whooping 99.967% batting average in these courts.
http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html (http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html)
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Conservatives 7-8 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the Iraq war is un-American!"
Most conservatives today (after Patriot Act, Gitmo, abu ghraib, 9/11, NDAA, etc, etc): "Obama is the worst President of all-time! He makes Nixon look like a choir boy! He must be impeached - NOW!!!"
The first sentence is not even debately, of course that was the case.
But this was the administration of Hope and Change remember?
-
Oh and the current VP and the previous SOS were two of the biggest advocates for the second Iraq War, and Bill Clinton tried like hell to drum up another war with Iraq with Gore, Berger and Albright traveling the world telling everyone how dangerous Saddam's WMD's were (all the while they were apparently being dismantled) and how Saddam had to be stopped. But that's utterly immaterial to the current administrations onslaught on Civil Liberties.
-
Oh and the current VP and the previous SOS were two of the biggest advocates for the second Iraq War, and Bill Clinton tried like hell to drum up another war with Iraq with Gore, Berger and Albright traveling the world telling everyone how dangerous Saddam's WMD's were (all the while they were apparently being dismantled) and how Saddam had to be stopped. But that's utterly immaterial to the current administrations onslaught on Civil Liberties.
and don't forget that the current VP drafted what would become known as the Patriot Act.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/rhetorical-question#
In the wake of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, Biden did, in fact, champion an anti-terrorism bill similar to the one now before Congress (though it was, as he complains, badly watered down by anti-government conservatives and leftist civil libertarians). And Biden doesn't let you forget it. "I introduced the terrorism bill in '94 that had a lot of these things in it," he bragged to NBC's Tim Russert on September 30. When I spent the day with him later that week, Biden mentioned the legislation to me, and to several other reporters he encountered, no fewer than seven times. "When I was chairman in '94 I introduced a major antiterrorism bill--back then," he says in the morning, flashing a knowing grin and pausing for effect. (Never mind that he's gotten the year wrong.) Back in his office later that afternoon, he brings it up yet again. "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill." You don't say.
Hey Beems, whacha say?
-
Most Liberals 7-8 years ago: "We've got Hitler in the White House"!!! :curse:
Most Liberals today (after Patriot Act strengthening and multiple re-signings, after indefinite detention, after NDAA etc. etc. etc.): "We must have these measures to protect American Lives". "Why is anyone surprised that this is going on, it's been going on for years, this is just the ongoing fight against terrorism."
Conservatives 7-8 years ago: "Anyone who doesn't support the Iraq war is un-American!"
Most conservatives today (after Patriot Act, Gitmo, abu ghraib, 9/11, NDAA, etc, etc): "Obama is the worst President of all-time! He makes Nixon look like a choir boy! He must be impeached - NOW!!!"
The first sentence is not even debately, of course that was the case.
But this was the administration of Hope and Change remember?
Oh yeah... I can't defend Obama's extension and escalation of Bush's neo-con policies. Our defense department went nuts after 9/11, and as a result, we have things like the PATRIOT Act and PRISM. I'm not going to pretend like I'm surprised by any of this stuff, though. We've all had suspicions that programs like this existed. At least now this information is out in the public.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcloudfront-media.reason.com%2Fmc%2Fmriggs%2F2013_06%2FPew_NSA_Poll.png%3Fh%3D268%26amp%3Bw%3D419&hash=85a608bbbcf87f3330436cd0ab088384082798a5)
http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/10/majority-views-nsa-phone-tracking-as-acceptable-anti-terror-tactic/ (http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/10/majority-views-nsa-phone-tracking-as-acceptable-anti-terror-tactic/)
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-nsa-data-diving (http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/10/pew-democrats-cool-with-nsa-data-diving)
:sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek:
-
No matter which party invented spying on citizens, it's just as concerning. I mean, it clearly has bipartisan support and probably always will.
-
So the majority of the American public is comprised of dumbasses?
Huh, who knew.
-
I have to admit, the Obama of 2007 was a smooth talker, and I can agree with alot of the content of his speeches. But the change in tone over his years in office is what is disturbing...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BmdovYztH8
Perhaps this has some relevancy in the Bilderberg thread.
-
Liberals: I was vehemently anti-police state until I rationalized it away as ultimately inevitable when Obama was elected leader of the Nazi party, and soon wielded unchecked power through his SchutzStaffel IRS and EPA. Now I march in step and with my right arm raised to the sky.
#thanksobama
-
I have to admit, the Obama of 2007 was a smooth talker, and I can agree with alot of the content of his speeches. But the change in tone over his years in office is what is disturbing...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BmdovYztH8
Perhaps this has some relevancy in the Bilderberg thread.
awkward.......
-
At one point do we have to just sit back and enjoy it?
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
Let's phrase it another way.
Do you think the loss of life is the only or most damaging consequence of terrorist attack, in terms of a country's overall well-being?
Probably.
I guess I disagree.
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
Let's phrase it another way.
Do you think the loss of life is the only or most damaging consequence of terrorist attack, in terms of a country's overall well-being?
Probably.
I guess I disagree.
I would argue our response to deaths caused by terrorism is the most damaging in terms of the country's overall well-being.
Of which I would group this effort at building an enormous database with the potential for egregious abuse on the list along with: torture, the Iraq War, Guantanamo, the overuse of the designation "enemy combatant"....and on it goes.
-
And dlew, if it helps, no one is reading your emails. There's a huge difference between the ominous sounding "intercept" and actual "surveillance".
Imagine if the discovery phase in a case worked slightly different, and instead of requesting documents, you had access to a huge repository of potentially relevant data. But if you used your subpoena to access a document you weren't sure was discoverable and hadn't been vetted, you were thrown off the case, suspended without pay and faced possible termination and criminal charges (even if you discovered an unrelated crime and even if that crime was serious).
No one is haphazardly rooting through your stuff.
Yeah but that's not how discovery works and there's a reason for that and I think the reason is more than "we've never had the capacity to create a repository of potentially relevant data."
I understand that no one is reading through my email, but it's still troubling, right?
I'd be interested in hearing your take on whether or not this poses some 4th amendment problem and if so, to what degree?
My legal background consists of a year as a paralegal in business litigation, so I honestly don't feel qualified to say anything too intelligent on it (as my clumsy discovery analogy suggests).
The problem with the discovery analogy is that, in this case, the "other side" would never willingly hand over documents and would likely destroy existing evidence and adjust their communications to avoid creating new evidence if they were made aware of an inquiry.
And again, despite what Snowden says about being able to wiretap the president with a few clicks from his desk in Hawaii, the process doesn't work that way. Every person with access to or even tangential involvement in the system has to pass several tests each year displaying knowledge of the legal restrictions on accessing such information (and the ramifications of doing so incorrectly or irresponsibly). Requests go through layers of approval and authorization and constant oversight from people whose job (and primary incentive) is to detect errant use and discipline those responsible.
So, I guess my take is that the information is already out there. This system makes the info accessible to the relevant authorities but only after probable cause (and a "foreign factor") are established.
I'd be interested how people with your background view that regarding the fourth amendment. FWIW, in my experience our legal department has been very cautious in these sorts of issues (for instance, government agencies or their contractors absolutely cannot run analytics on social media site users, even for the ostensibly benign purpose of measuring the effectiveness of the engagement efforts of our embassies with foreign audiences).
But again, I am by no means an "insider". Maybe it's as Orwellian as kstatefreak and dax think it is. I'm just going by what little non-classified knowledge I have of the program coupled with what I think is an obvious analysis of the irrational statements made so far from Snowden himself, who doesn't strike me as a particularly reliable source. Of course, perhaps I'm casting Snowden as a Benjy Compson while ignoring my own role as Jason.
I think the oversight is perfunctory with regard to consideration of privacy concerns.
A quick search through the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s nice table on FISA court applications submitted, accepted, and rejected shows that this is no more than a kangaroo court. Between 1979 and 2012, 33,942 applications were submitted. Of those, a mere 11 were rejected. (The difference between applications proposed and accepted is only 7, but I decided to go with the upper bound they report in their ‘Applications Rejected’ column to give the government the benefit of the doubt.) So the government has a whooping 99.967% batting average in these courts.
http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html (http://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/stats/fisa_stats.html)
Would a higher percentage of erroneously requested warrants make you feel better?
-
Felix, what did you think of the Friesdorf piece? Do you think this surveillance saves a high number of American lives?
How many is high?
1000/year?
10000/year?
Let's phrase it another way.
Do you think the loss of life is the only or most damaging consequence of terrorist attack, in terms of a country's overall well-being?
Probably.
I guess I disagree.
Feel free to elaborate.
Of which I would group this effort at building an enormous database with the potential for egregious abuse on the list along with: torture, the Iraq War, Guantanamo, the overuse of the designation "enemy combatant"....and on it goes.
yeah, that's what I was getting at in my response to felix that he edited out.
-
Would a higher percentage of erroneously requested warrants make you feel better?
To me the number indicates one thing for sure:
1) the FISA court approves almost every single request that is issued
Everything else is conjecture. Why? Because secrets. So unless you are sure that everyone involved is competent and ethical then the margin for error would probably seem to be a little absurd. I don't have enough information to evaluate the process. But so far we have seen the following:
From 2001-2007 Bush thought the FISA process too onerous, too public or whatever and choose to create a separate NSA project that surveilled Al Quaeda bypassing FISA oversight by claiming exigent circumstances and Congressional approval through the PATRIOT Act or whatever. He got absolutely grilled because some of the communications were purely domestic in nature and because people did not like the lack of a process. Fast forward to now, Obama apparently got millions upon millions of records (one hearing per company database?) with one approval through this same panel.
I guess Obama's approach is "better" because it adds a layer of oversight and accountability, but I'd really have a hard time calling the FISA more than a rubber stamp considering it has been four years since they denied a warrant and the scope of their approval is so far reaching. So what is the difference between just doing something and asking the FISA court? In practice, it seems like not much difference. I mean we aren't talking about going to the secretary to ask for some office supplies.
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
who are you arguing with?
-
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzotCnphjR13YECkJS0Hci5bL8C9y6Ba-ErZeFsl9CbD6FL2baZg)
-
Definitely just imagined a bunch of egyptians (all stacked 15-high on motorcycles) watching dax get on a horse and go after felix rex doing the windmill in the middle of Tahrir Square.
-
Why do you fellas regularly think everything is directed at you?
There's a very strident effort by noted liberal figureheads to downplay this situation.
-
You fellas aren't taking the final nail into the coffin of Hope and Change very well.
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
The fact that they've identified that nuance as something worth discussing is hilarious, and shows a complete disconnect from reality.
Can we call the current administration the Neo-J. Edgars?
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
Would you agree that the nature of our intelligence programs would be compromised if we held public hearings on secret and sensitive information? Could we even have spy agencies if they were required to disclose sensitive information to the public?
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
Would you agree that the nature of our intelligence programs would be compromised if we held public hearings on secret and sensitive information? Could we even have spy agencies if they were required to disclose sensitive information to the public?
Absolutely, while we're at it, let's get rid of grand juries, juries, the right to trial, the right to counsel, the 4-8th amendments, due process, warrants. etc. The SS can be trusted to try the accused, in good faith.
-
Yes, I am enjoying the latest argument that this was all legal because they were approved by what is essentially a secret court. As I recall secret courts would also play a major role in NDAA and indefinite detention.
So, everyone just needs to relax, the secret courts are on the case and ready to protect 'merica and your constitutional rights.
Would you agree that the nature of our intelligence programs would be compromised if we held public hearings on secret and sensitive information? Could we even have spy agencies if they were required to disclose sensitive information to the public?
Absolutely, while we're at it, let's get rid of grand juries, juries, the right to trial, the right to counsel, the 4-8th amendments, due process, warrants. etc. The SS can be trusted to try the accused, in good faith.
wut
None of that incoherent babbling has anything to do with my question.
-
Secret Congressional Hearings to discuss National Security Matters are not an issue.
Secret Courts consolidating power amongst a select few is an issue.
-
Interesting if true.
Your reader claims that the FISA Court must be a “kangaroo court” because it never denies applications. I, too, do not like the appearance of a court that grants almost every warrant application. But this is much more complicated than it looks.
First, the warrant process can be back-and-forth. I have heard FISA Court judges explain that in reviewing applications they sometimes find some aspect deficient, and tell the DOJ of their concern. The DOJ then, if possible, tries to improve the application (say, with additional facts) to satisfy the court’s concern. If they know they cannot, the DOJ may simply withdraw the application. This means the “granted versus denied” number is much less informative than it first appears.
Second, FISA applications are complex and often lengthy. The government does not bother with one unless they really want one, and then they put the time in to make the application thorough.
Third, it’s worth looking more carefully at who some of these judges are (and have been). In many ways the court is secretive, but one thing we do know is the members. They are all sitting federal judges. Here are a few who served recently: Judge James Roberston, of the D.C. district court, was on the FISA court for a number of years until he resigned in 2005 to protest the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. He was appointed to the federal bench by President Clinton, and early in his career worked for the Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights under Law. His public judicial work shows that he is anything but a rubber stamp for government police powers. Yet he (apparently) rejected almost no applications, as there were only 11 rejections out of almost 34,000 from 1979-2012. Or consider Judge James G. Carr, who served on the FISA Court from 2002-2008. He was appointed to the federal bench by President Clinton, and is a former law professor who wrote an extensive treatise on wiretapping law. I have practiced in front of Judge Carr; he, too, is no rubber stamp.
It is definitely worth scrutinizing the FISA Court, but it is not a kangaroo court.
-
This is more the impression I have.
BTW, I finally read the Friedman and Sullivan pieces on this. They're both clearer (and more concise) than me. And I get what michcat was driving at now.
-
I honestly think the dude is not just full of crap, but a little unbalanced.
NPR's Mark Memmot reports Carrie Cordero, the director of national securities studies at Georgetown University Law Center, spoke with Steve Henn on NPR's Morning Edition on Wednesday and told Henn "the notion that this individual has the authority to go ahead and ... 'wiretap' people is just ridiculous."
Cordero didn't go into detail on how surveillance programs work, but she said Snowden's assertion "does not resemble anything close to what I observed within the intelligence community."
-
I honestly think the dude is not just full of crap, but a little unbalanced.
NPR's Mark Memmot reports Carrie Cordero, the director of national securities studies at Georgetown University Law Center, spoke with Steve Henn on NPR's Morning Edition on Wednesday and told Henn "the notion that this individual has the authority to go ahead and ... 'wiretap' people is just ridiculous."
Cordero didn't go into detail on how surveillance programs work, but she said Snowden's assertion "does not resemble anything close to what I observed within the intelligence community."
While that may very well be true in the case of one individual (Snowden) . . . it's a fool's errand to try and dismiss the notion that an entity like the NSA isn't capable of scooping up every phone call/email etc. etc and isn't capable of taping into almost any call any time they want. If someone is dismissive of this, they are showing ignorance of the modern telecommunications network. Fiber optic capacity, massive core switching capabilities, VoIP and the ability to re-route (survive) on the fly has allowed telecommunications companies to consolidate traffic into fewer Core Switching Centers. Making it much easier for an entity like the NSA with it's massive data mining capabilities to tap into those network cores and scoop up just about anything they want, and to if they so desire, listen to just about anything they want and read just about anything they want.
-
I honestly kinda think Snowden was just a paranoid dude who saw some orientation slides and went sideways.
-
China Daily (lol at how much China is loving this. Good for them):
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.tapatalk.com%2Fd%2F13%2F06%2F13%2Feradyhat.jpg&hash=7e099acb17ec8d2de3d995d8129f95d8cc4541fa)
-
I used to get my neighbor's convos on my baby monitor often and by accident. I am not with the NSA or CIA.
-
Monster ^
-
I was simply keeping them safe in preventing terrorist attacks. Worked too. Justified.
-
I used to get my neighbor's convos on my baby monitor often and by accident. I am not with the NSA or CIA.
And
-
I used to get my neighbor's convos on my baby monitor often and by accident. I am not with the NSA or CIA.
And
I was simply keeping them safe in preventing terrorist attacks. Worked too. Justified.
-
nice
-
I honestly kinda think Snowden was just a paranoid dude who saw some orientation slides and went sideways.
This is basically my take. Saw the overview and bailed before the day 4 slides explaining the pain in the ass details of it all.
-
You know you're mumped when China is mocking you as being a police state.
Thanks, Nazi dem apologist hypocrite assholes.
-
It annoys me when the press keeps calling him a "former CIA undercover operative". He was IT at an embassy for a CIA office there. But they make it sound like he was James Bonding all over Europe.
-
It annoys me when the press keeps calling him a "former CIA undercover operative". He was IT at an embassy for a CIA office there. But they make it sound like he was James Bonding all over Europe.
It seems that most of our CIA operatives (read SS for the Nazi demigod Obama) anymore are in fact IT guys.
-
Guys, I heard that most spies are undercover as embassy employees. :ohno:
-
Guys, I heard that most spies are undercover as embassy employees. :ohno:
That sounds like bullshit. Link?
-
This will be interesting:
He said the NSA is “going through a major auditing” of materials to which Snowden had access, seeking answers about how he was able to obtain a classified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order and other records that should have been beyond his reach as a systems administrator.
-
This will be interesting:
He said the NSA is “going through a major auditing” of materials to which Snowden had access, seeking answers about how he was able to obtain a classified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order and other records that should have been beyond his reach as a systems administrator.
James Bonding all over that audit!
-
This will be interesting:
He said the NSA is “going through a major auditing” of materials to which Snowden had access, seeking answers about how he was able to obtain a classified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order and other records that should have been beyond his reach as a systems administrator.
James Bonding all over that audit!
:bwpopcorn:
-
i like how fake sugar dick is putting the government on blast when undercover brother Felix Rex is reading everything and marking his name down on a big rough ridin' list.
t&p's, fsd.
-
The U.S. Army response to Snowden? No access to the Guardian website by soldiers on posts and FOB. Good grief. What a bunch of pussies.
-
i like how fake sugar dick is putting the government on blast when undercover brother Felix Rex is reading everything and marking his name down on a big rough ridin' list.
t&p's, fsd.
Okcat not only embraces the police state, he's a cheerleader for it.
Probably wears Obastika "hope & change" bloomers
-
:ksu: <---- except with an "Obastika" or whatever
-
oh man, "Obastika" is great.
-
ha ha
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMP1WZ4N.jpg&hash=9140be617c58dedef8257bc3a093d1dbb099c8c8)