PRISM: NSA/FBI Mining Internet Data since 2007

[kallipolis]

The point is that you obviously don't grasp the concept that there is no proof that NSA is spying on Americans. That statement you made is complete conjecture coming from you. Don't blame Snowden for this one. Americans are not being spied on. I will maintain that stance until some evidence is provided that they are being spied on.

Americans can't be terrorists therefore there is no need for the NSA to spy on Americans!
Timothy McVeigh's actions in Oklahoma City would suggest that Americans can also terrorise Americans.

I'll assume that the NSA does not distinguish between Americans and foreigners for their task is to identify terrorists, nationality not being relevant for explosives can also be detonated by Americans as easily as they can by foreigners.

 

[Sausy]

Interesting piece on HOW untied congress is on this issue. I wonder how many folks here agree with any other item that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz put out??



Golly gee willickers I wonder why it is that Nancy Pelosi changed her tune?

Because like most political opportunists, Nancy's zeal for reform has substantially faded now she's part of the political elite. You have become skeptical and cynical on a lot of political issues over the past few years, why do you lack even the most basic skepticism for such a massive increase in the scope and reach of the national surveillance state? Is THIS what you spent so many years risking your life fighting for? An America whose secretive "protectors" cast the widest possible net over the population... guilty til proven innocent? Obviously, a noble view of America's promise is a hope towards the best America that can be, and our own history has often fallen far short. Yet it is the America that can be, and has shown flashes of that brilliance, that we should strive for. What are you striving for?

 

[tigerfan482]

^ Clearly, you don't like Snowden and regard him as a traitor. You don't believe any of his statements, you don't accept the documents he has provided to various newspapers, and you think the PowerPoint presentation was a fake. Because he did not give us one of the president's emails, he's obviously a liar.

Fine.

You are entitled to weigh the evidence for yourself, and draw your own conclusions.

But, the rest of us deluded people think there may be some truth in what he says, and in the evidence he has provided. If you want to persuade us of the veracity of your position, you need to give us something other than your personal certainty that the NSA would never spy on Americans without warrants. You need to provide evidence to refute Snowden's evidence. We respect your opinions, but opinion does not outweigh evidence in a debate.

As for Ben Franklin, I give up. You are correct. Franklin disdained liberty and urged us to surrender it to totalitarianism whenever we were gripped by fear. Freedom is just too difficult to protect, and not really worth it when you realize how safe you can be without it. Robert Meyer is a genius for finally pointing out to us, after 250 years of misunderstanding, what Franklin really meant.

Again, Snowden never said the government was spying on Americans. And I'd love to weigh the evidence. Can you put some here for me to weigh? You can't just keep saying that Snowden has given all of this evidence yet not be able to provide any of it. I have listed my evidence in my previous post which you just chose to ignore apparently.

As for Ben Franklin, thank you for giving up [Text: Removed]. I don't know how to make something any clearer. With both of these issues, [Text: Removed].

 

[tigerfan482]

Americans can't be terrorists therefore there is no need for the NSA to spy on Americans!
Timothy McVeigh's actions in Oklahoma City would suggest that Americans can also terrorise Americans.

I'll assume that the NSA does not distinguish between Americans and foreigners for their task is to identify terrorists, nationality not being relevant for explosives can also be detonated by Americans as easily as they can by foreigners.

I'm sorry, but what? If an American is suspected of being a terrorist, it's the FBI that investigates them, not the NSA. And yes, nationality of who is being targeted IS important to the NSA as they are charged with targeting foreigners, not Americans.

 

[kallipolis]

I'm sorry, but what? If an American is suspected of being a terrorist, it's the FBI that investigates them, not the NSA. And yes, nationality of who is being targeted IS important to the NSA as they are charged with targeting foreigners, not Americans.

We are all well aware of the roles of the NSA and FBI for not a few of us have been walking this earth for many years.

The NSA monitors all who they suspect are terrorists....without exception...then the FBI step in.

Nationality does not determine who is and who is not a terrorist as United States citizen Timothy McVeigh's terrorist actions in Oklahoma City evidenced.

 

[JayHawk]

That is precisely the problem.

All of our communications are being monitored indiscriminately. And, if we say the wrong things in our private communications, our government may take action against us.

Is that the kind of America in which we want to live? One where we must always be careful of what we say, even in our most private moments, lest the government inspectors take exception?

Is it really necessary to destroy liberty in order to "protect" it?

It has nothing to do with 'saying' something wrong. But I understand the world of paranoid fear being developed, it was almost fully mature when Bush was President and it is now starting to cry again.

Please tell me another issue that almost EVERY politician is supportive of that faces our nation? DO you really think Obama, Pelosi and Feinstein are willy nilly giving up the banner flag they hoisted to oust Bush? Nope. They simply gained knowledge that allowed them to understand no civil rights were being violated.

But now this is getting to be a pointless argument..

One side says nuh uhhh my country is monitoring me and i just hate it... i do ... i do...

While the other says.... nuh uh... the protection are in place and i like them there... i do ... i do ...

So until something else comes out, I doubt it will change a single thing. Just more nuh uhs and uh huhs.

 

[JayHawk]

I'm sorry, but what? If an American is suspected of being a terrorist, it's the FBI that investigates them, not the NSA. And yes, nationality of who is being targeted IS important to the NSA as they are charged with targeting foreigners, not Americans.

The NSA is charged with being the ONLY agency to break codes and interpret signals. SO the FBI uses them to break these codes and interpret these signals. THE REASON is because the congressional oversight, court sanctions and court approved process is observed at the NSA and would be ridiculous to re-create at the FBI.

 

[kallipolis]

The NSA is charged with being the ONLY agency to break codes and interpret signals. SO the FBI uses them to break these codes and interpret these signals. THE REASON is because the congressional oversight, court sanctions and court approved process is observed at the NSA and would be ridiculous to re-create at the FBI.

He he he Ha ha ha

 

[tigerfan482]

He he he Ha ha ha

Where are the charges against the NSA for breaking the law then? Why did Snowden avoid saying the NSA broke the law yesterday in his online chat? You do realize one of the leaked documents was a court order granting NSA the ability to collect the Verizon metadata right?

You can sit there and claim all day that the NSA is breaking the law, but until someone is charged and found guilty, we have to presume them innocent. Or is that not part of the Constitution that you agree with so you ignore it?

Bottom line is that there is a Constitutionally outlined procedure involving 3 branches of government for passing, executing, and adjudicating laws and the NSA has followed that process. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean the procedure wasn't followed like it should or that the outcome was unconstitutional.

I'm anxious to see how you people react when a judge throws out/finds Constitutional the ACLU lawsuit in New York.

 

[JayHawk]

I cant believe a semi-intelligent person who thinks enough of politics to even monitor this set of threads would be so naive as to think either side of the aisle wouldnt bash each other over the head with this program if there were improprieties. It is simply delusional.

In the end the only guy getting charges and a life sentence will be Edward Snowden. There will be the same fucking morons clamoring to Free Snowden as there are to Free Manning. Both deserve to be shot.

 

[kallipolis]

Where are the charges against the NSA for breaking the law then? Why did Snowden avoid saying the NSA broke the law yesterday in his online chat? You do realize one of the leaked documents was a court order granting NSA the ability to collect the Verizon metadata right?

You can sit there and claim all day that the NSA is breaking the law, but until someone is charged and found guilty, we have to presume them innocent. Or is that not part of the Constitution that you agree with so you ignore it?

Bottom line is that there is a Constitutionally outlined procedure involving 3 branches of government for passing, executing, and adjudicating laws and the NSA has followed that process. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean the procedure wasn't followed like it should or that the outcome was unconstitutional.

I'm anxious to see how you people react when a judge throws out/finds Constitutional the ACLU lawsuit in New York.

No one in their right mind expects legal action against the NSA to succeed.

No one in their right mind believes that the NSA is not snooping on the communications of United States citizens.

Theory is wonderful to behold when it stares back at you from a piece of paper....for theories impress the idealist..then there is reality in practice teaching us that Utopia remains a distant dream...worth aiming for.

 

[kallipolis]

I cant believe

Sure you can.

Just pretend that you can think for your self and dispense with all those Disney fed dreams of being an American patriot blinded by your naive belief that those in power are all paragons of virtue dutifully committed to obeying the laws of the land.

 

[Kulindahr]

Where are the charges against the NSA for breaking the law then? Why did Snowden avoid saying the NSA broke the law yesterday in his online chat? You do realize one of the leaked documents was a court order granting NSA the ability to collect the Verizon metadata right?

You can sit there and claim all day that the NSA is breaking the law, but until someone is charged and found guilty, we have to presume them innocent. Or is that not part of the Constitution that you agree with so you ignore it?

Government agencies should always be presumed guilty, especially ones which operate in secret.

 

[Kulindahr]

No one in their right mind expects legal action against the NSA to succeed.

No one in their right mind believes that the NSA is not snooping on the communications of United States citizens.

Theory is wonderful to behold when it stares back at you from a piece of paper....for theories impress the idealist..then there is reality in practice teaching us that Utopia remains a distant dream...worth aiming for.

Or the ideologue.

 

[tigerfan482]

No one in their right mind expects legal action against the NSA to succeed.

No one in their right mind believes that the NSA is not snooping on the communications of United States citizens.

Theory is wonderful to behold when it stares back at you from a piece of paper....for theories impress the idealist..then there is reality in practice teaching us that Utopia remains a distant dream...worth aiming for.

Exactly. It won't succeed because there is no breaking of the law. And I am in my right mind and I don't believe the NSA is snooping on Americans. I believe no one in their right mind actually believes the NSA is spying on all Americans.

Yes, theory is a wonderful thing on paper. Unfortunately, that's all that your contention that the NSA is spying on Americans is sadly. You have yet to produce any evidence or proof that they are doing so, so it is still all just theory.

Government agencies should always be presumed guilty, especially ones which operate in secret.

Definitely a paranoid belief there. I can see why it's hard to get a reasoned response out of you. It's apparently difficult to understand some government agencies have to operate in secret to maintain the upper hand. You can't announce to the US population (and thus the world) what it is you are doing and expect it to ever be effective again. However, to assume that because you don't know every detail about what they do, then they must be doing something illegal is preposterous and is really just a reflection of your obvious hatred of the government. If another 9/11 happens, I'm sure you'll be the first in line asking why more wasn't being done to protect us.

 

[Kulindahr]

Exactly. It won't succeed because there is no breaking of the law. And I am in my right mind and I don't believe the NSA is snooping on Americans. I believe no one in their right mind actually believes the NSA is spying on all Americans.

Yes, theory is a wonderful thing on paper. Unfortunately, that's all that your contention that the NSA is spying on Americans is sadly. You have yet to produce any evidence or proof that they are doing so, so it is still all just theory.


Definitely a paranoid belief there. I can see why it's hard to get a reasoned response out of you. It's apparently difficult to understand some government agencies have to operate in secret to maintain the upper hand. You can't announce to the US population (and thus the world) what it is you are doing and expect it to ever be effective again. However, to assume that because you don't know every detail about what they do, then they must be doing something illegal is preposterous and is really just a reflection of your obvious hatred of the government. If another 9/11 happens, I'm sure you'll be the first in line asking why more wasn't being done to protect us.

Power corrupts.

It corrupts on the local level to the point that cops can just shoot innocent people and get no punishment other than a suspension with pay... they can cuff people and then make up the reason for the arrest.

Power wielded in secret just corrupts all the more rapidly. So to believe that the NSA is not spying on Americans is naive delusion.

 

[tigerfan482]

Power corrupts.

It corrupts on the local level to the point that cops can just shoot innocent people and get no punishment other than a suspension with pay... they can cuff people and then make up the reason for the arrest.

Power wielded in secret just corrupts all the more rapidly. So to believe that the NSA is not spying on Americans is naive delusion.

Again, more rhetoric with absolutely nothing to back it up.

 

[Kulindahr]

Again, more rhetoric with absolutely nothing to back it up.

You're one of those who would have told President Roosevelt there was no hurry to invade Europe because there was no evidence the Nazis were really exterminating Jews or gays.

Blind worship of country must be nice -- it doesn't require one to think.

 

[tigerfan482]

You're one of those who would have told President Roosevelt there was no hurry to invade Europe because there was no evidence the Nazis were really exterminating Jews or gays.

Blind worship of country must be nice -- it doesn't require one to think.

Except there was evidence in that case. Blind commitment to paranoia and hatred of the government obviously doesn't require one to think logically.

 

[palbert]

I recognize that NSA cannot at any one moment spy on American citizens. They can't do it physically and they can't do it legally.

I also recognize they are collecting, indexing and cross-referencing everything they can get their hands on. Present reports suggest the information is kept for 5 years. I call that spying; you may not. If you steal mail and don't open it for 4 years you have spied. maybe not effectively, but you have spied.

I foresee many dangerous consequences here. See my post #129. Extend it: what if in legitimately investigating A for a national security inquiry they investigate his contacts X, Y, and Z - as good investigative protocol says they must. Most investigations, as in a background check, will the investigate X, Y, and Z's acquaintances, say, M, N, and O. What then if Y and N have together committed felony murder? Complicate the picture by introducing a foreign national.

I think Y and N will be charged - for matters having nothing to do with national security. And based upon evidence "not gathered - !!! - through spying.

Can you honestly say they haven't been spied upon? I cannot.

***

I also don't buy the story that we only monitor "foreign" transmissions, including phone calls. Given today's interlinked communications network a communication does not necessarily stay within the US. Once the connection leaves the US, goes to a foreign country, and comes back it is no longer a "domestic" communication. It is subject to full monitoring. And lord only know how satellite relays obscure the jurisdictional quagmire.

The staunch chest-thumping defenders do so without much thought.