HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » For The Record: The NSA S...

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 07:47 PM

 

For The Record: The NSA Spied on All Americans. It Is a Fact.

In clear contradiction of the plain meaning of the 4th amendment of our constitution. And they lied to Congress, and to us little people, about doing it.

And I'm really glad that I know they've been doing this. Because I think those are awful things to do, and that sunlight is an excellent disinfectant.

I'm also glad that President Obama is happy to have a conversation about this: I presume this means he was going to tell us, anyway, so we could have this conversation.

169 replies, 9403 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 169 replies Author Time Post
Reply For The Record: The NSA Spied on All Americans. It Is a Fact. (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 OP
MohRokTah Apr 2014 #1
blkmusclmachine Apr 2014 #2
HooptieWagon Apr 2014 #3
secondvariety Apr 2014 #5
nashville_brook Apr 2014 #148
jazzimov Apr 2014 #4
elias49 Apr 2014 #6
villager Apr 2014 #11
silvershadow Apr 2014 #45
billhicks76 Apr 2014 #150
Bartlet Apr 2014 #152
villager Apr 2014 #156
cui bono Apr 2014 #13
jazzimov Apr 2014 #32
cui bono Apr 2014 #43
jazzimov Apr 2014 #57
Ed Suspicious Apr 2014 #77
Dragonfli Apr 2014 #78
Aerows Apr 2014 #115
Ed Suspicious Apr 2014 #153
Ed Suspicious Apr 2014 #154
lark Apr 2014 #128
hueymahl Apr 2014 #161
mattclearing Apr 2014 #73
Android3.14 Apr 2014 #85
cui bono Apr 2014 #169
Thinkingabout Apr 2014 #47
bl968 Apr 2014 #80
G_j Apr 2014 #84
George II Apr 2014 #90
bvar22 Apr 2014 #103
Vincardog Apr 2014 #110
clarice Apr 2014 #135
billhicks76 Apr 2014 #149
truth2power Apr 2014 #7
840high Apr 2014 #8
OnyxCollie Apr 2014 #16
Phlem Apr 2014 #9
Cali_Democrat Apr 2014 #12
cui bono Apr 2014 #14
Cali_Democrat Apr 2014 #18
Bobbie Jo Apr 2014 #116
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #21
freebrew Apr 2014 #95
zeemike Apr 2014 #10
riverbendviewgal Apr 2014 #15
arely staircase Apr 2014 #17
GoneFishin Apr 2014 #19
Cryptoad Apr 2014 #20
Cali_Democrat Apr 2014 #24
cui bono Apr 2014 #53
Cali_Democrat Apr 2014 #55
ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2014 #28
jeff47 Apr 2014 #35
ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2014 #39
jeff47 Apr 2014 #60
sunnystarr Apr 2014 #91
jeff47 Apr 2014 #113
bvar22 Apr 2014 #126
Cali_Democrat Apr 2014 #42
mimi85 Apr 2014 #59
bvar22 Apr 2014 #105
think Apr 2014 #108
jeff47 Apr 2014 #112
bvar22 Apr 2014 #118
jeff47 Apr 2014 #119
joshcryer Apr 2014 #22
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #26
joshcryer Apr 2014 #34
whatchamacallit Apr 2014 #23
treestar Apr 2014 #25
rhett o rick Apr 2014 #46
neverforget Apr 2014 #62
jeff47 Apr 2014 #63
Skip Intro Apr 2014 #27
ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2014 #29
Skip Intro Apr 2014 #33
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #36
L0oniX Apr 2014 #89
JEB Apr 2014 #104
Aerows Apr 2014 #117
JEB Apr 2014 #125
Aerows Apr 2014 #139
JEB Apr 2014 #147
WillyT Apr 2014 #30
jeff47 Apr 2014 #31
joshcryer Apr 2014 #37
jeff47 Apr 2014 #41
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #44
jeff47 Apr 2014 #49
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #54
jeff47 Apr 2014 #58
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #66
jeff47 Apr 2014 #68
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #101
jeff47 Apr 2014 #114
hueymahl Apr 2014 #163
joshcryer Apr 2014 #51
joshcryer Apr 2014 #50
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #40
jeff47 Apr 2014 #48
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #56
jeff47 Apr 2014 #61
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #64
jeff47 Apr 2014 #65
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #67
jeff47 Apr 2014 #69
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #70
jeff47 Apr 2014 #71
RobertEarl Apr 2014 #75
jeff47 Apr 2014 #111
L0oniX Apr 2014 #92
jeff47 Apr 2014 #109
Maedhros Apr 2014 #120
jeff47 Apr 2014 #123
Maedhros Apr 2014 #124
jeff47 Apr 2014 #127
Maedhros Apr 2014 #132
jeff47 Apr 2014 #136
Maedhros Apr 2014 #142
hueymahl Apr 2014 #165
L0oniX Apr 2014 #121
jeff47 Apr 2014 #122
L0oniX Apr 2014 #145
Democracyinkind Apr 2014 #38
mimi85 Apr 2014 #52
WillyT Apr 2014 #72
Obnoxious_One Apr 2014 #74
NealK Apr 2014 #76
cantbeserious Apr 2014 #79
99Forever Apr 2014 #81
Swede Atlanta Apr 2014 #82
Demeter Apr 2014 #83
jwirr Apr 2014 #86
randome Apr 2014 #96
jwirr Apr 2014 #98
randome Apr 2014 #99
ProSense Apr 2014 #87
hueymahl Apr 2014 #166
L0oniX Apr 2014 #88
Vashta Nerada Apr 2014 #93
NCTraveler Apr 2014 #94
randome Apr 2014 #97
MannyGoldstein Apr 2014 #100
randome Apr 2014 #107
AtheistCrusader Apr 2014 #102
gcomeau Apr 2014 #106
sarah445 Apr 2014 #129
MagnumUK Apr 2014 #168
Otelo Apr 2014 #130
warrprayer Apr 2014 #131
Progressive dog Apr 2014 #133
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #134
randome Apr 2014 #137
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #138
rhett o rick Apr 2014 #140
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #146
randome Apr 2014 #141
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #144
randome Apr 2014 #151
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #157
uhnope Apr 2014 #164
Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #167
LanternWaste Apr 2014 #143
OilemFirchen Apr 2014 #155
uhnope Apr 2014 #159
OilemFirchen Apr 2014 #160
Sarah Ibarruri Apr 2014 #158
uhnope Apr 2014 #162


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 07:55 PM

2. "Conversation."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 07:59 PM

3. There's no way to spin it.

 

The Executive Branch has broken the law by spying on American citizens. They have lied to Congress, lied to the Courts, and lied to the People. It could have been stopped with a 30 second phone call, or the stroke of a pen... but wasn't done so. That is inexcusable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 08:59 PM

5. I'm afraid

this will shortly be taken out off all three branches of government's hands. It's like the J. Edgar Hoover days on steroids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 08:25 PM

4. NO, they didn't. THAT is a fact.

Go look at the Wikileaks info. The database was collected from private firms. But it could only be accessed under strict rules. It did NOT include names, addresses, etc. If the quesry was found to involve American Citizens, it was sealed and sent to the FBI who could only access the info with a court-ordered warrant.

Further, Clapper did NOT "lie" to Congress. The question involved "people", and as described above they did NOT track any American individual. It could be argued that Clapper misunderstood the question. If so, then he made a mistake which he tried to clarify in the letter that so many claim to be proof that he lied to Congress. In fact, he did NOT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:12 PM

6. Another of those 'unknown unknowns?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias49 (Reply #6)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:42 PM

11. A defender of Clapper's lies here at the "Underground"

 

Why am I sadly not surprised?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to villager (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 05:34 PM

150. Comrade Jazzimov

 

Lol...c'mon. 2+2=5 with these people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 05:53 PM

152. So when

Google and ATT and every internet provider collect your information and store it for years that's not a problem but when they give it to the Government for permanent storage because they are going to destroy it then it becomes a problem?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bartlet (Reply #152)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:15 PM

156. Welcome to DU!You actually consider that "not a problem" when the private sector collects your info?

 

I would beg to differ.

Even more so given the insidious partnerships between the alleged "public" and "private" sectors in this country, to boot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:45 PM

13. First of all, you do know that Wikileaks can be edited by anyone on the internet, right?

Secondly, why was any of it collected at all? That right there is unconstitutional.

Would you give the FBI your file cabinet and computers but then only give them the key/password if they got a warrant? No, you wouldn't.

As to you defending Clapper, well that's just pathetic. Why do you hate America?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #13)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:24 PM

32. First of all, I'm talking about the Wikileaks "evidence"

that so many here linked to.

Secondly, it's not unconstitutional because the technology didn't exist when the constitution was written.

I wouldn't give my info to the FBI, but almost all of us give it freely to 3rd parties who can give it to anyone they wish - including the FBI and/or the NSA. Thirdly, do you even know what a database is?

As to me "defending" Clapper, I notice that you didn't present any evidence that he "lied". Do you have any? Can you refute my statement?

The NSA and James Clapper have done nothing illegal. However, that doesn't mean that I don't think that it is immoral. I think the laws should be changed. But before they can be, we have to have a serious and objective discussion. Misrepresenting the case isn't productive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #32)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:33 PM

43. So no new technology is covered by the constitution?

It only applies to horses and buggies? Please. You can't expect to be taken seriously when you use that as an argument.

Why are you asking if I know what a database is?

Clapper:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/making-alberto-gonzales-look-good/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=1

On March 12, James Clapper, director of national intelligence, testified at an open congressional hearing. Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, asked him whether the National Security Agency collects “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.”

His answer: “No sir.” Then he added: “Not wittingly.”



It was a lie, as everyone now knows from the articles about the N.S.A.’s data-mining program.

Mr. Wyden knew it wasn’t true at the time, since he is on the Senate Intelligence Committee and is privy to secret briefings from people like, well, Mr. Clapper.

On Sunday, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell asked Mr. Clapper about the exchange.

“First, I have great respect for Senator Wyden,” Mr. Clapper said, using a Washington code phrase to indicate that he has no respect for the senator. “I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked ‘when are you going to start–stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is, meaning not answerable necessarily, by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful or least untruthful manner, by saying, ‘No.’”

Mr. Clapper further explained his least-untruthiness by saying he thought Mr. Wyden was asking whether the N.S.A. was actually listening to phone conversations (which Mr. Wyden clearly was not). “Going back to my metaphor, what I was thinking of is looking at the Dewey Decimal numbers of those books in the metaphorical library,” he said. “To me collection of U.S. persons data would mean taking the books off the shelf, opening it up and reading it.”


http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/07/02/Wyden-deeply-troubled-by-Clappers-domestic-spying-lie/UPI-69721372748400/

WASHINGTON, July 2 (UPI) -- Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., is "deeply troubled" by the top U.S. intelligence figure's public lie about domestic spying on Americans, the senator's office said.

Wyden said National Intelligence Director James Clapper's office within days admitted privately Clapper lied in public testimony at an open congressional hearing March 12, but Clapper refused to acknowledge this formally to the committee for 14 weeks.

The New York Times reported June 11 Wyden knew immediately Clapper's testimony wasn't true, because Wyden is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which receives secret briefings from top intelligence officials, including Clapper.

But Clapper formally corrected the record only 11 days ago, when disclosures by rogue former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden prompted weeks of intense public pressure.

Wyden asked Clapper March 12 if the NSA collects "any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans."

Clapper answered, "No sir," then added, "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly."

---
In a June 21 letter first reported by The Washington Post Monday, Clapper admitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee his answer March 12 was incorrect.


What the NSA is doing is unconstitutional. It is only legal because Obama pushed to legalize it. It was illegal when BushCo did it. Obama has expanded the program.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #43)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:50 PM

57. Obviously, you don't know the Constitution OR

what a database is or how difficult it is to access database info.

As for your history of the laws, go back and read your history.

As for Clapper:

Robert Litt, the general counsel to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, has written to the New York Times to deny the allegation that James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, lied to Congress about the collection of bulk phone records by the National Security Agency (NSA).

Citing an editorial entitled “Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower” which was published on Thursday, Litt wrote that the newspaper “repeats the allegation that James R Clapper Jr … 'lied' to Congress about the collection of bulk telephony metadata” and added: “As a witness to the relevant events and a participant in them, I know that allegation is not true.”


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/04/clapper-lie-congress-nsa-national-intelligence-counsel



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #57)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:22 AM

77. What is that supposed to even mean?

"...what a database is or how difficult it is to access database info. ".

You somehow believe that for a database worker, extracting meaningful information from a database is somehow difficult? That is a naive, ignorant, and just plain odd assertion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #77)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:19 AM

78. Data bases are quite complicated,You type in a query and it returns the results

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:59 AM - Edit history (1)

Typing is an arcane form of high magic that only a very few high priests and priestesses learn how to do,

It is clear you do not understand the intricacies of high magic or else you would not think database user software isn't built with a front end designed to be nearly impossible to master just like most other software.

Why, just to summon this page from the mist of webs I had to sacrifice two goats and poor the blood on the internet tubes! Stop being so ignorant!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #78)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:17 AM

115. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing

 

at this whole subthread. Your reply was priceless!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #78)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:00 PM

153. Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?



There are some who call me... Tim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jazzimov (Reply #32)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:54 PM

128. Closing your eyes to inconvenient truths is also unproductive.

Clapper even admitted that what he said was untrue. So now Clapper doesn't know what he said?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #32)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:27 PM

161. Wow, so many false statements, so little time

It's almost not even worth responding. In fact I won't. Anyone who defends Clapper and tries to spin his admitted lies into something else is so fundamentally disingenuous as to be worth of nothing more substantive than a response of scorn.

So consider yourself scorned. And ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:27 AM

73. Think you may be conflating Wikileaks and Wikipedia.

Wikileaks may be submitted anonymously by anyone on the Internet, but released by someone affiliated with Wikileaks at their editorial discretion.

Wikipedia may be edited by anyone on the Internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mattclearing (Reply #73)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:35 AM

85. Ignorance is on the calling card

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mattclearing (Reply #73)

Wed Apr 23, 2014, 01:04 PM

169. Oh! Yes I was.... brain fart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:34 PM

47. Some apparently has a different fourth amendment, you know like Cliven Bundy,

He wrote his own version to fit his needs. Yep, the Fourth Amendment of the US was followed, some just read what they want to hear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:13 AM

80. Private firms

When private firms are contracted to provide this information to the government then they are government agents or actors under the law. So even if the NSA contracted with private companies those companies are bound by the same restrictions that prevent the government from undertaking those actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:33 AM

84. Clapper's deliberate word games?

yes, they appeared to be deliberate and meant to avert the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:43 AM

90. I've seen that part of the hearing a number of times. Clapper answered the question truthfully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:53 AM

103. Clapper himslef has admitted he lied to the Senate Committee.

Untruth = Lie

Why are you so invested in damage control for Clapper at this point?
The History has already been written.
Clapper LIED under OATH to the Senate Committee,
and walked away laughing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:01 AM

110. No one is entitled to their own "Facts" the fact is NSA spies and is spying on US all. Believe what

you want but don't assert your beliefs as carved in stone FACTS. Your post would be OK if you just prefaced it with "IMO".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:20 PM

135. It all depends on what "is" is.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #4)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 05:32 PM

149. Wow

 

Does NSA pay you to spew such garbage?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:16 PM

7. Excellent, Manny! I, too, am sure he was going to tell us. Um hmm. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to truth2power (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:51 PM

16. He was going to tell us as soon as he found his comfortable shoes.

 

Bo took off with 'em and they haven't been seen since.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:28 PM

9. Manny,

I'm sure your in this for the long haul, me too. Know that there will always be denier, apologizers, and cheerleaders and for every assessment there will always be rebuttal. I'm sure that's healthy but for me, after a while can be discouraging.

How do you do it? This place is crazy! How do you stay in the fight? I've been restricting my access because non denying assholes on this site and have been much happier.

Love ya Manny. Whatever it is, bottle it and sell it.

Peace.

-p

PS.. have you noticed a flood of posters roughly 200 to 400 posts recently getting very animated in DU? If you sit back for a while you can see patterns going on here that you can contrast from the early days of DU. It's cool and weird and makes me very uncomfortable. Me thinks we've got rodents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #9)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:42 PM

12. "have you noticed a flood of posters roughly 200 to 400 posts recently getting very animated in DU?"

 

It's a coordinated government effort to plant operatives on interweb forumz.

Thank gawd we have people like you who are on the case....




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:48 PM

14. I thought you were against the NSA spying? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #14)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:53 PM

18. Are you sure you're responding to the right person?

 

My post was about govt operatives on the interwebz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:19 AM

116. No, that's seems to be the standard

answer to any post. Eventually, it's bound to match up with something.

Repetition, and all that....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #9)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:00 PM

21. Getting that check every two weeks from Karl Rove helps keep perspective

 

But seriously... I noticed that you've been scarce! Bad!

<weird stuff: on>

The universe is a big stage and we all play our parts. It's just who we are. Getting angry at silly people for being silly is no more helpful than getting angry at a baby for wetting its diaper. It's what they do.

So I try not to get pissed, and usually succeed. (But that doesn't mean I have to be cuddly. Cuddly just doesn't work sometimes.)

All we can do is to work at it, be smart about it, and try to make a difference. And have fun. Other than that, what's going to happen is going to happen.

<weird stuff: off>

The good news is that things are basically improving in our party and on DU. 12 years ago, Elizabeth Warren couldn't have been elected senator let alone become the widely-acknowledged soul of Democrats. Back then, Larry Summers was given vast powers to #%^* with us, instead of being cast off in flames by Senate Liberals last year.

DU has taken on a Thunder Dome-ish air in the past year or so, but in part I think that's from Third-Way dead-enders lashing out with strange arguments and personal attacks, because they've got nothing else. But their numbers are now small. They used to be large. We're winning.

Next step is to win the world outside of DU.

Excelsior!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #21)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:03 AM

95. +1...

many of us(it seems) are in agreement with you. Some of those 3rd-partiers must get paid to be here all day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:32 PM

10. Well we have had the conversation.

He told us they would try not to be so obvious about it and that the 4th amendment don't apply when you are really scared of the terrorist...and we have to agree because it is a democratic administration and the GOP boogie men are waiting in the wings to do worse.

So case closed, now go back to watching your TV and stop thinking about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:49 PM

15. Anyone watching Good Wife

To night's episode is right in this topic. AWESOME!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:51 PM

17. rec'd for the flattery through immitation nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:59 PM

20. Yall need to study your constituion more

especially the 9th amend and how it effects all other rights granted by the Constitution.

Its not a fact until a high court rules it so til then that is just your opinion,,,,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #20)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:04 PM

24. Correct

 

Most DUers, including the OP, have no idea how our government works.

Screaming that something is unconstitutional, doesn't make it so.

Although, it is amusing to watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #24)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:43 PM

53. I thought you were against the NSA spying? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #53)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:45 PM

55. Are you sure you're replying to the right person?

 

I've said in the past metadata phone record collection is overkill, but I never said it was unconstitutional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #20)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:18 PM

28. You can argue the unconstitutionality of a program before it reaches the high court.

That's kind of how it reaches the high court in the first place......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #28)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:27 PM

35. It reached the high court in 1979.

They ruled phone metadata is a run-of-the-mill business record that belongs to the phone company. To the person has no right to privacy regarding that. Just like you have no right to privacy over what you ordered at a local restaurant.

To actually have a right to privacy regarding phone metadata, we need a new law. Then it can be protected similar to medical records - which are run-of-the-mill business records, except they have a laws regarding disclosure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #35)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:31 PM

39. we need a new law

Right, agreed. In 1979 we had no idea about things like text messaging, smart phones and the complexity of the internet. You can build much more of a character profile now with meta data, at least that's what Joe Biden said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #39)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:57 PM

60. Metadata is nothin.

All I need is a last name, and an address or phone number - current or not. With that, I can buy a report on you.

That report will have every phone number you have ever had.
It will have every address you have ever lived at.
It will have every job you have ever had.
There's a very good chance it will have your salary history.
It will have your entire credit history - even the stuff that is "too old" for your credit report.
It will have the first 5 digits of your SSN.
It will have the names, addresses and phone numbers of your immediate family - past and present.
And so on, and so on.

The problem isn't just phone metadata.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #60)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:44 AM

91. that's the same info

that 3 credit reporting agencies have on each of us now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sunnystarr (Reply #91)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:13 AM

113. Nope.

Go pull your credit report. Everything is younger than 7 years. They also will not have nearly as many addresses and phone numbers.

But more importantly, to get a credit report you have to have the full SSN and a recorded/signed permission to pull a credit report.

As I said, you just need a last name and one address or phone number to get all that information. I do not need your permission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #113)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:19 PM

126. That wasn't an appeal to authority.

It was total disrespect for an anonymous Pro-NSA/Surveillance State poster on the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #35)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:32 PM

42. Yep

 

Like I said upthread, a good number of DUers have no idea how our government functions.

You are right. The info belongs to the phone companies. New leglistation is needed, but then again many DUers think the President is dictator and and create laws on his own.

It's really funny to watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #42)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:53 PM

59. Cali, you are so right.

Although it's become less funny by the minute. Maybe we can talk about Benghazi instead?

This NSA obsession isn't healthy for anyone and won't change anything. Let it go, Manny. You'll feel much better, promise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #35)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:59 AM

105. This guy disagrees.



I agree with him.
Who WAS that guy?
He would have made a good Vice-President or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #105)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 10:37 AM

108. This doesn't fit the new meme so it doesn't count.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #105)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:09 AM

112. The fun thing about opinions is they don't change reality.

Biden, like everyone else, is free to have an opinion.

Problem is that opinion doesn't make the 1979 ruling disappear.

Once again, we need Congress to pass a new law so that we are not covered by the 1979 ruling, and we can get some privacy from corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #112)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:24 AM

118. ..and THAT is YOUR "opinion".

Some people's opinions ARE worth more than others,
and you have NO creds at all,
so yours isn't worth much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #118)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:30 AM

119. Appeal to authority is an odd tactic for someone so anti-establishment.

but hey, whatever works for your current argument, right?

Let's say you're right, and the NSA stops the phone metadata program because of it. Got privacy? FUCK NO. Anyone willing to buy it can get your phone metadata. It's for sale on the open market.

Or is that OK? Like Snowden, do you think it's perfectly acceptable for corporations to spy on us?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:00 PM

22. Ron Wyden has never claimed they lied.

There would have been a conversation but it would've been in hearings on committees in Washington not in the mainstream for profit hyper tabloid media who actually is using it to foster apathy in the voting population. Oh and a couple of guys are getting sickeningly rich off of it.

The fallout? Section 215 of the Patriot Act will be, yet again, reauthorized. The whole "revelations" that we've seen and heard about will have fallen on deaf ears.

Time to write a book and cash in too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:24 PM

34. Wyden made sure the record was correct.

And he did it without leaking classified data that has had little effect overall and if anything has created a vacuum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:02 PM

23. HAIL HYDRA!

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:13 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:06 PM

25. No they didn't

Exaggeration limits credibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:33 PM

46. What evidence are you basing your certainty of "no they didnt" on? Are you absolutely certain?

 

Just wishful thinking doesnt make it so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #46)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:06 PM

62. Because Obama!

That's all that you need to know......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #46)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:12 PM

63. Well, only one program has leaked so far

and it's covered by a 1979 SCOTUS decision.

If there are tons of NSA programs spying on US persons, how come Snowden and company only leaked one that "spies" on US persons?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:09 PM

27. Baffled that anyone believes the NSA didn't spy on all Americans, and doesn't still.

I wonder what color the sky is in that world...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:29 PM

36. Ouch.

 



Is that Walter Matthau? I love his work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #29)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:56 AM

104. I think it's called shit brown.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #104)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:21 AM

117. Well when your head is

 

up there, that's pretty much the only color you see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #117)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:00 PM

125. What do you think the NSA rah rah crowd eats?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #125)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:58 PM

139. I think they are mushrooms. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #139)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 04:55 PM

147. Paid mushrooms living off the shit buried in the bowels of the dying empire.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:20 PM

30. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:24 PM

31. It is as much a fact as Saddam's WMDs.

Unfortunately for your argument, there were only two situations where NSA gathered data on US persons without a warrant. At least, there have been only two situations that have leaked so far.

1) Situations similar to the "jealous ex", where someone spied out of vengeance. In the situations that have leaked, the person doing the spying was caught and punished, though the punishments have not been leaked.

2) Phone metadata. Unfortunately for your claim, there's an overly-broad 1979 SCOTUS decision that applies quite nicely.

Essentially, the SCOTUS ruled that phone metadata is a run-of-the-mill business record that belongs to the phone companies. As a result, do you not have a right to privacy regarding phone metadata, and a warrant is not needed before collecting it. Just like you don't have a right to privacy regarding your phone number itself. For example, even if your phone number is unlisted, it's displayed to the owner of an 800 number when you call. "Unlisted" only counts for us proles.

Other situations that leaked were not US persons, and non-US persons do not have any Constitutional rights.

But here's why you are being really, really, really dumb on this: The NSA isn't the end of the problem.

The phone companies already sell your phone metadata to anyone with a checkbook. After all, it isn't private.

So let's pretend your argument was actually true, and as a result you shut down the NSA programs. You still have no privacy. The phone companies will go right on selling your data to anyone with a checkbook.

What we need is a law to stop both the NSA and the phone companies. But if you convince everyone that your argument is correct, we do not get that law - You erroneously convinced people that stopping the NSA stops the privacy violation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:29 PM

37. Nah, they keep all plaintext, they just can't "view it" without a warrant.

This allows them the ability to retroactively go back in time and figure out really important details.

But I agree that they are as egregious as corporate data miners. The biggest irony? The suggested fix that is being proffered is that the NSA lets the corporations do all the data holding and analysis and if they find something they let the NSA know and the NSA gets the warrant to look at it.

Talk about almighty corporate power, damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #37)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:32 PM

41. That's why posts like this OP are really, really, really dumb

The biggest irony? The suggested fix that is being proffered is that the NSA lets the corporations do all the data holding and analysis and if they find something they let the NSA know and the NSA gets the warrant to look at it.

Exactly.

Do what Manny wants, and the problem gets worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #41)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:33 PM

44. Did *I* suggest the "fix"?

 

There will not be an actual fix until the Executive branch is led by a person who adheres to true Democratic principles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #44)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:38 PM

49. Yes. You demanded the NSA "stop spying".

And you never talk about anyone other than the NSA.

There will not be an actual fix until the Executive branch is led by a person who adheres to true Democratic principles.

Wrong again.

The fix has to come from Congress.

Your focus on the Executive branch also indicates you only think the NSA is a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #49)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:44 PM

54. The US security apparatus reports to the President

 

The other stuff you write about is bad, but it's small potatoes compared to, say, being waterboarded, nearly drowned in a tub of ice water, and/or being held in solitary confinement for decades. That's the kind of stuff the Executive branch does, as we know. I don't think even Facebook would do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #54)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:51 PM

58. And there go the goalposts.

You can be sure that when Manny's arguments start to go south, the subject will quickly change.

Suddenly, NSA collecting phone metadata is the CIA torturing people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #58)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:29 PM

66. Haven't moved a bit. You asked a question, I answered it,

 

and then you claim *I* moved the goalposts.

Lovely.

Have a good night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #66)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:34 PM

68. And here we get to stage 2 of Manny's argument going South

The point where he declares himself correct no matter what, and then announces he is abandoning the argument.

Because when one's argument makes sense and is going well, one usually flees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #68)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:44 AM

101. Or receiving a barrage of prevarications and personal insults

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #101)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:16 AM

114. Too bad those posts are still there.

They show several nice reasonable responses to comments like "did I propose a fix" and your greater fear of government than corporations.

Problem is all those topics weren't working well for you - you stopped responding. Instead, you leapt to CIA torture, and now play like you're so insulted.

Which means we've hit stage 3 of Manny's argument going South. You'll reply a few more times about how terrible I am. Then we'll hit Stage 4 when you stop replying. Followed by Stage 5, when you make a new OP and the whole cycle begins anew.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #114)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:36 PM

163. So Mr. Jeff, you seem to enjoy finding cracks in arguments (whether they are there or not)

Care to offer your own solution, or do you think everything is hunkey-dorey as-is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jeff47 (Reply #41)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:39 PM

50. The fix is insane.

But you know what's even worse about the fix? Guys like Snowden think that corporate data mining is OK because, get this, we don't have to do business with corporations, it's all voluntary.

Companies can surveil you to sell you products, to sell you information to other companies. That can be bad, but you have legal records. First off, it is typically a voluntary contract. Secondly, you have got court challenges you could use.


Yeah, Snowden? How about that last Facebook settlement? $20 pitiful million dollars. For 1.3 billion users.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:32 PM

40. "Anyone with a checkbook" does not have the right to imprison me. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #40)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:37 PM

48. Yes, actually they do.

In IL, they literally have the right to do so. Debt collection laws in IL are rather amazing. Companies get to throw IL residents in jail without really proving the debt is valid.

In other states, it requires a little more effort on their part. Such as destroying your credit, getting you fired, and then seizing your assets. That car you paid off? They'll get around proving the car loan is valid real soon now™, but they get to repossess the car now.

It doesn't have to have bars on the windows to be a prison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:49 PM

56. You just admitted they are spying on everyone

 

By obtaining and holding the meta data.

What we don't know is what else they are capable of obtaining and holding.

Of course what they are capable of, is, as far as can be, practically infinite. Limited only by computer space and time taken to collect the data.

So, your excuses are no good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #56)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:03 PM

61. Reading. You really need to start trying it.

You just admitted they are spying on everyone By obtaining and holding the meta data.

If only there wasn't some part of my post discussing a particular 1979 SCOTUS decision. Then you wouldn't be lying.

So if they are spying on everyone, how come Greenwald, Snowden and the rest haven't managed to leak anything beyond phone metadata and jealous ex'es? You'd think they'd have managed to cover a single additional program if the NSA is doing so much spying.

Yet everything else they've leaked is against non-US persons. Oh, I will admit you have to read their stories very carefully to find that targeting information. It's usually one sentence 10-or-so paragraphs in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #61)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:15 PM

64. Did you just now start reading?

 

There has lots of info from the gang about what they can and are doing. Even the senators have said as much. But the heads of NSA have gone to congress and told lies and here you are. Who to believe?

First you admit they are collecting data on everyone and then you say.... well fuck if I know what you are saying, but it can't be believed, that's for sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #64)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:20 PM

65. The problem with attempting a "gotcha" is you have to actually be clever to pull it off.

There has lots of info from the gang about what they can and are doing.

There is lots of info about what they can do.

There is lots of info about what they are doing.

The problem is 99% of the "can do" is not being used on US persons - you have no right to privacy around phone metadata, and that's the only leaked program that hit US persons. Heck, I can buy your phone metadata right now.

First you admit they are collecting data on everyone and then you say.... well fuck if I know what you are saying, but it can't be believed, that's for sure.

The problem with attempting a "gotcha" is you have to actually be clever to pull it off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #65)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:33 PM

67. Question

 

How come you always support the establishment?

You support the nuke establishment against all reason, and now you are sitting there telling me that the NSA is capable of doing more, but all they do is what they can buy from AT&T.


You really think Rove didn't listen in on Democrat's phone calls? Because, you know, the present system is the Rovian nightmare. Why do you strive to protect it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #67)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:46 PM

69. I don't.

Let's go back and re-read the last paragraph of the first post where you replied to me.

What we need is a law to stop both the NSA and the phone companies. But if you convince everyone that your argument is correct, we do not get that law - You erroneously convinced people that stopping the NSA stops the privacy violation.

I'm saying we need Congress to pass new laws in order to protect our privacy. That isn't supporting the establishment. That's saying we need to change the establishment to support us. And there's tons of "big data" entities that will fight us.

You support the nuke establishment against all reason

No, what I do not support is the bullshit you smear about them. For example, according to your posts, North America was supposed to become an uninhabitable wasteland a year ago.

When that didn't happen, you started claiming that all life in the Pacific would be dead...6 months ago.

Lying your ass off is not being "anti-establishment". It's lying your ass off.

and now you are sitting there telling me that the NSA is capable of doing more, but all they do is what they can buy from AT&T.

Well, there's this guy named Snowden. So far, he's only leaked that the NSA did what they can buy from AT&T.

So where's that second program? Why are Greenwald, Snowden and everyone else not leaking it?

You'd think if there were all these other programs spying on US persons, he might have leaked a second one that spied on US persons. Btw, just so you are aware, "US Person" is not the same thing as US citizen. It means someone subject to US jurisdiction. Which means it should be easier to find abuses:

Let's say the NSA is listening to all the phone calls of Mr. Evil-doer. Mr. Evil-doer then travels to Guam. To follow the law, the NSA has to either stop listening while he's in Guam, or they have to get a warrant. Now, I'd imagine that it would be pretty easy for the NSA to claim this kind of thing "slipped through the cracks" all the the time in order for them to keep spying anyway. Yet Snowden and company have not leaked evidence of such a program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #69)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:07 AM

70. You have any links?

 

You just made several accusations about me and some posts. None of which is true. But that's par for the course with you. Links? Crickets?

You've heard of Hoover. The old time FBI chief who used info to blackmail.

Ever hear about Sen. Frank Church, who warned us what government could and WOULD do?

How about the Nazis who compiled info on the Jewish people?



All you have is your words here, and we can can see you just say stuff that has no real meaning. Hang it up dude. You got nothing but cheap words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #70)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:16 AM

71. Don't remember your own posting history?

Just hit that "My Posts" tab and scroll back a ways.

You claimed Fukushima would make the West Coast of the US dead, possibly all of North America. When pointed out that the actual measurements did not indicate that, and that Japan would have to be dead first, you stuck in there like a good trooper.

You claimed that disappearance of one fish stock in the Pacific was due to Fukushima, and that all life in the Pacific will follow. When pointed out that the same stocks collapsed in the 1960s, you hung in there and continued to claim Fukushima is the only possible cause.

Now, I could provide links, but I already did that back when you made these claims. They showed that you were utterly wrong, but you still hung in there. So why, exactly, should I bother digging through your post history for you when it won't change a thing?

You've heard of Hoover. The old time FBI chief who used info to blackmail.

Ever hear about Sen. Frank Church, who warned us what government could and WOULD do?

How about the Nazis who compiled info on the Jewish people?

I'm not saying it's impossible for them to break the law. I'm saying no such lawbreaking has leaked, yet.

So why haven't Snowden, Greenwald and the others leaked any additional programs? They leaked one program that is legal thanks to the 1979 SCOTUS. Why not leak program number two? If there really is such a vast swath of illegal spying, why are Snowden, Greenwald and the others keeping it secret?

I eagerly await your next post insisting you are as pure as Jesus, and that evil done in the 1600s demonstrates that the NSA is spying today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #71)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:37 AM

75. Just check my journal

 

Anyone can see you are just exaggerating. The question is: why?

The nuke point is, which you have not refuted at all, is that you claiming nukes were safe, there would be no problems. You were wrong every time.

And now, here, you say they can spy on everyone, they have collected data on everyone, but as far as you know, they are not collecting any more data that what they can get from AT&T, just like you can.

As for the whistleblowers not telling you everything... they really don't want to, they'd rather the government change its ways without all the beans spilled. Hell, some people already want to knock them off for what they have spilled. You can even look at it as they are blackmailing the US. And keeping the only insurance they have, up their sleeves.

No, this convo is you saying here is nothing to worry about, that history will not repeat and that Senator Church was just scared, and there is no evidence of them breaking any laws.

What do you think about Chelsea Manning? How many lies and criminal acts did she uncover?

You can have the last word... but yeah, check my journal, lots there about FUKU.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #75)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:05 AM

111. Oddly enough, you don't send every post to your journal.

And as already mentioned, you have your own version of reality. Links do not change it.

For example, there's this thread. In which you claim a die off that started in the 1980s was caused by Fukushima. Links showing you were wrong were provided. Including a link to the marine biologist you cited in your OP explaining it has nothing to do with Fukushima.

But that doesn't fit with your reality, so links don't change it.

The nuke point is, which you have not refuted at all, is that you claiming nukes were safe, there would be no problems. You were wrong every time.

Nope.

You know, if you think it's so important to find links to posts to show that your characterization is correct, you'd think you'd actually provide a link. Of course, that would interfere with your version of reality.

My entire point is climate change is far deadlier than nuclear power. By largely abandoning nuclear power in the 1970s, we saved thousands of lives. In return, we killed and will be killing hundreds of millions, thanks to all the coal and oil we used instead.

That's not a good trade, even though nuclear accidents are far more spectacular than coal mine collapses, and far faster to develop than droughts and sea level rise.

As for the whistleblowers not telling you everything... they really don't want to, they'd rather the government change its ways without all the beans spilled.

Which is why they didn't leak any programs at all.

Oh wait, they did leak a program. Golly, it looks like this argument makes no sense at all - leaking two programs would be about as difficult as leaking one program. Yet they didn't leak two.

What do you think about Chelsea Manning? How many lies and criminal acts did she uncover?

In your reality, or the one the rest of us live in? 'Cause I strongly suspect you'll claim the "Collateral Murder" video shows a crime.

Problem is it does not. It's a war zone. We get to blow the shit out of people as soon as we suspect the target is an enemy, and the "Collateral Murder" people helpfully point out the first group had someone who was armed. Any responders that don't have a giant red cross on their vehicle get to be labeled "enemy" too.

The "Collateral Murder" video shows why going to war is bad. Everything in it is legal.

Perhaps you could tell us what crime was exposed when Manning leaked that we know Castro's favorite brand of cigar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #31)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:46 AM

92. Blatant epic false equivalency. Phone companies are not looking for criminals and terrorists.

 

When is the last time Verizon put out a drag net and lined up everyone for a crime victim to identify?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #92)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 10:45 AM

109. Privacy is not only from the government.

And I'd argue that the commercial violations of our privacy are far, far more invasive. Largely because there are zero regulations, whereas the government actually has regulations.

In fact, the phone metadata program only exists because there are zero regulations on corporate data collections - the only reason the data is there for the NSA to collect is the phone company is abusing your privacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #109)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:35 AM

120. I agree with you that corporate collection of personal information is a problem.

 

I've been fighting against that since the 90's.

I disagree that holding the NSA accountable for their bad acts will make the problem worse. The argument that we shouldn't shine a spotlight on the NSA's actions and demand accountability, because corporations also collect information for different purposes, is not valid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #120)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:43 AM

123. What bad acts?

I disagree that holding the NSA accountable for their bad acts will make the problem worse.

The 1979 SCOTUS decision means the metadata program is legal.

Every other program leaked so far has been against non-US persons, which means they're legal - even if you're Chancellor of Germany, you don't have Constitutional rights*.

That leaves us with no "bad acts" in the legal sense.


*(As long as she wasn't in US territory or in US custody while the monitoring was going on)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #123)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:53 AM

124. I won't recap all of the revelations from the leaked documents.

 

The 1979 decision applied to the wiretap of a single individual who was a suspect in an investigation. Applying that ruling to the widespread collection of data from individuals not suspected of any crime is incongruent.

Numerous individuals have speculated that the NSA program constitutes "bad acts." For example, here is the opinion of a Federal judge:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-court-ruling/

"I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval," said Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush. "Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment."

Leon's ruling said the "plaintiffs in this case have also shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits of a Fourth Amendment claim," adding "as such, they too have adequately demonstrated irreparable injury."

He rejected the government's argument that a 1979 Maryland case provided precedent for the constitutionality of collecting phone metadata, noting that public use of telephones had increased dramatically in the past three decades.


I suppose it comes down to who you want to believe - the NSA's own talking points, or the analysis from a wide spectrum of dissenters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #124)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:47 PM

127. The ruling did not claim it only covered individual suspects.

I won't recap all of the revelations from the leaked documents.

How about providing a single example?

The 1979 decision applied to the wiretap of a single individual who was a suspect in an investigation.

Nope. That was the background of the case.

The ruling stated:
1) Phone metadata is a run-of-the-mill business record, and thus has no legal protection. As opposed to something like medical records that have legal protection.

2) Phone metadata belongs to the phone company, and not the individual. So the phone company gets to decide what to do with the metadata.

Because of 1) and 2), phone metadata can be gathered without a warrant, and without contacting the individual. And that applies whether you are collecting from one person or 350 million people. Scale is irrelevant to both components.

He rejected the government's argument that a 1979 Maryland case provided precedent for the constitutionality of collecting phone metadata, noting that public use of telephones had increased dramatically in the past three decades.

Which is why he is wrong. There is absolutely nothing in the 1979 ruling that restricts the scale of collection.

IMO a better ruling would have invalidated it based on the much larger amount of data collected as metadata. The 1979 data was just time of day, number called and duration. Cell phones provide much, much, much more data as metadata.

I suppose it comes down to who you want to believe - the NSA's own talking points, or the analysis from a wide spectrum of dissenters.



Alternatively, you could take more than a second to think about the post you are responding to, and realize the poster isn't backing the NSA's position. The poster is saying we have a much larger problem that requires a legislative fix. Just because Google or AT&T is doing the spying doesn't make it OK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #127)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:15 PM

132. Um...in my previous response I did agree that there is a larger problem

 

with corporate data collection.

I just disagree with the notion that we shouldn't be upset with what the NSA is doing because of it.

As for your interpretation of the 1979 ruling, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I place a bit more weight on the interpretation of a Federal judge, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #132)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:22 PM

136. Sure, just like Dred Scott.

Just because they've got a black robe doesn't mean they are correct.

His argument is scale invalidates the 1979 ruling. Because.......scale. Big numbers.

Scale could be relevant if the 1979 ruling talked about "during an investigation", or "a suspect". Unfortunately, we got a very broad ruling about the data itself, and not only about investigation. Scale doesn't make the data suddenly private, or suddenly make the data belong to the individual.

You are free to drop the argument from authority and point out how scale could actually invalidate the 1979 ruling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #136)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:10 PM

142. Federal judges are certainly not infallible.

 

However, their opinions on the Constitutionality of the NSA's activities and the applicability of the 1979 ruling does carry more weight than the opinion of some guy named jeff47 (or Maedhros, for that matter) on the Internet. All "Arguments from Authority" are not fallacies:

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Appeal_to_authority.html

On the other hand, arguments from authority are an important part of informal logic. Since we cannot have expert knowledge of many subjects, we often rely on the judgments of those who do. There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true. The fallacy only arises when it is claimed or implied that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism.


As for myself, I see the scope of the surveillance and the lack of a specific, named target to be problematic based upon the text of the 4th Amendment itself:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #127)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:43 PM

165. You are badly, badly twisting that opinion

Yet you have apparently taken a lot of time to answer all these other posts, and delve into your debating opponent's history, so clearly you are not posting carelessly.

That really leaves only one conclusion. You are purposefully distorting facts to fit your agenda.

Just so I am clear as to what you position is (I think I can guess) - do you support what the NSA is doing vis-a-vi the collection of data on US Citizens without a warrant?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #109)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:35 AM

121. Sure ...Verizon is voluntarily forwarding meta to NSA under no threat.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #121)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 11:39 AM

122. They'd have no metadata to forward if they weren't spying

Verizon doesn't have to record your metadata. Or save it for for 3 years. Or sell it to anyone who pays them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #122)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:45 PM

145. OFFS now I get it...

 

You hang out in #History of Feminism. I normally don't waste time discussing anything with that gang. Enjoy your government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:29 PM

38. They could be terrorists, though.

You never know! Better spied on than sorry!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:43 PM

52. Manny, you are without a doubt

the most negative person on this forum - or any other I participate in. Try to relax, if possible. Take care and have a good week (if possible).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:18 AM

72. Manny, You Are A Treasure Here, And This Place Wouldn't Be The Same Without You !!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:37 AM

74. It takes courage to speak the truth.

 

And I've noticed much intimidation against those whole speak the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 04:59 AM

79. Agreed - No Other Way To Spin This

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:49 AM

81. Not only did we get lied to by the NSA...

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:27 AM - Edit history (1)

... but those who PROMISED to work for US, did nothing about it, comfortable shoes or not. There are lies and then there gawddamn lies. The same crowd is looking for our support again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:56 AM

82. Couldn't agree more.....

 

I really tire of the apologists for the concerted attacks by our government on our constitutional rights.

Our government, the Congress in concert with the Executive have shredded the 4th Amendment with the Patriot Act, the endless spying and ever expanding secret government (NSA, FBI, CIA, etc.).

The Judiciary continues to give the government a pass on these practices as "necessary" for security. I suggest they study the history of the Alien and Sedition Acts passed by the 5th Congress of the U.S.

The Judiciary continue to erode our democracy by recognizing money as speech, giving monied interests unrestrained ability to pervert our electoral process. The Judiciary continues to threaten the safety of Americans by recognizing an individual right to bear a firearm. Any clear reading of the 2nd Amendment casts this in the context of a "well-regulated militia".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:26 AM

83. Facts don't get us very far, unfortunately

 

Especially when we are outvoted by the $$$$

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:38 AM

86. I remember then talking about listening for certian words and then tracking those words. That would

mean that if we were talking on the phone or the internet they zeroed in on us regardless if there was cause. We could be talking about a video game using words that could apply both to issues. That meant all of us were being spied on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #86)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:05 AM

96. That's quite a leap in assumptions.

 

Do you have any reason to suppose the NSA targets American citizens? All of what you just described is done for foreign targets, not citizens. At least so far as we know.

Just because someone has the capability of listening in on your conversations doesn't mean they are doing so. The FBI has that capability. Hell, I have that capability if I wanted to pursue it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #96)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:12 AM

98. I was not the one who fist suggested that they spied on us using words. I do not remember where

I read that but they were talking about listening in on telephone conversations and internet conversations. There was nothing in the statement that limited this to foreigners. For one thing if you are listening for a WORD how do you know if It is a foreigner or a citizen that is talking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #98)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:16 AM

99. And there is nothing to indicate it applies to citizens.

 

In fact, since the NSA is specifically forbidden from targeting citizens, there is information that refutes that idea.

But you're right in that if a foreign target is being monitored, there is no way to 'unhear' or to 'unsee' information that might be coming from an American citizen.

However, that's been the case ever since wiretaps were invented.

Neither Snowden nor Greenwald nor the Guardian have shown that the NSA is 'violating the Prime Directive', so to speak. They are forbidden by law from targeting citizens. If anyone has evidence this law is being violated, then I'd say we have plenty of reason to be outraged.

But where is that evidence?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:21 AM

87. "For The Record:"

"I'm also glad that President Obama is happy to have a conversation about this: I presume this means he was going to tell us, anyway, so we could have this conversation."

...President Obama is doing more than having a "conversation."

Obama administration starts to implement changes to NSA phone records program

By Andrea Peterson

During his Jan. 17 speech on National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance, President Obama proposed a number of changes to the agency's bulk domestic phone records program. Thursday, the administration announced that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) approved a motion to start implementing some of those changes.

Specifically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said the court granted a motion to modify the most recent primary order authorizing the 215 phone records program to ensure that the metadata will only be queried after a judicial finding that there is a "reasonable, articulable suspicion" that the selection is associated with an international terrorist organization "absent a true emergency." In addition, the motion limited the query results to metadata within two hops of the selection term, rather than the prior three.

The FISC also ordered a classification review of the motions and the most recent primary order authorizing the program from January of this year, the government's motion to amend that order, and the court's order granting that motion, to be completed by Feb. 17. Once the review is completed, ODNI says the documents will "will be published as appropriate."

<...>

Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington Legislative Office mirrored his sentiments. "It's good to see that some of the president's reforms to the bulk collection program have been implemented," she said. "What we need now, though, is not tinkering around the edges but an end to bulk collection. If the president won't end the program, then Congress must pass the USA FREEDOM Act and shut it down permanently."

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/02/07/obama-administration-starts-to-implement-changes-to-nsa-phone-records-program/


Obama to Call for End to N.S.A.’s Bulk Data Collection

By CHARLIE SAVAGE

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is preparing to unveil a legislative proposal for a far-reaching overhaul of the National Security Agency’s once-secret bulk phone records program in a way that — if approved by Congress — would end the aspect that has most alarmed privacy advocates since its existence was leaked last year, according to senior administration officials.

Under the proposal, they said, the N.S.A. would end its systematic collection of data about Americans’ calling habits. The bulk records would stay in the hands of phone companies, which would not be required to retain the data for any longer than they normally would. And the N.S.A. could obtain specific records only with permission from a judge, using a new kind of court order.

In a speech in January, President Obama said he wanted to get the N.S.A. out of the business of collecting call records in bulk while preserving the program’s abilities. He acknowledged, however, that there was no easy way to do so, and had instructed Justice Department and intelligence officials to come up with a plan by March 28 — Friday — when the current court order authorizing the program expires.

<...>

Jameel Jaffer of the American Civil Liberties Union said, “We have many questions about the details, but we agree with the administration that the N.S.A.’s bulk collection of call records should end.” He added, “As we’ve argued since the program was disclosed, the government can track suspected terrorists without placing millions of people under permanent surveillance.”


"For The Record:" Yes, Bush actually spied on American:

Some efforts took place in public. In May 2002, the surveillance court rejected a request to dismantle a “wall” that inhibited criminal prosecutors from working closely with intelligence investigators using FISA surveillance; that fall, a review court overturned the ruling. Meanwhile, the administration was also pushing in private to get around obstacles to sharing information among intelligence agencies.

<...>

The newly disclosed documents also refer to a decision by the court called Large Content FISA, a term that has not been publicly revealed before. Several current and former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Large Content FISA referred to sweeping but short-lived orders issued on Jan. 10, 2007, that authorized the Bush administration to continue its warrantless wiretapping program.

The Bush administration had sought a ruling to put the program, which had been exposed by The New York Times, on a firmer legal footing. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales disclosed a week after the decision that a judge had issued “innovative” and “complex” orders bringing the program under the surveillance court’s authority. But when they came up for renewal that April, another surveillance court judge balked and began requiring cumbersome paperwork, prompting the administration to seek a legislative solution, an intelligence official later explained.

<...>

Two classification guides say that the N.S.A. used the orders during a transition to the enactment of the Protect America Act, an August 2007 law in which Congress legalized the program. It was replaced with the FISA Amendments Act in 2008.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/us/how-a-courts-secret-evolution-extended-spies-reach.html

This is what I've been posting about for years. Bush was actually spying on Americans. He bypassed the courts, and Congress briefly made it legal.

The program was in fact a wide range of covert surveillance activities authorized by President Bush in the aftermath of 9/11. At that time, White House officials, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, had become convinced that FISA court procedures were too cumbersome and time-consuming to permit U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to quickly identify possible Qaeda terrorists inside the country. (Cheney's chief counsel, David Addington, referred to the FISA court in one meeting as that "obnoxious court," according to former assistant attorney general Jack Goldsmith.) Under a series of secret orders, Bush authorized the NSA for the first time to eavesdrop on phone calls and e-mails between the United States and a foreign country without any court review. The code name for the NSA collection activities—unknown to all but a tiny number of officials at the White House and in the U.S. intelligence community—was "Stellar Wind."

http://web.archive.org/web/20081216011008/http://www.newsweek.com/id/174601/output/print

Note, this is inside the U.S. and involves bypassing the FISA court to actually "eavesdrop."

Republicans fought to make that legal, and succeeded in doing so before Democrats were able to force an expiration of the law.

From a post last year:

There have been a number of media reports using the same Obama quote to basically claim that he once called out Bush, but then embraced the policy. They are intentionally conflating a quote about the PAA with his position on the 2008 FISA amendments, which he voted for. They are not the same thing. The PAA was a Republican effort to absolve Bush.

While the article mentions that Obama voted against the Protect America Act (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00309), there is no mention of the fact that the Act expired in early 2008.

Senator Mitch McConnell introduced the act on August 1, 2007, during the 110th United States Congress. On August 3, it was passed in the Senate with an amendment, 60–28 (record vote number 309).[12] On August 4, it passed the House of Representatives 227-183 (roll number 836).[12] On August 5, it was signed by President Bush, becoming Public Law No. 110-055. On February 17, 2008, it expired due to sunset provision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Legislative_history


The amendments to FISA made by the Act expire 180 days after enactment, except that any order in effect on the date of enactment remains in effect until the date of expiration of such order and such orders can be reauthorized by the FISA Court.”[38] The Act expired on February 17, 2008.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act#Protect_America_Act_of_2007


Here's Bush's statement at the time: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080214-4.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724

The major problem with the FISA amendments is that it gave the telecomms immunity. Otherwise, it included several reforms. What it did not do was make Bush's illegal spying legal.

Here is information on the FISA law including the 2008 amendments.

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008

Specifically, the Act:[19]

  • Prohibits the individual states from investigating, sanctioning of, or requiring disclosure by complicit telecoms or other persons.

  • Permits the government not to keep records of searches, and destroy existing records (it requires them to keep the records for a period of 10 years).

  • Protects telecommunications companies from lawsuits for "'past or future cooperation' with federal law enforcement authorities and will assist the intelligence community in determining the plans of terrorists". Immunity is given by a certification process, which can be overturned by a court on specific grounds.[20]

  • Removes requirements for detailed descriptions of the nature of information or property targeted by the surveillance if the target is reasonably believed to be outside the country.[20]

  • Increased the time for warrantless surveillance from 48 hours to 7 days, if the FISA court is notified and receives an application, specific officials sign the emergency notification, and relates to an American located outside of the United States with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power. After 7 days, if the court denies or does not review the application, the information obtained cannot be offered as evidence. If the United States Attorney General believes the information shows threat of death or bodily harm, they can try to offer the information as evidence in future proceedings.[21]

  • Permits the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to jointly authorize warrantless electronic surveillance, for one-year periods, targeted at a foreigner who is abroad. This provision will sunset on December 31, 2012.

  • Requires FISA court permission to target wiretaps at Americans who are overseas.

  • Requires government agencies to cease warranted surveillance of a targeted American who is abroad if said person enters the United States. (However, said surveillance may resume if it is reasonably believed that the person has left the States.)

  • Prohibits targeting a foreigner to eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval. [22]

  • Allows the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.

  • Allows eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.

  • Prohibits the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.

  • Requires the Inspectors General of all intelligence agencies involved in the President's Surveillance Program to "complete a comprehensive review" and report within one year
Effects

  • The provisions of the Act granting immunity to the complicit telecoms create a roadblock for a number of lawsuits intended to expose and thwart the alleged abuses of power and illegal activities of the federal government since and before the September 11 attacks.[citation needed]

  • Allows the government to conduct surveillance of "a U.S. person located outside of the U.S. with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power" for up to one week (168 hours) without a warrant, increased from the previous 48 hours, as long as the FISA court is notified at the time such surveillance begins, and an application as usually required for surveillance authorization is submitted by the government to FISA within those 168 hours[21]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978_Amendments_Act_of_2008#Provisions


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #87)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:46 PM

166. Just curious

How much do you spend each year on candles for you Obama shrine?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:32 AM

88. Certainly our wonderful journalists would have told us about NSA crimes...

 

...crimes against the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 08:48 AM

93. But...but...but...Snowden!!!11111

 

It's about Snowden, dontcha know????!!!!!!111111ELEVENS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:07 AM

97. So you think storing copies of metadata is the same as spying.

 

Most people don't, which is why the outrage about this is limited to the Internet and pontificating politicians. You're wasting an awful amount of time on worrying about what could be happening to you.

Why not use that seemingly boundless energy on issues that we know need fixing?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #97)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:40 AM

100. Poll: Majority of Americans Against NSA Spying

 

Update: Polls Continue to Show Majority of Americans Against NSA Spying

Obama's NSA Speech Fails To Register With Americans, Poll Finds

There's nothing more basic than America's ability to fix our problems by smart voting, when things get awful enough that the average American uses their head. Police states inevitably end that ability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #100)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 10:04 AM

107. Being 'against spying' is like saying you're against war.

 

Of course everyone is going to say that. But is anyone other than the groups I mentioned up in arms about it? Not that I can see.

And how do you conflate 'police state' with metadata phone records that are obtained via a warrant? I honestly don't see that.

I really think this is low-hanging fruit for some to rail against because they feel powerless about the truly major issues we confront. Says more about the state of politics than any imaginary police state, IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 09:52 AM

102. I tend to assume the president didn't know before Snowden.

Maybe suspected, but didn't know. Hell, congress doesn't know. I'm sure the NSA feels much more effective as an intelligence gathering service if it basically just doesn't report to anyone on its methods and capabilities.

Why bother? Just invites oversight and investigation. It's not like they have to report their budget. Much of the intelligence budget, from the NSA, to the NRO, is all black. They probably tell their congressional oversight some dribs and drabs of what they are up to but keep in mind, these people on the committee include shitbirds like Michelle Bachmann. If you were actually in charge of something important, right or wrong, and you had to report to an idiot like her, I think you'd play your cards close to the chest too.


And this is all assuming the NSA actually plays it straight, and just goes too far in gathering info. Meaning, to say that they only gather, and do not exert influence to maintain their reach, by making say, phone calls to committee members telling them how they'll vote on something, or else XYZ dalliance goes public, etc.


That's a lot of power, right there, just in the fact they are an intelligence gathering agency, and they have a black budget. Power does funny things to people. Even good people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 10:01 AM

106. For The Record....

 

You are defining the word "spying" so ludicrously loosely that you rob the term of all meaning.

That's also a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 12:55 PM

129. hi

thnaks to snowden he is my hero

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah445 (Reply #129)

Tue Apr 22, 2014, 01:30 PM

168. Hi Sarah

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:01 PM

130. This is the top "greatest thread" as we speak

 

Sorted by recs. Pushback from pro-spying individuals has failed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:20 PM

134. It is fact the NSA spied on all Americans. I would not presume Obama was going to state any

Last edited Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:53 PM - Edit history (1)

such thing..what evidence there is for that, I have not seen.

K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #134)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:41 PM

137. Please be more specific about your 'fact'.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you don't give yourself the same benefit of a doubt you'd give anyone else, you're cheating someone.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #137)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 01:52 PM

138. It is a material fact, yes, may be a disputed fact by the NSA..that is different.

I am sure you have seen the information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:10 PM

140. One cant see the evidence if their eyes are closed.

 

“Sometimes people don't want to hear (or see) the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.” Friedrich Nietzsche

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #140)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:47 PM

146. People are sometimes uncomfortable with information,the scope of the Snowden leak has been riveting.

Best we know and deal with it..a waste of time to presume they are the benevolent party.

They work for us, although this is lost on many Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:11 PM

141. The fact of metadata records obtained via a warrant?

 

Is that your fact?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)
[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #141)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:43 PM

144. You're suggesting the NSA is not disputing spying on Americans? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #144)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 05:34 PM

151. A non-equivocal answer on that would be welcome.

 

Oh. Wait. Obama already said the NSA is not listening to your phone calls or reading your email.

As to inadvertently gathering information on citizens: happens all the time. You can't listen in to a foreign target's phone calls and somehow un-hear if he/she is speaking to an American.

Go ahead and pretend that I've been living in a cave for the past year. What fact do you have that the NSA is spying on American citizens? Should be easy to do since it's a 'fact' not subject to interpretation.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.
[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #151)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:25 PM

157. I asked you a question you are not willing to answer.

Obama said...........really? What is it he is talking about reigning in?

I suggest if you wish to have a conversation about this you avoid telling me what I should
say to you.

You are looking for confirmation the NSA spied on all Americans from the POTUS, is that correct? If not, it has not taken place??

I can't imagine your reasoning to support such an enterprise, but it is your choice.


https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/guide-what-we-now-know-about-nsas-dragnet-searches-your-communications

Lawmakers Probe Willful Abuses of Power by NSA Analysts
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-23/nsa-analysts-intentionally-abused-spying-powers-multiple-times.html


NSA performed warrantless searches on Americans' calls and emails – Clapper
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/01/nsa-surveillance-loophole-americans-data

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jefferson23 (Reply #157)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:39 PM

164. just lurking, but that's a total fail on your part. You can't answer a simple question.

 

and you seem to think accessing metadata with a warrant that was collected on some Americans = NSA spying on all Americans. The OP is that dumb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #164)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:47 PM

167. You sound content..I am happy for you. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 03:15 PM

143. "Why bother with an investigation and trial? He's guilty. I'm sure of it."

 

"Why bother with an investigation and trial? He's guilty. I'm sure of it."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:13 PM

155. Tragically inane.

If by "spied on" you're referring to metadata collection, you're not simply naive... you're absolutely wrong:

For The Record: The NSA Did Not "Spy" on All Americans. It Is a Fact.

NSA Collects 20% or Less of U.S. Call Data

WASHINGTON--The National Security Agency phone-data program, which has been at the center of controversy over the NSA's surveillance operations, has been described by lawmakers as collecting records on virtually every phone call placed in the U.S.

In fact, it collects data for about 20% or less of that data, primarily because it doesn't cover records for most cellphones, the fastest growth in telephony and an area where the agency has struggled to keep pace, according to several people familiar with the program.

The dwindling coverage suggests the NSA's program is less pervasive than widely believed and also less useful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #155)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:04 PM

159. how many people here believe this "Sky is Falling" garbage?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #159)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:08 PM

160. About 300.

Round it up to .002% of DU's membership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 06:33 PM

158. The NSA and the CIA have been doing things they shouldn't have since 1947 (CIA) and 1952 (NSA).

That's 66 and 61 years.

Have they ever done the right thing? Maybe. Has anyone overseen them? No. Has anyone bothered to get them under control? No.

If you would like to, how do you plan to do it? Do you have a plan? I sure don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Apr 21, 2014, 07:33 PM

162. this is FOX or RW radio-level BS. and Snowden LIED btw

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread