PRISM -- NSA Monitoring Web Services We All Use?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I don't have a problem with arresting Clapper for lying to Congress.

---

Difference between "not a problem" and actively pushing for it like you are here. Clapper doesn't even need extraditing yet I doubt he'll even lose his job let alone be arrested.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

You'd prefer to allow the intelligence services of hostile countries to do as they will? Clearly that would not be a threat to our freedom or well-being.

---

So you think American intelligence can do as it wills, even if it goes against what Congress has authorised and is publicly denied ... and if someone reveals the truth to the world then what you deem hostile nations ought to extradite them back to the USA ... but they can't do as they will?

My problem is with the revelations about the European/Asian spying programs, less so with PRISM revelations. As for lying to Congress, the relevant committee knew what was going on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

You'd prefer to allow the intelligence services of hostile countries to do as they will? Clearly that would not be a threat to our freedom or well-being.

---

If the only way to prevent foreign intelligence services from doing what they will is by stockpiling the personal data of innocent Americans and bugging the embassies of our allies, then sure, I'd rather let hostile countries do as they will.

But don't you think that might be something of a false dichotomy?

You're assuming that there are defensive intelligence capabilities and offensive intelligence capabilities. That is clearly not the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

You're assuming that there are defensive intelligence capabilities and offensive intelligence capabilities. That is clearly not the case.

---

So let it be written. So let it be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

My problem is with the revelations about the European/Asian spying programs, less so with PRISM revelations.

---

Your problem is what was revealed or that it was revealed? Because what was revealed was shocking.

Quote:

---

As for lying to Congress, the relevant committee knew what was going on.

---

And allowed it to stay on the record uncorrected. That makes it even worse not better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

As for lying to Congress, the relevant committee knew what was going on.

---

That's a nice sentiment. So the cattle, err, the voters have no place in knowing that they're being spied on unconstitutionally?

Wow.

Do you consider moving to North Korea next?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

That's a nice sentiment. So the cattle, err, the voters have no place in knowing that they're being spied on unconstitutionally?

Wow.

Do you consider moving to North Korea next?

---

That's kind of what I'm thinking. We could have a remarkably powerful police state if we didn't care about civil liberties and were willing to do everything possible to cement governmental authority and state security. I don't think that's a trade that most of us are willing to make though. I'm certainly not.

To be fair, I don't think that's what Loki wants either, though you might not realize that based off his response to these revelations. I'm seeing something truly Orwellian in his description of NSA overreach as somehow protective of our freedom and well-being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enoch the Red

So let it be written. So let it be done.

---

Exactly. The agencies should primarily try to uncover hostile agency acts.

I have my doubt that the NSA is even interested to defend the US public from other countries services as long as they share they date with the NSA. They pretty much admitted that "friendly" agencies are coordinating their efforts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Clearly that would not be a threat to our freedom or well-being.

---

Suicide is of course an option if you live is at risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

That's a nice sentiment. So the cattle, err, the voters have no place in knowing that they're being spied on unconstitutionally?

Wow.

Do you consider moving to North Korea next?

---

Rather amusing for a leftist to say that you don't trust the state to do what's best for the citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Your problem is what was revealed or that it was revealed? Because what was revealed was shocking.
And allowed it to stay on the record uncorrected. That makes it even worse not better.

---

People lie to Congress all the time. It's bad, but it's not the end of the world. What matters more is if the underlying program is legal, which is to say that is under a Congressional committee's oversight and is consistent with the Constitution. No one here has made a case against either point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Rather amusing for a leftist to say that you don't trust the state to do what's best for the citizens.

---

That's rich coming from a 'political scientist' like you, knowing full well that progressives and conservatives can share values -- like protecting privacy. And that european states often do a better job of that than the US.

Quote:

---

People lie to Congress all the time. It's bad, but it's not the end of the world. What matters more is if the underlying program is legal, which is to say that is under a Congressional committee's oversight and is consistent with the Constitution. No one here has made a case against either point.

---

It's that congressional "oversight" that's being questioned now. Some of those committee members have complained about gag rules that prevent them from challenging a program, or doing proper "oversight". Budget committees either don't ask the right questions about program funding, aren't allowed to know the super-secret info, or can't share it after a classified briefing. The committees are prevented from sharing information, even with other committees, under the very rules they created. :bulb:

That might very well be "legal", since they're our legislators....but it's reminiscent of "It's legal because I'm the President".


Another method for spying data collection: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us...ted=1&_r=0&hpw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Rather amusing for a leftist to say that you don't trust the state to do what's best for the citizens.

---

Trust but verify, duh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Rather amusing for a leftist to say that you don't trust the state to do what's best for the citizens.

---

I only see you being submissive to the government in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Rather amusing for a leftist to say that you don't trust the state to do what's best for the citizens.

---

My motto is: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Checks and balances, my dear. That shouldn't be so hard to understand. One of the "checks" being the constitution, by the way.

New motto for Obama:

"Yes we scan!"

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us...anted=all&_r=0

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23178284

Looks like France and Britain have similar programs on a similar scale. Oops. :noob:

And at least now we know!

But I thought only America = bad & undemocratic? :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23178284

Looks like France and Britain have similar programs on a similar scale. Oops. :noob:

---

I wonder if the French, like the Brits, cooperate with the NSA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

But I thought only America = bad & undemocratic? :(

---

Only in your demented mind, my dear. And yes, that's an appropriate use of the qualifier "only" unlike in your post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

But I thought only America = good & democratic? :(

---

Yeah Loki USA #1!!! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthJoker

Exactly. The agencies should primarily try to uncover hostile agency acts.

I have my doubt that the NSA is even interested to defend the US public from other countries services as long as they share they date with the NSA. They pretty much admitted that "friendly" agencies are coordinating their efforts.

---

It's not, the NSA's functions are specialized, they focus on intercepting and analyzing information. Counter-intelligence is entirely the province of other organizations, like the FBI and CIA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

People lie to Congress all the time. It's bad, but it's not the end of the world. What matters more is if the underlying program is legal, which is to say that is under a Congressional committee's oversight and is consistent with the Constitution. No one here has made a case against either point.

---

You want me to make a case against the Constitutionality of PRISM? They are opening and making copies of US citizens' mail without a warrant. It's the very definition of an unlawful search under the 5th Amendment's due process clause. The real scope and process of the program may be unclear but if any part of what's been leaked about it is true, however limited, it's going to be a due process violation. The phone metadata is on safer ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

But I thought only America = bad & undemocratic? :(

---

I don't see anyone from the UK or France demanding to scour the earth to imprison anyone who reveals the truth? The British system has to my knowledge been debated in public too and not developed in secret, lying about it in Parliament and punishing anyone who reveals the truth. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you understand the difference?

I don't think only the USA is 'bad & undemocratic' - if our intelligence services do the same, I'd mind (doubt they have the resources), and there is uproar about whether they use this intelligence from foreign services. And like Rand said - if our spies do illegal stuff, I wouldn't be calling for a worldwide manhunt to try him as a traitor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

You want me to make a case against the Constitutionality of PRISM? They are opening and making copies of US citizens' mail without a warrant. It's the very definition of an unlawful search under the 5th Amendment's due process clause. The real scope and process of the program may be unclear but if any part of what's been leaked about it is true, however limited, it's going to be a due process violation. The phone metadata is on safer ground.

---

According to the NY Times, the mail program has been around for decades...Presumably Congress critters all know about it. It might or might not be unconstitutional, but it would spread the blame to our elected representatives and not just rogue intelligence agents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

I don't see anyone from the UK or France demanding to scour the earth to imprison anyone who reveals the truth? The British system has to my knowledge been debated in public too and not developed in secret, lying about it in Parliament and punishing anyone who reveals the truth. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you understand the difference?

---

Because the revelations about Britain and France haven't touched upon foreign intelligence methods...There weren't many people in the US calling for Snowden's head when he only revealed PRISM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

According to the NY Times, the mail program has been around for decades...Presumably Congress critters all know about it. It might or might not be unconstitutional, but it would spread the blame to our elected representatives and not just rogue intelligence agents.

---

I think you're getting confused. Mail-cover has been around for more than decades. But that's not what PRISM is apparently doing and even if it were the intrusiveness is actually qualitatively different. When you send physical mail via the US Postal System, the information grabbed by mail-cover actually has to be observed and used by federal government employees anyway. It's literally impossible to deliver something via the US post without letting the US post know where it's supposed to go. This is manifestly not a requirement for internet traffic since that is not maintained, directed, or controlled by the US government. And anyway, as I said, you laid the challenge that no one had made a case against either point, the constitutionality or the Congressional knowledge. I don't give a flying fuck if Congressional committees knew about it, they know about and willingly authorize all sorts of things which they don't actually have the power or authority to allow. The US government is not permitted to search and/or seize our communications without due process. It can gather publicly accessible information (even if it seems like it is intrusive on our privacy because it is done so very effectively that it feels creepy) like locations we have visited if it has proper legislative or executive authority allowing it to but it is barred from actually intruding, from crossing containing borders, without due process.

http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons...n/uf004377.gif