Domestic Surveillance

[tschu]

I don't give a sh#t who's watching me. In fact I support this type of surveillance - I have nothing to hide, but people who may threaten my safety and well-being do and this can certainly help protect the American public.

[strigori]

I was as against the Patriot Act (total bait and switch with the name) then, and against it now. It violates the constitution.

 

People need to accept the fact that in order to live in a free society with all the rights and freedoms we hold dear means inherently living in a society that can never be completely 'safe'

 

Ben Franklin quotes that seem appropriate.

 

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

 

 

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

This is supposed to be a Government Of the People, By the People, For the People. Not one to Watch Every Detail of the People.

[carlfense]

Couldn't you just as easily ask why those that appeared to be outraged at one point no longer appear to be?

Maybe something like this?

When it comes to domestic surveillance, a considerable number of Democrats seem willing to support actions under President Obama that they deemed unacceptable under George W. Bush, while some Republicans have shifted in the opposite direction.

[carlfense]

I was as against the Patriot Act (total bait and switch with the name) then, and against it now. It violates the constitution.

 

People need to accept the fact that in order to live in a free society with all the rights and freedoms we hold dear means inherently living in a society that can never be completely 'safe'

 

Ben Franklin quotes that seem appropriate.

 

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

 

 

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

This is supposed to be a Government Of the People, By the People, For the People. Not one to Watch Every Detail of the People.

[TGHusker]

Personally I felt a little more comfortable with the Patriot Act when Bush was in the WH than I do now. I think this comes from a persons perceived trust in the executive branch. i.e. If Bush were to run amuck with PA provisions, I feel it likely would be only to help catch more terrorists (which I don't have a problem with). However, if Obama were to also run amuck with it, I feel it would be more likely to be used for nefarious reasons much like the IRS scrutinizing conservatives more than liberals etc.

 

The big concern I have isn't so much Bush and/or Obama (although neither should have this power), but President 2016, President 2020, President 2024, etc. Who will that be? What will they do with such powers? It's scary to think that we're giving power like that to the executive branch in perpetuity when we have no idea how it'll be used, and we have no real way to make them stop using it.

 

We, the citizens, are no longer being served by our government. We serve the government, they have taken the reins, and we must do what they say or be jailed. When I can be jailed as an Enemy Combatant, without trial or recourse to the law, for having written that last sentence, then you know something is utterly wrong with this picture.

Right on. I've become more weary of the PA as I understood it more. A hard balance to keep from tipping the wrong way- security vs personal rights. We go back to that potential for power and corruption and abuse of authority all placed in the hands of a few

[TGHusker]

I was as against the Patriot Act (total bait and switch with the name) then, and against it now. It violates the constitution.

 

People need to accept the fact that in order to live in a free society with all the rights and freedoms we hold dear means inherently living in a society that can never be completely 'safe'

 

Ben Franklin quotes that seem appropriate.

 

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

 

 

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

This is supposed to be a Government Of the People, By the People, For the People. Not one to Watch Every Detail of the People.

Yea, when Carl and I agree on something - you know it has got to be right.

[krill]

I find it gravely concerning that our government is already circling the wagons to brand Snowden a traitor and presenting preposterous claims such as this illegal surveillance program could have prevented 9/11. For all the money and civil liberties we have surrendered, the only terrorism that has been prevented is of the massively incompetent sort. Even that does not have a very good success rate with two morons recently blowing up a marathon in one of our largest cities. This entire surveillance apparatus could easily be circumvented by people with an understanding of cryptography that is freely available to anyone, and it's secrecy was destroyed by a civilian contractor that apparently had not been been working there very long.

 

So, given that is won't work to prevent terrorism, and given the size and scope of the program, couldn't possibly remain secret forever, what exactly is the purpose? If a simple credit score with a few entries can determine with relative accuracy how trustworthy you are to borrow money, imagine what a massive database processing and correlating all your phone calls, emails. text, web searches, social media post, and god knows what else could be used for. Oh, and it will also have no public oversight or legal basis. Not scared yet? I am not one for conspiracy theories, but it's very difficult to explain why the government wants this program so badly.

[Hingle McCringleberry]

I don't give a sh#t who's watching me. In fact I support this type of surveillance - I have nothing to hide, but people who may threaten my safety and well-being do and this can certainly help protect the American public.

 

This type of thought is horrifying. The issues is what happens when the gov uses this massive pile of data against you/me Americans in general. We have the IRS messing about with groups that seemed to go against the Pres. We have the FBI using drones in the US. We have a president that has ordered the murder of at least six Americans overseas. It just came out this morning that we have bugged the EU missions in NY and DC, and possibly bugged the EU building in Brussels, also taking a large interest in Germany, France, Italy, and Greece.

 

 

 

When the Nazis came for the communists,

I remained silent;

I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,

I remained silent;

I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,

I did not speak out;

I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,

I remained silent;

I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,

there was no one left to speak out.

[tschu]

Godwin's Law, ladies and gentlemen

[huKSer]

From an article in the Kansas City Star - An interview with a former official in the East German secret police.

 

Even Schmidt, 73, who headed one of the more infamous departments in the infamous Stasi, called himself appalled.

 

 

“You know, for us, this would have been a dream come true,” he said, recalling the days when he was a lieutenant colonel in the defunct communist country’s secret police, the Stasi.

 

 

“It is the height of naivete to think that once collected this information won’t be used,” he said. “This is the nature of secret government organizations. The only way to protect the people’s privacy is not to allow the government to collect their information in the first place.”

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/26/4315030/memories-of-stasi-color-germans.html

[Hingle McCringleberry]

Godwin's Law, ladies and gentlemen

HAHA... Sorry about that. Mind you I am not saying that this government is anywhere close to what Germany was under the Nazis. I posted the poem more to show if we stand by and do nothing we can wake up with a drastically changed country.

[knapplc]

Invoking Godwin's Law is stupid and counterproductive to a discussion. Why do people refer to Hitler/the Nazis in discussions? Because most people have very little grasp of history, recent or ancient, and any historical reference flies right over their head. But everyone's heard of Hitler, so the reference won't be lost.

 

You want Hitler references to go away? Don't try to shame people with some silly reference to a trope, work to improve education in America.

 

 

 

EDIT - and so it's clear, I'm not going after tschu here, I'm expressing annoyance with Godwin's Law. tschu just happened to remind me how much I hate it.

[Lil' Red]

The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents.

 

Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by statute and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls.

Link

[tschu]

From Britain:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/18/david-miranda-detained-uk-nsa

 

I think some extent of public surveillance is good and even necessary, but I draw a pretty strict line when it comes to detaining people without cause and without access to an attorney. That is wrong.

[zoogs]

The things we do in the name of fighting terrorism.