NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden..

[mozzandherb]

but I'm sure I could call my mom right now and tell her 20 times that I want to kill the president and nobody will be aware of it.

Try it and see what happens

[LadyG]

The underwear and the boston bomber both were able to fly/was not flagged due to misspellings of their names. That no fly list is only good in narrow ways.
Life is dangerous.
I worry more about getting shot up in a mall or theatre, than I do being in an terrorism event. Why? because the odds of it happening are better. So, where is the bureaucracy to save me from mass shootings??

[toycar]

I hear a lot of whining but I don't see cheese.


Where are the suggestions in place of monitoring?

Huh? Im listening.

Im not hearing anything.




Well for decades they were able to stop plots against the country and none of these tactics were used. Are you suggesting that people of today are LESS capable then people of yesterday?



I don't believe you have an expectation of privacy with phones. Mobile or landline.

You pay for a privledge. You pay to use the phone. No expectation of privacy. It's a nice luxury, but do you expect the same privacy from public phones?

If you got caught calling your drug dealer because they screened the records looking for someone else and caught you instead would you be mad?

Hey that was a private call right?

No.


Yeah, actually that is a private call and MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS guarantee that. Maybe you need a refresher on the bill of rights homie.


4th amendment

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



So yeah, actually I DO EXPECT PRIVACY because it is my granted right as a citizen of the United States of America. I'm not really sure where you are getting lost here. The fact that you mach the expectation of privacy to me illustrates just how far askew the way of thinking in todays culture is.

You accept the idea that you have no privacy and laugh at the plausible idea that privacy IS a right.

Well, believe it or not it is, and people like me are outraged at the idea that the gov can just do whatever they want with a blanket excuse at their side(such as terrorism) to invade your personal life.




So then what's the difference?

If you have something to hide, maybe phones are not for you. If you have nothing to hide, then it shouldn't make a difference.

Im not advocating for them to run wild, but come on is it really that serious?


This is a yes or no discussion. NO THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT. I dont have anything to hide. You think if I felt like I had something to hide I would volunteer the idea that I smoke weed, call a dealer for a bag or party when the kids are asleep? I could care less man, even if that robot machine is listening. Whatever, I WOULD PROUDLY EXPLAIN MYSELF TO ANYONE ASKING. Atleast they would be giving me the appropriate chanel to confront my accuser and address the issue.


This program is designed to stereotype people blindly by invading on things you otherwise think are private.



You can try to slant it anyway you want, but just because you have no proof that something wasn't prevented doesn't mean it hasn't happened.


The gov cannot help but let us know when they did something good, are you really trying to suggest that all of this "good" coming out of this program is just getting swept under the rug or something? Come on man. You know they tell us about stopping/preventing attacks. Its because you know this, that you KNOW there haven't been THAT MANY attacks thwarted on US soil. Especially not compared to the number of people that executed their plan before anyone even knew their name.


It has in fact happened, it might not be the results you want, but hardly comparable to a Tornado.

And yes we all get the fact that people will die, but that's not a reason to not try to stop crazies.


Not saying that we should abandon the idea of stopping crazies. I am saying my constitutional rights, just like yours, are more valueable than this program or the results it has given.

That is all.


Its not like I am suggesting we toss our hands up and walk away. Violating the rights of American citizens? Come on. There has to be a line somewhere, and I think our CONSTITUTION is a pretty good place to start.

We were able to manage the country for centuries before these crazy ass infringements on our rights started happening. We have gone to war to defend these rights, hundreds of thousands of people have died over that silly piece of paper called the constitution. Now, people just want to disregard it in the face of terrorism?

No fuggin way.

Comments in red.

[deevergote]

Try it and see what happens

This thread is now flagged for review, for sure! (and it's an international discussion!)

The underwear and the boston bomber both were able to fly/was not flagged due to misspellings of their names. That no fly list is only good in narrow ways.
Life is dangerous.
I worry more about getting shot up in a mall or theatre, than I do being in an terrorism event. Why? because the odds of it happening are better. So, where is the bureaucracy to save me from mass shootings??

Agreed. It's all politics. People want to feel like something is being done to keep them safe. I'm sure if an accurate, unbiased poll were to be given to the entire country, the majority would still support the Patriot Act as a form of "protection" (I'm not supporting or opposing it with that statement... just stating what I believe would happen.) As long as the majority gives support, the government officials will do what will get them reelected.

The sad thing is... if a terrorist wants to do damage, they will. They will find a way. If a private citizen wants to do damage, so will they.
Big Brother style precautions will stop some of it. An absolute lockdown would stop more of it. But nothing will stop it completely. It's impossible.

US citizens need to be vigilant. Law enforcement needs to be properly equipped and properly trained to recognize and neutralize a threat.

[mozzandherb]

Don't know what kind of status this guy was trying to achieve, but there are over 500,000 people who have Top Secret clearance in the U.S...many knew about what was happening here, but why is this the only guy to come forward? That's what I'm wondering...

[Ralphie]

Actually Ralphie, Its called a warrant, which pre 9/11- they needed to get your info from the phone companies.
Phone companies YOU PAY FOR, and (pre 9/11) would not give your info up without a warrant because OF THE EXPECTATION of privacy. The 4th amendment.
Fix what we had pre-9/11, revert back to that- and eliminate the surveillance state. Repeal the Patriot Act.

Did any of you watch the video to the end? He tells you what is going to happen.

Well depending on the cirumstances, they still need a warrant.

Let me throw this out there-

I agree that the patriot act didn't cause 9.11, the US Govt dropping the ball did. Interagency miscommunications and just a lack of communication prevented 911 from being stopped.

If we continue on this path of surveillance and we improve the oversight and transparency of these programs and the communication between Agencies, how would that not be 100x better then Pre 9/11 days?

[toycar]

Don't know what kind of status this guy was trying to achieve, but there are over 500,000 people who have Top Secret clearance in the U.S...many knew about what was happening here, but why is this the only guy to come forward? That's what I'm wondering...

My opinion;



Most people in America don't even understand why its against the constitution, what amendment protects you from this, or anything of the sort.


There is a large lack of understanding of what liberties and rights are in America that are assured to us as citizens.


Also, I'm sure the people in positions to talk, are under legal obligation not too. The Mr Snowden guy is FUCKED now and could face the death penalty if he ever lands back in the USA.


For what exactly?

He used his freedom of speach to talk about a secret program that violates millions of peoples constitutional rights.


But, in America, hes a traitor and a criminal now.



Lol, why do you think nobody else talked about it?

[deevergote]

Most Americans are willing to sacrifice their freedom in exchange for decreased responsibility. If they put the government in charge of everything, then the government is responsible for everything. It's easy. It's lazy.

[toycar]

Well depending on the cirumstances, they still need a warrant.

Let me throw this out there-

I agree that the patriot act didn't cause 9.11, the US Govt dropping the ball did. Interagency miscommunications and just a lack of communication prevented 911 from being stopped.

If we continue on this path of surveillance and we improve the oversight and transparency of these programs and the communication between Agencies, how would that not be 100x better then Pre 9/11 days?

If they would've just communicated with eachother and done NOTHING else 9/11 could've been prevented.




They don't have to take our rights away to do their jobs bro, they don't. Sure its easier, but, it is not required.



And, for the tornado side of my previous comments, just want to point out that 100 billion dollars a month rebuilds a community pretty fast. We spend 100 billion dollars a month on fighting terror, and programs like this are all wrapped up into that number just the same. That number might be shrinking now that we are drawing down in Afghanistan and the conflict in Iraq is over, but you get the point. If only 1 billion dollars was spent on nation buidling it would have huge effects.


That money could easily benefit people of America vs whatever the fuck it is actually accomplishing-if anything.



Well after the bombing in boston, they had no idea what their names were. Had pictures of the guys, information from the russians about the one brother years earlier, and yet with all these programs in place we still couldn't connect the dots and get a name attached to a picture of a KNOWN PERSON OF INTEREST who was in this database and had been interviewed by the fbi.



And all of this is what we get AFTER this program is in place? Come on. If they couldn't use their super computer to figure this out, then I want my money and rights back.


And an earlier post talked about finding that fuck in the boat. No cameras, monitoring or anything caught that kid. A PERSON noticed him in the boat. Just a random person.


Thousands of cops within 1 block of where he is, a citizen points him out. The k9's didn't even find him.


How well do these programs work that you are so passionately defending in the face of losing your own rights as a citizen?

[Ralphie]

It's easy to comment on things we know nothing about.

Everyone has an opinion.

I read an article on the news, where they interviewed Mr.Snowden. Did he say that the NSA WAS listening to people for no good reason, or just that they COULD if they wanted too?

Big difference.


If I give you a computer with a program and tell you, you can just input a name and listen to calls for that person.....the possbility is there, but you don't act upon it because its not necessary to listen to random peoples calls, then has anyones rights been violated!?!?

4th Amendment-
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



now read this-

Stipulations of the 4th Amendment

The Fourth Amendment guards against the government’s ability to conduct unreasonable search and seizures when the individual party being searched has a “reasonable exception of privacy.”

The Fourth Amendment specifically requires a law enforcement agency to possess judicially sanctioned search and arrest warrants, which are supported by probable clause, to be administered before a person’s property can be inspected.

The Fourth Amendment ties in numerous limitations whereby an individual may be searched without a warrant given the presence of certain circumstances. The individual’s property may be searched and seized if: The individual is on parole or in a tax hearing, faces deportation, the evidence is seized from a common carrier, the evidence is collected by U.S. customs agents, the evidence is seized by probation officers, the evidence is seized outside of the United States, or probable cause is evident.


Assuming that the NSA had probable cause, linked via the information they were going on, then how were they violating anyones rights?

Like LadyG said(and we are all guessing or going off what Snowden says, as none of us work for the NSA)

Its just indexing peoples information and looking for links, at which time it finds one, they listen to calls and monitor to see if it takes them anywhere.

Sounds like probable cause too me.

It can be argued either way, you could say that the system can link up a bunch of bs and then you can just listen to anyones calls...

well thats why I say keep the program, but have more oversight.

Im just saying id be more upset if someone was listening to the conversations that take place inside my home, then on the telephones.

I expect more privacy in my home, I also expect privacy on the phone, but im ok with people listening in on my calls if its for the greater good......because I actually don't expect them to listen to my calls because they shouldn't have a reason too....

but if my name comes up and there is a red flag, then that means its working and by all means listen in.

Bad shit is still going to happen, but if it saves one life to me its worth it.

[Ralphie]

and from my readings of the 4th amendment, phone calls don't seem to be the point of that amendment.

Search and seizure. They are not searching your home, or seizing any property, merely listenng in on a phone convo....that they may or may not have probable cause for.

It's a slippery slope but we won't know for sure anyway.

[8ball]

I remember some time ago I made a comment about echelon and how we are being monitored and half of the frequent members on this forum went ape shit and thought I was retarded blahblah blah.... Well I knew about that 6-7 years ago. There is way more shit going on NOW than back then but since half the people cant handle the truth (literally you would mentally fold) & the other half wont accept it. And a sll percentof that know whats going on but like to play by the "rules" I decided fuck every one. One day youll see what denying or supporting this type of shit will do

[LadyG]

There where no phones when the 4th amendment was written. Just like no drones, or machine guns. Or women's rights.

Dude. If giving away your first amendment right to free speech is ok with you, then nothing any of us say is going to make a difference.
Being able to use , Bomb, Prez, Murica, and Jihad in the same sentence without a little alarm going off in an algorithm and then your personal emails, phone calls, web interactions, everything will be monitored for a period of time afterwords.
Will this get me in trouble with the cops- if say, I was a drug dealer AND saying these things?
Prob not. But that is because drug dealing is not a matter of national security.
If I was a intn'l cartel boss- maybe.

But then again, that is where the line is NOW. Not where it could be in 10+ years. Hell 5+ the way were going...

[Ralphie]

LOL.

What's going to happen 8ball!?

It's going to turn into the matrix BWHAAHAHAHAA

You fucking guys kill me.

Should start a fucking stand up act.

[Ralphie]

In 5 years we will be exactly where we are today.

Maybe a little safer, most likely not, but you make it sound like we're going to be in prison camps as they peel away our rights and enslave us.

Stop watching tv and go outside and play.

It doesn't work that way.