Obama speaks about NSA surveillance

[NYC17]

Of course. It's just many people don't have the technical know-how to know exactly how they get their data and assume the government is taking it from the people.

Also, 2006 called. They want their news back.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is the difference between the democrats and republicans.

If 911 happens when republicans run Washington, they create the Patriot Act which includes a sunset clause that must be voted on by congress to renew it from time to time. Democrats eventually attack the Patriot Act as an infringement upon liberty.

If 911 happens when democrats run Washington, they create the Patriot Act with no sunset clause.

"If this scenario that didn't happen, happened, this thing I say would have happened is irrefutable because I say so".

Compelling.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

The public is schizophrenic. We want to be secure, and we yell when bombings happen, yet we are opposed to ANYTHING that takes even a little freedom away. Look at the TSA (ignoring the outliers of clear abuse). Pat downs : MAH FREEDOMS scanning machine : MAH FREEDOMS Dogs: MAH ALLERGIES

the gov't just cant win at all.

No they can't but they should try harder. I mean I'm not saying doom is upon us but really both sides are to blame (Crazy people in the public going crazy) and government crazies acting crazy.


Still, I wouldn't be surprised if the crazies were all secretly Old God Tentacles

[ringpriest]

Al Gore wouldn't have freaked the hell out like Captain Texas did.

I'm note so sure Al Gore would have done much better... I remember during the Yugoslav War, he was in the middle of a live TV interview when the news came that the Russians had siezed the Pristina Airport, and he seemed pretty close to losing it then. (Alas, that was back in the days before Youtube, and I can't seem to find video of the interview on the 'Net.)

[Greeneggplant]

it's all bullshit.

what good is a national secretive agency, if they disclose what and what they don't do, to the general public.

[Xisa]

So in other words: "We broke the law, we KNOW we broke the law, but the guy that made us obey the law isn't a Patriot".

Got it. Huzzah Double-speak!

[Powerogue]

Call me optimistic, but the website in particular sounds like a good move towards transparency. Snowden acted because they were spying on citizens without their consent or knowledge. At the least, we can strike out the last word of that sentence.

Though it does bring to question what use a surveillance of the american people has when they know about it.

On citizen's rights vs practicality, they should definitely swerve to the former as a publicity stunt, and that seems to be what they're doing.

[Elegiac]

So in other words: "We broke the law, we KNOW we broke the law, but the guy that made us obey the law isn't a Patriot".

Got it. Huzzah Double-speak!

What law did they break?

[Deleted]

Notice How he didnt say that Snowdon was a traitor though.

[Ryuukon]

Kind of funny how all the strict constitutionalists came out of the woodwork when Obama got elected.

We were already out, we just didn't get the kind of press that the bickering and whining democrats and republicans got. Just look at the most popular news outlets in the US. One is vehemently republican (and bat shit crazy to boot), and the other is die hard democrat (though not quite as bat shit crazy).

Is there any surprise that constitutionalists never got much air time? Aside from the Reps and Dems calling us out on things that they didn't have an answer for, just telling us to "shut up and support our troops".

[Deleted]

I get the feeling that NSA will move it's operations to another country and then claim that they got rid of the surveillance in America.

2007 Obama is no more. 2013 Obama is a petty dictator.

Well, at least he has changed his views on privacy completely.

[ringpriest]

What law did they break?

The Patriot Act? According it it's author, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner,

“I do not believe the released FISA order is consistent with the requirement of the Patriot Act,” Sensenbrenner wrote. “How could the phone records of so many innocent Americans be relevant to an authorized investigation as required by the Act?”

That's leaving aside the blatant Fourth Amendment violations, and many privacy laws as well.

[Total Crica]

how asinine - the more we make public WHAT we are monitoring, the more the bad guys know what to avoid so they DON'T get monitored by us... - im surrounded by idiots - if you have nothing to hide, why the heck you care who reads what you say?

[Sole-Warrior]

how asinine - the more we make public WHAT we are monitoring, the more the bad guys know what to avoid so they DON'T get monitored by us... - im surrounded by idiots - if you have nothing to hide, why the heck you care who reads what you say?

I care about my privacy. Same reason you do not want your neighbor reading your email or text massages. Government officials are to me strangers, and unless they have a warrant for me, I would feel violated if they spied in on me. For me personally meta data doesn't bother me that much. But just stay away from the content of my private internet activities. As for the NSA program, so far no one has been able to link a terrorist who has been stopped by NSA surveillance program, traditional detective work has been far more effective as a counter-terrorism method.

also you are acting like you have ABSOLUTE TRUST in the fucking government, but how can you be so sure they are perfect?
It turns our they are targeting people with political or philosophical differences with the government.

"A security training test created by a Defense Department agency warns federal workers that they should consider the hypothetical Indian-American woman ["Hema"] a “high threat” because she frequently visits family abroad, has money troubles and “speaks openly of unhappiness with U.S. foreign policy.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/07/pent...icy/singleton/

- - - Updated - - -

The Patriot Act? According it it's author, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner,


That's leaving aside the blatant Fourth Amendment violations, and many privacy laws as well.

215 section of the patriot act ; )

[prwraith]

My problem is that if you want to keep your information private, you have to live like a stone age man /. No internet, no cell phones, nothing moved electrically. All paid in cash and notes hand written.

That's a problem that the only way to have even a modicum of privacy is to regress your societal standards. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.

[lavafoxx]

My problem is that if you want to keep your information private, you have to live like a stone age man /. No internet, no cell phones, nothing moved electrically. All paid in cash and notes hand written.

That's a problem that the only way to have even a modicum of privacy is to regress your societal standards. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.

So, whats the problem with doing this thing you speak of?

[Duronos]

Going to clear this up again... The NSA (and this specific program) have been around since the 90's at least and most likely earlier. I do personally know for a fact that the surveillance program has been around since the 90's.

[prwraith]

So, whats the problem with doing this thing you speak of?

You don't see a problem with regressing society?

[lavafoxx]

You don't see a problem with regressing society?

You're assuming that there IS a "forward" or "backwards" for a society to actually go.

Change doesn't work that way friend.

[cmennare]

Kind of funny how all the strict constitutionalists came out of the woodwork when Obama got elected.

Many of us have been talking about this for years. The problem that we have is the fact that we are tired of either being lied to by both parties or marginalized by the media. The GOP have promised the constitutionalists time and time again that things would be different, and like naïve idiots we listened. The Democrats promised more individual liberties like our Constitution promises, the Patriot Act is still in force and now the NSA scandal. There needs to be a serious over haul of the political process here in the USA, if not then nothing will ever change. A definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

[prwraith]

You're assuming that there IS a "forward" or "backwards" for a society to actually go.

Change doesn't work that way friend.

That's silly, any historian would argue a progressive trend in society across several fronts. Changing, as you put it, to a set of values from the past, is inherently moving backwards.

I don't at all think it's acceptable that if we want privacy we have to do that. We should be allocated privacy in equal measures with security. To much of one or the other causes issues imo.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem that we have is the fact that we are tired of either being lied to by both parties or marginalized by the media.

I'll agree with that, we need a major overhaul in election mechanics. Starting with the electoral college. Ending with the way president potentiates are presented to society.

As it stands now, if it's a republican candidate I just assume he's full of shit. If it's a democrat candidate, I also assume he's full of shit