Like loaded questions much? Seriously? That question is beneath me. But I'll answer it anyway. The answer is 'yes.' I have a right to know what MY government is doing in MY name if I, or any other citizen, asks. There's a clause in the Constitution call 'Redress of Grievances' - and though courts ignore it, it's in there, and for a reason. By the way, here's what you, and others, are not getting. 'Terrorism' - whatever that means - has been going on for a long time. It's no more than a scary word for 'murder' that the government trots out to make you think that that sacrificing rights in order to combat it is somehow patriotic or, even more disturbing, necessary. It isn't. Ultimately, it becomes the justification for everything from invading countries that have nothing to do with attacks on this country to putting citizens of this country under heightened scrutiny, to arming police departments to the point that they look more like military occupiers than police. The reality is most 'terrorism' is homegrown and is nothing more than asshats trying to kill people for some nebulous 'political' purpose. To make a statement. The reality is sometimes freedom is messy, and will be abused by some assholes. If your solution is to legislate and try to protect against the lowest common denominator, go with God, many societies on the face of this planet have done just that only to find it doesn't work. For me? Give me my privacy and I expect the government to follow the rules and restrictions laid down for it. If the government can't do that and do their job, then they no longer should be my government.
Somewhat relevant: LAS VEGAS (AP) - A federal judge says the FBI violated the rights of a wealthy Malaysian businessman when agents posed as Internet repairmen to get into his Las Vegas suite during the World Cup soccer tournament last summer. A lawyer for Wei Seng "Paul" Phua calls the Friday ruling by U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon a victory for freedom. The attorney, David Chesnoff, said authorities can't break something inside a person's home then pose as repairmen to get inside. http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/2883...ted-rights-of-vegas-hotel-guest#ixzz3XbXvwTeZ
I'm going by the definition of terrorism of things like September 11th, World Trade Center Bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing. The Government doesn't have to trot that out as something to "scare me" into allowing them to pass all sorts of laws. The terrorists do that well enough. I'm not disagreeing with the "THIS IS BAD" crowd, I just actually want to have a conversation about it as opposed to shouting "This is wrong! I'm awesome! Woot!" and moving on. The discussion needs to shift to how far the Government can go to protect the citizens (in some cases sometimes themselves) as opposed to them not being able to do anything, then not providing any protection. Let me say that I'm way more afraid of a terrorist attack happening at something like the Chicago Marathon, Taste of Chicago or any major event in the third largest city in the country over the Government mapping all the data out and doing nothing against non-People of Interest. It may not be a concern to those in Bumblefuck, [insert country] but to me it's a real concern. I was just standing outside the Sears Tower and the experience of looking up at it has shifted from the previous awe "It's the tallest building in the world bitches!" to "Holy fuck, that thing would be the primary terrorist target in Chicago." I think my previous statement of the perceived loss of control and shattered perception of invulnerability might be in the zeitgeist. There is obviously a contingent of people who thought things were one way, but are freaking the fuck out they're another. Is this what happens if people thought they really never had the control they thought they did? I actually understand the feeling. It has nothing to do with drinking any kool-aid, absorbing propaganda or any of that "OBEY THE GOVERNMENT" shit. When I was younger I thought since I grew up in a upper middle class family, spoke well and dressed well that I was impervious to being on the wrong end of racism. I didn't wear Air Force Ones, have my jeans below my ass or hangout with "thugs". It was a fucking shock to me when certain situations made it clear: "Nope, guess what, you're still black. Shit is still going to happen to you regardless of who you actually are". I feel like this Snowden/NSA thing is everyone "finding out they're black". When the news came out, I wasn't surprised or shocked at all. I thought "Of course they are, I just hope (not believe) they're using it for the right reasons." There wasn't a major shattering of expectations, perceptions or faith. Also, there was minimal outrage when this stuff came out earlier and the beginnings of this stuff was targeted to brown people. Also, overall we'll never have the entire picture to accurately weigh the pros and the cons. "No one has stated one reason why this is a good thing"...just because no one on this board knows does not mean those reasons do not exist. Unless we have any CIA/Homeland Security/Government Officials on the board. Also, is it possible at all that the Government doesn't see this information as a form of power to wield over the everyday citizen? Could it be possible that it's another tool to make sure that they're getting the people who can threaten their tax paying public? If there is anything the Government is focused on, it's keeping us fat, happy to keep paying taxes, keep re-electing and quiet.
The war on terror is a psychological one that the terrorists have won long, long ago. Want to know why a plane won't be hijacked and flown into a building? Because the passengers have learned their lessons and won't be sheep any more... they will fuck that person up, not sit back and rely on the government to protect them. It's not because of some multi-billion dollar data snarfer that is listening in on your phone calls and tracking your every move. The plane that flew into the mountains a couple weeks ago? You can thank the "anti-terrorist door lock" measures for that one. And blame the fucking pilot with a history of mental illness, and the process that allowed him to be a pilot after a long history of suicidal thoughts. More people die as a result of cancer, or drunk driving, or any number of other things than terrorism... and yet it's the rallying cry to take away your freedom. Or Ebola. The next big threat that will wipe out America! Spoiler: MEME ALERT Oh my God the sky is falling! Terrorism is not a valid reason for you to let your rights be trampled on, it's an emotional swaying of opinion... like when they say, "protect the children". They're using that to construct a specious argument that if you don't pass that measure that fucks over your privacy, you must want to rape children. Preposterous, and too many voters are too fucking stupid to see how blatantly and easily they are being manipulated. Bunch of fucking sheep. Bah. Get of my virtual lawn.
Of course the government should be able to keep some things classified, but allowing them to do that requires trust. When shit like this goes down, it seems pretty hard to trust them. (And by "some things" I don't mean across-the-board collection of private data of its citizens.) Again, regardless of what you think of data collection/surveillance, they sent up the entire program - which is questionably legal/constitutional at best - behind closed doors, without asking anyone. Governments should not be allowed to do things like that, it's ridiculous.
Hell, go look at the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp) that is being "fastracked" through to the benefit of the corporations that own your fucking government. "Fastrack" is a term that might as well mean, "let's do this in secret because everyone will hate it and we don't want them to know about it until they can't do anything about it". Where's the accountability in that?
Is there a government for the US government to model their accountability policies after? Is there an example to work towards?
How about they just follow their own laws and constitution? I don't understand how people talk about this whole thing as if it's just a legitimate program the government thought they would try out. It's not, they overstepped what are supposed to be their boundaries, and lied about it. Whether or not you think they should have access to all private data, can we not agree that they shouldn't be allowed to make those decisions on their own?
For me, this is the gist of the argument. The constitution exists and was written the way it was for a reason. Doesn't that make the NSA itself a "general warrant"? The fact that we are having a debate arguing whether or not it's a big deal that the government is doing this is almost as mind blowing as the fact that practically every politician in Washington apparently has decided that the Constitution, which they swore an oath to uphold, doesn't matter. That 's where my visceral "this is just wrong" reaction comes from. It's not that they are doing what they are doing. It's that they are doing what they are doing and so many don't care. It's all upside down and it has been for a very long time. It was never meant for the government to be this over reaching and powerful.
Only bringing this thread back up because there has been a massive update to the Patriot Act. The biggest thing being for "The USA Freedom Act will ultimately end the bulk collection of millions of Americans' phone records" and "The government will need a targeted warrant to obtain any phone metadata from phone companies" http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/02/politics/senate-usa-freedom-act-vote-patriot-act-nsa/index.html Also, something very interesting to consider, in regards to the whole "The government needs to tell everyone what they're doing, how, and when" Can't say this is anything more than a coincidence, but it leans towards that concept that terrorist (foreign or domestic) are going to take advantage of any public information out there. CNN comes out yesterday reporting the TSA has a 95% failure rate when it comes to detecting explosives or weapons. The very next day, there are reports of at least 5 bomb threats against major airliners. Now the threats weren't credible and the planes were safe, but it could point to something here.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/fb...rveillance-aircraft-over-us-cities/ar-BBkywnm "Allen added that the FBI's planes "are not equipped, designed or used for bulk collection activities or mass surveillance."" Not yet anyways. *throws phone in the river and puts on tin foil hat*
Sigh. A review of history indicates that there is no solution to lone madman. There never has been, there never will be. Some of the most totalitarian regimes on Earth have tried. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Rome (under Caesar and later Caesars), Ottoman Empire, Austro Hungarian Empire, Soviet Union, China, El Salvador, Nicaragua. All these countries tried to tamp down on the rights and freedoms of their citizens and operate in relative secrecy. Yet, all faced terrorist incidents. You will never be able to prevent all potential incidents no matter how secretive you are. What you can prevent though, is the abuse of freedoms by those in power that are supposedly working at our behest. Shining the light of day on the activities of nebulous agencies like the NSA is not only good, it is the duty of anyone that actually gives a shit about freedom. I'm not talking about the 'Chicken Fried, NASCAR lovin', hatin' the foreigners, Bible Thumping, Blowing Shit Up, Unquestioning of our Government' brand of 'freedom' that passes for actual freedom. I'm talking about the ability to live your life the way you want, largely free from government interference. 9/11 killed approximately 3,000 people. There is no doubt that this was a tragedy. Has it been worth the loss of American soldiers post 9/11? Especially considering that neither Iraq or Afghanistan institutionally had anything to do with it? You know who did? Saudi Arabia. Where was that war? The reality is the American public has been duped into believing that spending more on defense than every other voluntary expenditure combined, and more than the next highest 12 countries combined (check the latest CBO analysis) passes for security. It doesn't. Furthermore, the change in media - and I don't mean just Fox - all stations are owned by huge corporations that have direct and indirect ties to defense contractors. We're talking trillions of dollars a year. Trillions of dollars that are justified by scaring you, the general public, that somehow our very way of life is threatened by exposing what our government does in our names. But let me ask you this: if our existence is so fragile as a nation that we can't publicly discuss what our government does in our names, is it a society worth protecting? My answer is no, it is not. Better to have real actual freedom than pretend security. I know you can have one, I know you can't have the other.
Have you ever heard of the FBI's letter to Martin Luther King, urging him to kill himself? What reason is necessary beyond "the right to control your personal information is as obvious as your right to control your physical body"? What threshold of "illegal" are you deeming acceptable? Odds are that unknowingly you've committed at least one crime this week. Even if you've actually managed to avoid committing any crime, are you sure that there's nothing in your activity that could potentially be similar to what criminals do? I'm part of a community emergency response team, the stuff I carry in my bag could be construed to be burglary tools if a cop felt like being a dick. Better hope you don't like using cash, because that could be construed as criminal activity. Feinstein, you're thinking of Diane Feinstein. IIRC, she gets failing grades from both the NRA and ACLU, which is kind of impressive. Regarding the TSA's "security": am I alone in being pretty much fine with anything that isn't explosive being brought on board? I think what is at stake is now well-understood, and I think most explosive compounds are detectable by dogs or mass spectrometers.