Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   The NSA could have avoided controversy simply by telling you it was recording all your communications   (theguardian.com) divider line 18
    More: Unlikely, NSA, declassification, data collection, mass surveillance, intelligence, FISA Court  
•       •       •

534 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Feb 2014 at 12:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



18 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-18 01:17:46 PM  
Might be true.  If it was widely known, would many of those now shocked simply shrug and say "of course, they told us this years ago to fight terror".  It's amazing (and sad sometimes) how much the average person will tolerate if he/she believes that everyone else is ok with it.
 
2014-02-18 01:20:59 PM  

syberpud: Might be true.  If it was widely known, would many of those now shocked simply shrug and say "of course, they told us this years ago to fight terror".  It's amazing (and sad sometimes) how much the average person will tolerate if he/she believes that everyone else is ok with it.


You mean like getting groped at the airport?
Yeah, no. Not OK with it.
Never was.
Drew the line and know what?
Smarter, more patriotic and braver folks over here.
 
2014-02-18 01:32:23 PM  
My favorite bit is where he insists that he didn't lie to Congress because he wasn't thinking about phone records being collected when he lied, and that because he believes it wasn't a lie, it wasn't a lie - the only person who could determine it was a lie, after all, is him.

He gives Bill Clinton a run for his money in terms of his rhetoric. Only a seasoned liar with a narcissistic personality would try to come up with a crazy, convoluted explanation about what a lie really is to lie his way out of a lie in which he was caught red-handed.

/Liar.
 
2014-02-18 02:04:04 PM  
I'm still mad that they're fooking up parts of their own data collection program so badly.  Oh great, so they're really only collecting phone metadata from legitimate businesses and boomers over 50 who refuse to get cells.
 
2014-02-18 02:56:13 PM  
So it would NOT have aided "the enemy" to disclose the existence of the program(s)? So Snowden is totally in the clear, right?
 
2014-02-18 03:26:36 PM  

nijika: I'm still mad that they're fooking up parts of their own data collection program so badly.  Oh great, so they're really only collecting phone metadata from legitimate businesses and boomers over 50 who refuse to get cells.


Call me skeptical.

First of all, the cell system uses much the same infrastructure as wired phones.  They might be missing calls from phone-to-phone on the same cell site, or close ones, but anything cell call that goes any distance is going to go through the same infrastructure as landline calls.

Secondly, CALEA states the providers have to maintain and store the metadata for government use.  All they really had to do is *ASK* for it, all secret-like, and either the providers would give it, or not, but in any case they'd be forbidden from publicly mentioning it.
 
2014-02-18 03:27:46 PM  

jigger: So it would NOT have aided "the enemy" to disclose the existence of the program(s)? So Snowden is totally in the clear, right?


When you are the one being monitored, you are the enemy.

Take it from someone who used to do the monitoring.

/Ex-SIGINT weenie.
 
2014-02-18 04:30:03 PM  
Yeah, because spying on foreign trade and wikileaks supporters is definitely preventing terrorism.

I'm not even sure either of the two douchebags they run in 2016 are going to pretend to be anti-NSA, even after all these new revelations. Obama spouted constitutional rhetoric and did a complete 180 once in office, they probably won't even bother next time. They're trying to ease us in.

Not that I'm a defeatist. I think we can make more than enough noise before the elections come around again.
 
2014-02-18 04:32:56 PM  
Meh, I don't do anything wrong. They can listen all day if they want.
 
2014-02-18 04:39:54 PM  
So in spite of everyone involved asking "was that wrong should I not have done that" nobody has offered to change it and claim it's for the courts to decide.
 
2014-02-18 05:06:29 PM  

OregonVet: Meh, I don't do anything wrong. They can listen all day if they want.


So you don't have curtains or blinds? Privacy has more value than you'd give it. What if a future administration similar to Nixon gets a hold of this tech? Or the game changes and suddenly you're a target? Not only that, but it's been shown to not be effective at stopping terrorism and is actually used as a tool of economic espionage.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/25907502
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/us/eavesdropping-ensnared-american -l aw-firm.html?_r=0

And if the nature of the game changes:  http://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metadata-to-fin d -paul-revere/
Keep in mind, that's only metadata. We now know they have a helluva lot more than that at their disposal. These are devices that could, in the wrong hands, squash dissent as it appears.

If you still don't care, that's fine. Apathy isn't exactly uncommon in the States.
 
2014-02-18 06:21:57 PM  
Didn't they do exactly that when the PATRIOT Act was passed?

The only thing that suprised me when all of this was "leaked" were how many people were suprised this was happening.

This has been happening for over a decade, half of you just didn't care when it was a Republican in the WH.
 
2014-02-18 06:42:15 PM  
To be fair, the moment between "You're a tinfoil hat paranoid for even mentioning $X" and "You must have been living under a rock, we've known $X for years" might be one of the few things in this universe that beats the speed of light.

(They thought neutrinos for a while, too, but I guess that was caused by a loose fiber optic cable during testing.)
 
2014-02-18 07:05:11 PM  
They told me they were gonna fingerbang me at the airport, and not even let me have gatorade afterwards... but I'm still not happy about it.
 
2014-02-18 07:10:48 PM  
I've widely known it since at least 1995, and never been okay with any of it. However, being a realist, I keep my online footprint as small as possible and encrypt everything else.

Much as I lock my doors and windows when I leave the house, instead of crying about how unfair is is that there are burglars.
 
2014-02-18 07:35:36 PM  

SpacePirate: Yeah, because spying on foreign trade and wikileaks supporters is definitely preventing terrorism.


I know that since 9/11 we've been training ourselves to equate "national security" with "counter-terrorism", but they are not, in fact, precisely synonymous. That's not to say you should suddenly be okay with everything they're doing, just keep in mind that terrorism isn't their only mission area.
 
2014-02-18 07:47:22 PM  

Gyrfalcon: I've widely known it since at least 1995, and never been okay with any of it. However, being a realist, I keep my online footprint as small as possible and encrypt everything else.

Much as I lock my doors and windows when I leave the house, instead of crying about how unfair is is that there are burglars.


I guess the difference is, these are burglars with badges. They consider it their government job to burgle everyone.
 
2014-02-18 08:59:06 PM  

Evil High Priest: Gyrfalcon: I've widely known it since at least 1995, and never been okay with any of it. However, being a realist, I keep my online footprint as small as possible and encrypt everything else.

Much as I lock my doors and windows when I leave the house, instead of crying about how unfair is is that there are burglars.

I guess the difference is, these are burglars with badges. They consider it their government job to burgle everyone.


And the burglar is at least upfront about his intentions. He doesn't put on a show about maybe not robbing you if you vote for him, then rob you blind.

incendi: SpacePirate: Yeah, because spying on foreign trade and wikileaks supporters is definitely preventing terrorism.


I know that since 9/11 we've been training ourselves to equate "national security" with "counter-terrorism", but they are not, in fact, precisely synonymous. That's not to say you should suddenly be okay with everything they're doing, just keep in mind that terrorism isn't their only mission area.


Very true. Protecting the financial interests of the corporate globalists, whom fund their campaigns, through economic espionage could certainly be viewed as National Security. 

/'Merica
 
Displayed 18 of 18 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report