RE: America is not the first surveillance state

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: America is not the first surveillance state

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: America is not the first surveillance state

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 4:53:38 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Obama was 100% correct, you cant have both, as idyllic as it sounds.

I would live with the body count in exchange for freedom. This is not news, is it? Yes, even if that body count includes my wife & children I'd be content with that price tag.

You can find the cost of freedom buried in the ground
-- CSN&R

quote:

ORIGINAL: VincentML
I call fallacy on the notion of an Orwellian world. You are drinking the kool aide, DS. There is nothing Orwellian or illegal or unconstitutional about the NSA data base. Nor will there be until someone shows the harm done to them in a court of Law.

I understand, Vincent, that you would back the government (or at least Obama) pretty much no matter what he did. But taking that statement apart:

Orwellian: This is undeniable. You'd have to be blind not to at least see parallels. There very definitely IS something Orwellian.
Illegal: You are correct. When you write the laws then nothing you do is illegal. As has been noted, nothing Adolf Hitler did was illegal either.
Unconstitutional: Again, you are correct. The Supreme court makes that decision. The supreme court basically saying that unless you know all about the SECRET surveillance programs then you can't bring a case. Got it. The traditional process that happens in regularly law is null & void because all this evidence is excluded suppressed due to "national security". In point of fact none of this "evidence" will ever see the inside of a court room. It will never be introduced in a criminal trial. There is no mechanism to challenge it. The exclusionary rule only works if there is a criminal trial from which to exclude it.

So what we have is a perfectly legal and constitutional Orwellian government that spans all three branches.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 21

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 4:57:47 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

So far, only Vincent gets it.

People post more information about themselves than the NSA or GCHQ could ever hope to store. Shops track your everymove because on free internet sites "YOU" are the product. Every credit card transaction, cash transfer ect is logged both with the stores you shop at and the banks you use. Anyone know how big a computer the NSA would need to check every single email sent daily, line by line, word by word ?

Anyone who thinks any of this wasnt done under Bush, needs a head shake. As I recall, the Republican voice was all for the renewal of this very act, including on this very forum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#Title_I:_Enhancing_Domestic_Security_against_Terrorism

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 22

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 5:01:49 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

"I would live with the body count in exchange for freedom. This is not news, is it? Yes, even if that body count includes my wife & children I'd be content with that price tag."

An honest reply Jeff, we will have to differ. I consider saving lives worth what amounts to a minute, if any, loss of freedom.

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 23

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 5:54:03 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
An honest reply Jeff, we will have to differ. I consider saving lives worth what amounts to a minute, if any, loss of freedom.

Oh... so would I. The difference is in how you and I are perceiving this. When you say something like, "They got 90 days of call records from one phone company" it isn't that bad. When you say, "Oh.. it was ALL the phone companies for ALL US citizens" it's getting a bit more concerning but we're still only talking about phone records not the phone calls. But a big data person would already be salivating at that... the average public sees it as "minute". But now we start adding stuff in... all the email and pretty much anything that is sent over the internet unencrypted. At this point we're not talking about any loss of freedom but we are talking about a complete loss of privacy. They would know everything... EVERYTHING.

Now... just add in one bad apple president. For instance, if you knew EVERYTHING about every single person in the US do you think you could win a bid for president? Even if I swallow my disbelief and decide Obama is a good guy this is the legacy we are handing our children. It is at BEST a ticking time bomb and when it goes off the results might be much more harmful than measly little global warming (at least from a human perspective). Police states are kinda ugly and one this powerful scares the crap out of me.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 24

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 6:01:47 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
All this fuckin' NSA surveillance really helped those folks in Boston. Yep, the answer is our safety because big brother loves us.
Sorry, that shit doesn't even pass the giggle test.

So, what do you propose? Withdraw all efforts to defend the people and the nation so your ears will not be offended?

So, the only two options are an Orwellian world, or no effort to defend the people/nation?

I call fallacy of the false dilemma.

I call fallacy on the notion of an Orwellian world. You are drinking the kool aide, DS. There is nothing Orwellian or illegal or unconstitutional about the NSA data base. Nor will there be until someone shows the harm done to them in a court of Law.

heh heh

its a trespass on the case.

Credit card transactions are private contracts and information being passed between 2 people with the expectation of privacy is not consent for the government to eaves drop or spy on its content any more than peeking into your window and watching you fuck. People did not grant to the government the authority to use the facilitator of conveyance be it a man or a wire to spy.

The injury is a trespass.

You are the one drinking the koolaide

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to vincentML)

Post #: 25

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 6:03:51 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

I understand, Vincent, that you would back the government (or at least Obama) pretty much no matter what he did.

That parenthetical caught my eye.

As I sort out my thinking on this (not that anyone's waiting up nights for me to do so), one question that arises is, "How would I feel if a Romney Administration were doing this? Or a Ryan? Or, God help us, Palin?"

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to JeffBC)

Post #: 26

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 6:04:53 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
An honest reply Jeff, we will have to differ. I consider saving lives worth what amounts to a minute, if any, loss of freedom.

why dont you all give me the legal definition of "freedom" and lets start there.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 27

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 7:01:29 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

FR

An interesting look back:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/06/nsa_prism_program_can_we_trust_the_government_with_our_secrets_no.html?wpisrc=flyouts

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Real0ne)

Post #: 28

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 7:17:23 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

in wisconsin we neednt go any furthger than than statute number 001

1.01 State sovereignty and jurisdiction.

The sovereignty and jurisdiction of this state extend to all places within the boundaries declared in article II of the constitution, subject only to such rights of jurisdiction as have been or shall be acquired by the United States over any places therein; and the governor, and all subordinate officers of the state, shall maintain and defend its sovereignty and jurisdiction.

they are chartered to protect the "sovereignty" NOT THE FUCKING INHABITANTS within the boundaries of the state.

Sovereignty is a "status", the "state" of being sovereign "overlord".

Begs the question just WHO we the people are?

The next question is, if they are chartered to protect the state then how does that buck up against the right to "free" speech, how about "exercise" of religion? Oh wait I forgot we are only "allowed" to pray, not exercise our religion as the constitution says.

seems since they are chartered to protect the state not us, that they could claim literally anything as a threat that does not agree with whatever they ram through the legislature. technically, should some judge want to make a narrow construction of the issue

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 6/10/2013 7:22:50 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to dcnovice)

Post #: 29

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 7:18:24 PM

DesideriScuri

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
So far, only Vincent gets it.
People post more information about themselves than the NSA or GCHQ could ever hope to store. Shops track your everymove because on free internet sites "YOU" are the product. Every credit card transaction, cash transfer ect is logged both with the stores you shop at and the banks you use. Anyone know how big a computer the NSA would need to check every single email sent daily, line by line, word by word ?
Anyone who thinks any of this wasnt done under Bush, needs a head shake. As I recall, the Republican voice was all for the renewal of this very act, including on this very forum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#Title_I:_Enhancing_Domestic_Security_against_Terrorism

The Patriot Act (where this current shit started) was passed with nearly all Republicans voting in favor, and had a lot of Democrats voting in favor, too. The original act had a sunset date, but has been extended by both parties each time, and has been extended by chambers run by both parties (obviously not at the same time) and has been signed by Bush and by Obama (Presidents of both parties).

It wasn't just the Republicans supporting this shit, is what I'm getting at.

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 30

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 7:25:18 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

sort of like the automatic standing army vote, and the need to be at war to impasse the constitutional roadblocks set into place. etc etc etc

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

Post #: 31

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/10/2013 10:49:25 PM

Marini

Posts: 3629
Joined: 2/14/2010
Status: offline

Interesting thread Jeff, I am somewhere in the middle on this topic.

There is so much information that companies and even the common person can obtain about other people by only knowing a person's first and last name.
If you know someone's address and know their social security number or their driver's license, you can obtain more information than most of us are comfortable with.

It's the age we are living in.
Maybe it's the price we all invariably pay, for living with all this "modern tecnology".
Maybe once the horse is out of the barn, it's almost impossible to put the horse back in the barn.

**Don't get me wrong, I have never trusted "the man", nor do I necessarily like or approve of "surveillance states/police states".

I don't feel like I totally comprehend the magnitude nor the real impact on most people lives.

As usual, more questions than answers here.

At the end of the day, what can most of us really do to change anything about "surveillance states"?

I hate to say this, but I would think the trend is moving towards a lot MORE and increased surveillance---> and I don't see anyway to stop the trend.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

< Message edited by Marini -- 6/10/2013 11:14:51 PM >

_____________________________

As always, To EACH their Own.
"And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. "
Nelson Mandela
Life-long Democrat, not happy at all with Democratic Party.
NOT a Republican/Moderate and free agent

(in reply to JeffBC)

Post #: 32

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 12:29:44 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

I agree Marini. The question of "what to do" when a powerful government goes bad is vexing. What I try to do is educate people. In this case my view is less tinfoil hat and more geek. It's understanding the possibilities of this surveillance which turns it from minute to sinister. From there I don't know. It's not like either party is going to slow down or stop this.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Marini)

Post #: 33

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 4:33:49 AM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
An honest reply Jeff, we will have to differ. I consider saving lives worth what amounts to a minute, if any, loss of freedom.

why dont you all give me the legal definition of "freedom" and lets start there.

Because youre an arsehole, basically. Use search and see just how much info most people on here have given you, which then gets spun and twisted in your reply.

When you feel like an honest debate give me a call.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Post #: 34

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 4:42:24 AM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

Jeff I fully get the mission creep, thats why you need a strong legal system to keep the powers that be in check. But just because I am okay with the collection of some data, it doesnt follow that I am in favour of everything being kept. Parliament also has an oversight committee who look at this kind of issue. GCHQ are due to give a report to this committee today, I will post it later if I remember.

This has also caused a big fuss in the UK, due to the closeness between your NSA and our GCHQ. Here is a link on the latest from our side of the pond.

http://news.sky.com/story/1101774/hague-gchq-prism-snooping-claims-baseless

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 35

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 5:10:30 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

no because you aint got the balls to state your definition of freedom because you know damn well I will slap you long side the hayd with official legal definitions which are not even in the same universe as the shit presumptions you use.

hey but you sound really good

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 36

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 5:14:46 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Jeff I fully get the mission creep, thats why you need a strong legal system to keep the powers that be in check. But just because I am okay with the collection of some data, it doesnt follow that I am in favour of everything being kept. Parliament also has an oversight committee who look at this kind of issue. GCHQ are due to give a report to this committee today, I will post it later if I remember.

This has also caused a big fuss in the UK, due to the closeness between your NSA and our GCHQ. Here is a link on the latest from our side of the pond.

http://news.sky.com/story/1101774/hague-gchq-prism-snooping-claims-baseless

The strength of the legal system is a nonsolution horseshit and meaningless when criminals run it.

mission creep is why every case needs to have a mandatory fully empowered 12 man jury more optional and every damn bill, act et al be voted upon by the people directly not some asswipe politician.

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 6/11/2013 5:15:28 AM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 37

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 6:13:06 AM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

I rest my case M`lud.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Post #: 38

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 8:37:12 AM

vincentML

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
So far, only Vincent gets it.
People post more information about themselves than the NSA or GCHQ could ever hope to store. Shops track your everymove because on free internet sites "YOU" are the product. Every credit card transaction, cash transfer ect is logged both with the stores you shop at and the banks you use. Anyone know how big a computer the NSA would need to check every single email sent daily, line by line, word by word ?
Anyone who thinks any of this wasnt done under Bush, needs a head shake. As I recall, the Republican voice was all for the renewal of this very act, including on this very forum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#Title_I:_Enhancing_Domestic_Security_against_Terrorism

The Patriot Act (where this current shit started) was passed with nearly all Republicans voting in favor, and had a lot of Democrats voting in favor, too. The original act had a sunset date, but has been extended by both parties each time, and has been extended by chambers run by both parties (obviously not at the same time) and has been signed by Bush and by Obama (Presidents of both parties).

It wasn't just the Republicans supporting this shit, is what I'm getting at.

Well okay, DS. I guess they feel it justified in the face of an ongoing albeit seemingly diminshing threat. . . . until the next big event. What pisses me off is the kerfluffle and feined outrage over a program we all knew was there and the small government guys like Rand Paul making political hay over it for their own ideological and political benefit, using the paranoia of survivalists and the like advancing their anti government agenda. These Luddites need to come into the realities of the 21st C where the world is connected by technology, loose borders, and easy to get ammunition. This aint Kansas anymore, Toto. Those small town dreams and idyllic days of preindustrial America are long gone. We are all connected. Wired. Irreversibly.

We are 25% of the world economy, we control the trade routes of the seas with a mighty armada of eleven carrier task forces, and we have many points of contact with the rest of the world. We can't live in isolation in the backwater counties of our agrarian dreams. People elsewhere are bound to get pissed at us and come after us to do us harm because rightly or wrongly they blame us for their own circumstances, which is a whole other issue. The issue here is and we touched on it earlier is how far do we go to defend the nation? That is a dialogue worth having. The president and members of Congress took an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, domestic and foreign. Where is the line to be drawn? For me it is drawn where innocent citizens are suffering harm. We don't tolerate collateral damage. I haven't seen anyone step forward yet to show they were harmed.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

Post #: 39

RE: America is not the first surveillance state - 6/11/2013 10:22:29 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Jeff I fully get the mission creep, thats why you need a strong legal system to keep the powers that be in check. But just because I am okay with the collection of some data, it doesnt follow that I am in favour of everything being kept. Parliament also has an oversight committee who look at this kind of issue. GCHQ are due to give a report to this committee today, I will post it later if I remember.

*nods* Two points.

This mountain of data they are building is akin to a bomb which can blow up the earth in the sense that it is so potentially destructive that I'd prefer nobody ever built such a thing. But it is already built... and getting improved daily... on my tax dollars. This goes back to what was said previously... there is no legitimate reason to ever compile such a database and the desire to do so is de-facto admission of non-trustworthiness. This is a control mechanism, plain and simple.

Even in the hands of some relatively benign government (say Iceland's) I would not want this database. Then again, I doubt a benign government would want it also. Or, more accurately, a part of that government would want it but the stronger part would think to itself, "bad idea". Insofar as the UK govt, you have decide for yourself if "trust" them but that trust will always be built on poor faith. It's the fox watching the hen house as it were.

Having read that link it's good that people in the UK (and Canada who is maybe doing the same thing) are asking questions but the questions being asked and answered are the wrong questions entirely. Note that the speaker in that article talks about how they USE the information not what use such a data pile might have for an unscrupulous player. And lets be clear... in any govt anywhere there will eventually be an seriously bad actor. This is the legacy we are leaving for our children even if things are fine today.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 40

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: America is not the first surveillance state

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109