Edward Snowden: American Hero

#76
#76
rockytop9808 said:
The problem is we are told that all they have access to is metadata. The leaker has since come out and indicated otherwise. I find it hard to believe a guy would essentially sacrifice everything for bits and bytes of data.
Click to expand...

Hopefully you meant to say you find it hard not to believe him.

I won't suggest there isn't a great potential for serious violations of how I remember things were supposed to go. Our representatives in the House and Senate need to step up and make sure those abuses aren't occurring.
 
#77
#77
notabed22 said:
Hmm... just out of curiosity, would a "classified program to kill a race of people in this country" be legal?

You know, legal... like I specified when I referenced the legality of the program?

No?

Oh, okay. So your statement makes no sense. Alright. Carry on then.
Click to expand...

I think Volbeef actually has made a political forum alt because of the continued reading comprehension and "you make no sense" replies. When he whips out the portfolio comparison we will know for sure. I am giving up on the thought that he is a militant LG alt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#78
#78
Gramps said:
Has Bush made any statement concerning this?

If he has I am not aware of it and doubt he will.

Cheney on the other hand may say something.
Click to expand...


Im sure Bush knew about it before Obozo did. After all, he gets his news from the paper.
 
#79
#79
YorkVol said:
On the first issue, to me, the metadata are just bits and bytes until they are attributed to an actual person. Probable cause comes when the initial signal coming from overseas has information indicating some suspicious activity. At this point, those nodes that are linked to the initial signal should be able to be identified and attributed to a person. I think everyone would agree that we would like to know who a known or suspected adversary may be communicating with in the US(even if some of those people turn out to be US persons). But, if I understand this correctly, the raw metadata isn't attributed to anyone per se.
Click to expand...

The phone number is by definition connected to a person - it is an identifier.

If I understand the program correctly (have heard conflicting things) the data is not mined at all until a number pops from other investigative techniques. Then a court order is sought to find out what other numbers this number talked to.

If that is true, I see no reason the government needs to own this data prior to use. it may be an extra set of steps but why not wait to subpoena it when authorized to do so? It alleviates the opportunity for abuse.


YorkVol said:
To exploit this can be done a couple of ways. First, the way it seems most on this board would prefer, you can follow the signals blindly, take the list of numbers to the FICA Court, get warrants, review the records, send the info out to the law enforcement agencies and hope that you are on time.

Or you can have the data available on hand, pull just the PII you need and send that to the law enforcement for action in minutes.
Click to expand...

The latter is my understanding of how it is done. The claim I've heard is that the first scenario does not occur and I would have a problem if it did.



YorkVol said:
The debate should be along these lines and should include the safe guards and accountability that must be built into the system to make sure our data isn't mishandled.
Click to expand...

Of course the debate cannot occur unless we know what is done...

YorkVol said:
On the second point, I can't argue with that. In my view, we've lost all confidence in the Legislative Branch's ability to act as a proper check to the Executive Branch. We feel the Judicial Branch is co-opted as well. Consequently, the public doesn't believe the debate has or will ever occur.

In my view, we all need to look around and find real representatives to send to Washington who will stand up against the Administration, regardless of political party and uphold their responsibilities.

I'm thinking there is a Business Professor in Birmingham that needs to step up.
Click to expand...

As to the last point - no effin' way
 
#80
#80
Bjorn_Yesterday said:
Why should it be gathered and interpreted secretly by the federal gov't without my consent?

I am totally guaranteed protection from the details of my life being used as the fire-stoking chopwood for some McCarthy-esque government paranoia. I am totally guaranteed protection from having this information used against me. I don't think our gov't realizes this.
Click to expand...

Sound....
 
#81
#81
Gramps said:
You are aware this was also going on with a Republican in the White House ?

Not defending Obama. This issue goes beyond party lines. There are leaders of both parties that are saying they are in favor of this program, likewise you have members of both parties saying they are opposed to it.

I would say it is safe to say some of the senators and congress members that are saying they are opposed to this program were aware of it and voted to approve it.

This is politics as usual. I sometime think it would be very scary if we actually knew what has gone on and is going on in our government.
Click to expand...

Is there any evidence that this data was being collected on American Citizens that have NO contact with foreign entities, on domestic to domestic conversations by American Citizens, or at the level that it is being collected today? Look at Maxine Waters' comments and tell me you don't believe that there isn't a political motivation in the increase of the numbers of people spied on and the variety of the information gathered. The Boston Bombers were very "public" with their plans and ideas, the Russian's told us to watch them, and yet our gubment did nothing. The info is being gathered under the NSA program as a disguise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#82
#82
volinbham said:
hero? No - as he admits he did it for himself because of the "world" he wants to live in.

Am i glad he did it? Absolutely.

Same as manning? No - manning simply did an indiscriminate document dump that with all likelihood contained names of operatives and helpers. Snowden revealed the mechanics of a specific program and vetted which docs to be released to avoid endangering specific people.

as for the contention that he took away this tool - a bunch of the posters complaining about the "reveal" claim to have known all along that we do this. If true don't you think the terrorists knew too? You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

+1000
 
#91
#91
Sonny Chiba makes the best swords.... or Or Gordon Liu, he would just snatch their eyes out!

My favorite is Chow Yun-Fat (or Yun-Fat Chow).
 
Last edited:
#93
#93
Snowden says he plans to ask another country for asylum.


NM...already posted
 
#94
#94
Monica Crowley and Simon Rosenberg (on Fox ) are saying Snowden needs to be prosecuted. Simon flat out called Snowden a traitor, Monica does not go that far but agrees he has done damage and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
 
#97
#97
Gramps said:
Monica Crowley and Simon Rosenberg (on Fox ) are saying Snowden needs to be prosecuted. Simon flat out called Snowden a traitor, Monica does not go that far but agrees he has done damage and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Click to expand...

I'm glad he did what he did but if you break the law you pay the price.
 
#98
#98
Gramps said:
Monica Crowley and Simon Rosenberg (on Fox ) are saying Snowden needs to be prosecuted. Simon flat out called Snowden a traitor, Monica does not go that far but agrees he has done damage and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw that too. Sounds like a talking head that wants to cover it all up and lock him away.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top