General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA big "FU" to the United States by other countries?
IMO, Snowden is a coward and a hack. I distrust his intentions and find the distortions of the information and the hypocrisy of trying to create an international incident by exposing U.S. state secrets to countries that aggressively violate human rights to be disturbing.
I know people love the idea of poking this country in the eye, but I don't see how this current situation helps in the big picture. It will only serve to steel the resolve of countries that will use this as an opportunity to say to the U.S.: you have no reason to talk.
If anyone thinks that's good, then s/he is completely naive. I mean, is the goal is to have one of these other countries take the lead in challenging human rights abuses? Is it to knock the United States off its high horse? After Iraq and torture, this country likely deserves that. The Bush years were despiriting. What I don't get is why anyone would use the current outrage about NSA domestic surveillance programs to try to damage relations with other countries. What's the point, and is it worth it?
France, Too, Is Sweeping Up Data, Newspaper Reveals
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/world/europe/france-too-is-collecting-data-newspaper-reveals.html
The government had proposed a Communications Law in 2009 but it faced opposition in the National Assembly. The new National Assembly that formed in May with a majority of members from President Rafael Correa's political party approved a modified version of the original bill.
This law is yet another effort by President Correa to go after the independent media, said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director. The provisions for censorship and criminal prosecutions of journalists are clear attempts to silence criticism.
The law, which applies to both broadcast and print media, includes the following problematic provisions:
- more -
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/06/17/ecuador-end-assault-free-speech
The majority of us were opposed to Bush's illegal spying, but that debate was focused on domestic surveillance, spying on Americans.
The current debate about foreign surveillance is almost surreal, with people pretending that they had no idea about U.S. spying, as if it's an activity unique to this country. That is the mission of the NSA and of its counterparts around the world.
NYT editor's blog: Snowdens Questionable New Turn
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023034825
The focus on foreign surveillance arose from Snowden's notion about what the U.S. shouldn't be doing, and the focus has now shifted to sticking it to the United States.
There was a right way and a wrong way to approach NSA accountability, Snowden's international escapade was not it.
On the domestic side, the debate should have been ongoing, and in the aftermath of the leak, it should have remained the focus. The debate also needs to be on the facts. Greenwald does his best to make this about Obama (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023068613). Snowden broke the law. I've said that, to have people respond: Snowden knows he broke the law. No one can dispute that he will be held accountable by law. One of the first actions from his supporters was to petition the WH for a pardon. His bid for asylum is also an acknowledgment that he broke the law and seeks to avoid prosecution, albeit framed as an attempt to escape "persecution."
Through all of this, there is little focus on the facts, a lot of hype and no real push for solutions.
For example, one of Greenwald's recent releases got little attention after it was pointed out that safeguards were in place.
By SCOTT SHANE
<...>
On Thursday, in the latest release of documents supplied by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor now believed to be hiding in Hong Kong, The Guardian published two documents setting out the detailed rules governing the agencys intercepts...They show, for example, that N.S.A. officers who intercept an American online or on the phone say, while monitoring the phone or e-mail of a foreign diplomat or a suspected terrorist can preserve the recording or transcript if they believe the contents include foreign intelligence information or evidence of a possible crime. They can likewise preserve the intercept if it contains information on a threat of serious harm to life or property or sheds light on technical issues like encryption or vulnerability to cyberattacks.
And while N.S.A. analysts usually have to delete Americans names from the reports they write, there are numerous exceptions, including cases where there is evidence that the American in the intercept is working for a terrorist group, foreign country or foreign corporation.
The documents, classified Secret, describe the procedures for eavesdropping under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, including an N.S.A. program called Prism that mines Internet communications using services including Gmail and Facebook. They are likely to add fuel for both sides of the debate over the proper limits of the governments surveillance programs.
They offer a glimpse of a rule-bound intelligence bureaucracy that is highly sensitive to the distinction between foreigners and U.S. persons, which technically include not only American citizens and legal residents but American companies and nonprofit organizations as well. The two sets of rules, each nine pages long, belie the image of a rogue intelligence agency recklessly violating Americans privacy.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/us/politics/documents-detail-nsa-surveillance-rules.html
Today, in the latest release of classified NSA documents from Glenn Greenwald, we finally got a look at these minimization procedures. Here's the nickel summary:
The top secret documents published today detail the circumstances in which data collected on US persons under the foreign intelligence authority must be destroyed, extensive steps analysts must take to try to check targets are outside the US, and reveals how US call records are used to help remove US citizens and residents from data collection.
I have a feeling it must have killed Glenn to write that paragraph. But on paper, anyway, the minimization procedures really are pretty strict. If NSA discovers that it's mistakenly collected domestic content, it's required to cease the surveillance immediately and destroy the information it's already collected. However, there are exceptions. They can:
< >
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023060180
WaPo: New documents reveal parameters of NSAs secret surveillance programs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023058091
The debate briefly returned to: Oh, what about the next Republican President? What is preventing a discussion about the facts of the infomration directly above?
Claiming that opposition to Snowden's actions is equivalent to being an "apologist" for the NSA is part of the problem. His actions are a separate issue from the debate on NSA accountability.
There is little attention being paid to proposed solutions: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023135750
What's the goal of this debate? Isn't it to understand the problem and fix it, to rein in excesses?
In a country where surveillance has been part of the fabric of law enforcement and national security, with the acknowledgment that it's a necessity, the debate is about how to do it while protecting Americans, classified information and the Constitution.
That's not apologizing for the NSA. That's the reality.
This is the reason that while Senators like Udall and Wyden are critical of the program, they're offering a fix. You can bet there will be those who don't think it goes far enough, and others who will dismiss it.
One thing is certain, whether its a SCOTUS decision or a Congressional fix, the U.S. surveillance program, the 61-year-old NSA, isn't going anywhere.
I suspect that any fix in operation can earn the label unconstitutional. I suspect that if the Church Committee existed today and proposed the FISA court, it would be challenged as such.
You don't have to love it. You never did. You can push elected officials for accountability, but will you be satisfied?
My beef is there is no need to distort the facts to debate the issue. That is what Snowden's leak did, and I might add, intentionally.
The NSA doesn't need to be sensationalized to spark a debate. The facts of its operation are enough to do just that, as evidenced by the years of challenges mounted by civil liberties organizations.
The hyperbole is getting thick.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023163029
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Imagine that. *You* distrust *Snowden's* intentions. The hypocrisy reeks:
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)leftstreet
(36,117 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Lets face it the other side pays better.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)That's a sign that one lacks a valid argument to the topic at hand.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)and your "valid argument" goes out the window.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Response to ProSense (Reply #39)
Post removed
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)The real issue is the violation of the 4th and they have people like you trying to help invalidate it.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"The real issue is the violation of the 4th and they have people like you trying to help invalidate it."
...after your first post accusing me of having "a job posting this stuff," you're saying this is the "real issue"?
I mean, I'm not the one jumping into threads launching personal attacks.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I didn't need to see the video to make my own assessment of your intent.
that you attack a long time poster with a hint of the ridiculous, is pretty ballsy and frankly predictable given your past posts.
Why do you hate so much?
Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)I'm sure they need one after going through the 128 threads of BS you started.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Damn internets....Houston I think we have a problem here
ProSense
(116,464 posts)being disingenuous, huh: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122617
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't be changed to make that legal.
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.
Yup, stand 100 percent behind it.
Ever heard of the PAA: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724
By all means, go on pretending you never received a response.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122942
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3133739
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3125366
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122700
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122561
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3133739
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3133751
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3134370
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023134060#post86
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023169023#post167
You know I'm going to post this everytime you post your failed gotcha, don't you?
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)You know what the difference between you and all those Bushbots that made excuse after excuse for immoral behavior during the years of his reign?
Neither do I.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)but it's not going to work.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)predictable
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)an important part of the quote that you failed to highlight:
Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
Also, as demonstrated in the very documents that Snowden leaked, there are controls put in place to keep from spying on Americans, and if the the controls don't work and info is gathered accidentally on Americans, there are specific instructions on what to do with that information - number 1 being to DESTROY it.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)an important part of the quote that you failed to highlight:
"The law can't be changed to make that legal."
Here's a map:
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)which you have not addressed.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)These absurd, incessant, deliberate contortions would be hilarious...except that mass surveillance isn't.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981567
They are attempting to normalize the step-by-step elimination of the Constitution.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981711
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)That's your MO. I merely point out the rank hypocrisy and disinformation being thrown around this place.
Thanks for putting this here. With the other maps, that is quite a DU resume you are building.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Rather than alert, I think it should be left up as an example of what kind of person you are.
Galraedia
(5,027 posts)There is a crucial difference between the Obama administrations phone call data-mining program, which is constitutional under current law, and the Bush administrations NSA surveillance program, which was clearly unconstitutional. Unlike the Obama program, which is limited to obtaining information about phone calls made and received from telephone companies, the Bush program authorized the government to wiretap private phone conversations. From a constitutional perspective, the difference is critical, and it is unfortunate that President Obama has not done a better job of explaining the distinction, and why his administrations program does not violate the constitutional right of privacy.
The Fourth Amendment provides that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. The Supreme Court has held that, at least presumptively, a search is unreasonable unless it is based on probable cause and a judicial warrant.
It would therefore seem that it violates the Fourth Amendment for the government to collect phone call records from phone companies without first obtaining a judicial warrant based on a finding that there is probable cause to believe that the individual whose call records the government want to examine has committed a crime. This would be true, for example, if the government wanted to open that individuals mail or search his home or wiretap his phone calls, so why isnt it true in this situation as well?
The puzzle turns on the meaning of the word search. The Fourth Amendment does not protect a general right of privacy, but only a right not to have the government unreasonably search an individuals person, house, papers, or effects. But what is a search?
Read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/01/why-bush-violated-the-fourth-amendment-and-obama-has-not.html
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Shouldn't you be monitoring your post about "Edward Snowden's parasites"?
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023175948
Galraedia
(5,027 posts)P.S. Stop stalking Prosense. It's creeping people out.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Just like posting the President's campaign and pre-Presidency speeches is relevant.
Here, for example, is Candidate Obama having a debate with President Obama over NSA surveillance:
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Galraedia
(5,027 posts)here's something from Snowden from only 4 years ago:
Edward Snowden's greatest hits:
"Moreover, who the fuck are the anonymous sources telling them this? Those people should be shot in the balls."
~ Edward Snowden talking about how leakers should be 'shot in the balls'.
"These are the same people who blew the whole we could listen to osamas cell phone thing the same people who screwed us on wiretapping over and over and over again.Thank god theyre going out of business."
~ Edward Snowden, citing the need for secrecy with wiretapping programs.
"Save money? Cut this social security bullshit... Somehow, our society managed to make it hundreds of years without social security just fine, you fucking retards. Magically the world changed after the new deal, and old people became made of glass. Yeah, that makes sense... They wouldnt be fucking helpless if you werent sending them fucking checks to sit on their ass and lay in hospitals all day... My grandmother is eighty fucking three this year, and you know what? she still supports herself working as a goddamned hairdresser."
~ Edward Snowden on Social Security
"See, thats why Im goddamned glad for the second amendment. Me and all my lunatic, gun-toting NRA compatriots would be on the steps of Congress before the C-Span feed finished."
~ Edward Snowden on the Second Amendment
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)See, today we are not pretending that the mass surveillance is LEGAL. *Today* we are pretending that it isn't HAPPENING. You need to check the script and coordinate!
Galraedia
(5,027 posts)why are you still running your mouth off about it?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I think I'll just let that one stand *all by itself.*
This is the level of twisting we are dealing with, folks.
Galraedia
(5,027 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)that twist wasn't deliberate? You mean you *honestly* couldn't decipher who "we" referred to in that sentence?
I am very sad and remorseful now and promise not to pick on you anymore.
Galraedia
(5,027 posts)What are you a Ron Paul supporter? Are you trying to send me a race-based coded message?
I'm sure the 'we' you were referring to is Prosense. I'm not stupid, your argument on the other hand is. And if you want to talk about flip-flops:
"Moreover, who the fuck are the anonymous sources telling them this? Those people should be shot in the balls."
~ Edward Snowden talking about how leakers should be 'shot in the balls'.
Guess Snowdick doesn't have to worry about being shot in the balls now...given the fact that he doesn't have any.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Why are you linking to another thread of yours? "Concerned" we missed it?"
...easier than reposting the entire content of the other posts in the thread, and to encourage ongoing discussion in those threads that are still live.
Now, why does it bother you?
Cha
(297,809 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Talk about thick hyperbole layered with characterization and arch insinuations.
I assume your agenda to be all about that which benefits you personally because you have no respect for others and never carry on discussion as an honest broker.
Your lot needs a whole new set of methodology, this shit is burned out from being on the road too many years.
flamingdem
(39,332 posts)especially due to the choices Snowden made to give intelligence to China and Europe.
He could have made his points with far less damage.
What should any of this have to do with Latin American US relations.
It's a circus and Assange and maybe others we don't even know about - Putin? - are ringmasters.
Response to ProSense (Original post)
Post removed
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You mean like countries that run off-shore prisons to hold people without trial, violently suppress protests and keep activists in legal limbo for months or even years on trumped-up charges, and indiscriminately murder children in warzones?
"countries that aggressively violate human rights"
...is justified.
China: Benefit the Masses Campaign Surveilling Tibetans
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/06/18/china-benefit-masses-campaign-surveilling-tibetans
China: Renewed Restrictions Send Online Chill
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/01/04/china-renewed-restrictions-send-online-chill
China threatens death penalty for serious polluters
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/19/us-china-pollution-idUSBRE95I10D20130619
A rare look at China's death row
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-202_162-10010534.html
"You mean like countries that run off-shore prisons to hold people without trial, violently suppress protests and keep activists in legal limbo for months or even years on trumped-up charges, and indiscriminately murder children in warzones?"
That's why I mentioned this in the OP: After Iraq and torture, this country likely deserves that. The point wasn't a historical perspective, it was about the current situation. The Bush years, as I said, were despiriting.
- Ordered an end to the use of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, withdrew
flawed legal analysis used to justify torture and applied the Army Field Manual on interrogations
government wide. - Abolished the CIA secret prisons.
- Says that waterboarding is torture and contrary to Americas traditions
contrary to our ideals.
- No reports of extraordinary rendition to torture or other cruelty under his administration.
- Failed to hold those responsible for past torture and other cruelty accountable; has blocked
alleged victims of torture from having their day in court.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)In addition to being busted on your blatant hypocrisy in this thread, you can't win your argument by appealing to people's patriotism. The whole, if you support Snowden you are damaging the country is desperation at its worst.
cali
(114,904 posts)this really is a grand apologist theory of everything.
and I use that word accurately.
Logical
(22,457 posts)jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I think this OP would be important for this line alone:
Through all of this, there is little focus on the facts, a lot of hype and no real push for solutions.
We need a REAL discussion and a "real push for solutions".
cali
(114,904 posts)who consistently has ignored threads about the ever growing National Security State and posted over a hundred threads on Snowden.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"and no one has focused less on facts than the OP who consistently has ignored threads about the ever growing National Security State and posted over a hundred threads on Snowden."
...that is your attempt to derail the thread.
BREAKING: Privacy Advocates To File Supreme Court Petition Challenging NSA Surveillance Program
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023168153
Do you support Senator Leahy's Patriot Act/FISA reform bill?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023135750
Those threads don't get nearly the number of personal attacks as OP's critical of Snowden.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I have found her posts to be consistently factual.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)When Bush was president and spying on Americans, according to her it was criminal, but when Obama does it, it's okay by her and Snowden is a monster who should be persecuted.
Factual or not, what she is a a blatant hypocrite. If that's somebody you look to for inspiration, my advice is look elsewhere.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)it's solutions. All she's interested in is everyday posting thread after thread of anti-Snowden propaganda. She has consistently ignored the larger issues and attempting to shift the blame and attention to making it all about Snowden and NOT about government acting like Big Brother.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)And her OP about proposed legislation that offers a solution that she links to in this OP directly contradicts your statement.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)and yet she wants to hang Snowden. If she's really interested in change, then she has to stop calling for the head of whistleblowers. Until she does, anything she says is empty and hollow.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"So she wants proposed legislation to stop spying and yet she wants to hang Snowden. If she's really interested in change, then she has to stop calling for the head of whistleblowers. Until she does, anything she says is empty and hollow."
...are your serious with this comment? Why don't you tend to your own opinions and stop worrying about mine.
I mean, " then she has to stop calling for the head of whistleblowers"
Oooh!
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)and imprisoned? You seem to have a hard time actually sticking to the issues at hand and instead go off on these rather silly tangents.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Are youy denying that you have gleefully called for Snowden to be extradited"
...you also forgot "coward and a hack." See the OP.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)Anything you have to say on legislation that challenges spying is mute to me if it doesn't include protection for whistleblowers. There is no reform to be had unless you make it safe for people to tell the truth. Until you realize that, you are no friend to democracy or the American people.
So go ahead and laugh your ass off all you want on that. Personally, I don't think it's all that funny.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Anything you have to say on legislation that challenges spying is mute to me if it doesn't include protection for whistleblowers."
...I'm hurt. We were so close (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023185307#post22)
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)But you are definitely out of fresh material.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Oh please, if there's one thing Prononsense isn't interested in, it's solutions. All she's interested in is everyday posting thread after thread of anti-Snowden propaganda."
...why are you even responding to this thread and attempting to disrupt it with personal attacks?
I mean, you don't want to discuss the OP, you just entered the thread to attack me?
That is your idea of having credibility?
Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Seems some people think the OP was an invitation to post personal attacks.
I suppose they think that's going to stop me from continuing to post my opininons.
Attack away. I've said my piece.
flamingdem
(39,332 posts)We need a therapist on call here lol
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)you will continue to inundate this board with the same exact topics and information over and over and over and over. That I am sure of.
"I have no doubt you...you will continue to inundate this board with the same exact topics and information over and over and over and over. That I am sure of. "
...keep posting my opinion as many times as I want to, regardless of the personal attack launched by those who can't tolerate other people's opinions.
Logical
(22,457 posts)you have the right to post the same endless points over and over. No one will stop you. But then you wonder why people do not take you seriously.
"Define a personal attack? Attacking your posting strategy and bias is not a personal attack. And you have the right to post the same endless points over and over. No one will stop you. But then you wonder why people do not take you seriously.
...irony. You're all over this thread discussing me, links, and now asking for a definition of "personal attacks," avoiding the topic of the OP, and you think I'm the one "people do not take you seriously"?
Logical
(22,457 posts)LOL, you bring up personal attacks and make them an issue then wonder why I asked about them?
And here is one of your favorite laughing icons for you.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"LOL, you bring up personal attacks and make them an issue then wonder why I asked about them?"
...when the goal is to be disruptive, one sees bringing up "personal attacks" as they're being made as strange, huh?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The administration has that problem lately, too. See post 58.
Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Posting her own words is an "attack" now."
...not an "attack." It's your attempt to discredit by repeating a lame gotcha attempt: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3185530
I mean, you can't even admit that you received a response. So you post the quote as if it by itself is discrediting.
There is nothing wrong with the quote (you appear to like it), and I stand by it, and my posts related to President Obama do not contradict it.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)If you actually had a response that was coherent, you would post the argument here, instead of throwing out blue links that go nowhere even approaching relevance - flailing and myopic, irrelevant copied paragraphs about warrantless wiretapping, while you willfully ignore the totality of the surveillance state, how it has expanded under Obama, and how your own outraged, hypocritical words expose your utter shamelessness here.
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
I was trying to express my emotional, visceral response to the twisting, brazen defense of the assault on our Constitution and our civil protections, but another DUer put it better than I ever could have: "I couldn't do that without vomiting from the dizziness and shame." Your posts are a barometer of how sick, shameless, and utterly dishonest the ProPaganda on behalf of the One Percent and their purchased government has become.
Here is Candidate Obama arguing with President Obama over the Surveillance State:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3186051
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You have nothing. If you actually had a response that was coherent, you would post the argument here, instead of throwing out blue links that go nowhere even approaching relevance - flailing and myopic, irrelevant copied paragraphs about warrantless wiretapping, while you willfully ignore the totality of the surveillance state, how it has expanded under Obama, and how your own outraged, hypocritical words expose your utter shamelessness here."
...I have a lot more than you. All you have is an imagined contradiction, and are using it to try to discredit an opinion you don't agree with. Notice how you use it to do just that, and then state your own opinion as if you expect no one to challenge it? You throw around insults laced with your POV as if that makes your statement the last word.
OK, here's my comment that you keep posting.
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't be changed to make that legal.
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.
My response was: Yup, stand 100 percent behind it
Ever heard of the PAA http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724
You dug up the quote to attempt a gotcha. I'm not debating myself because your attempt failed.
So I will provide text of the link (bolding the relevant points) and preface it with this: I stated that the law can't be changed to make an illegal act legal, and that Republicans were trying to pull a fast one. They were.
From the link:
Secret to Prism program: Even bigger data seizure
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/secret-prism-success-even-bigger-data-seizure
The entire article is framed to create the impression that warrantless wiretapping is legal, and that Obama approves of it.
The article mentions the Protect America Act, quotes Obama opposing it, and then creates the impression he embraced it when he became President.
From the article:
Congress approved it, with Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., in the midst of a campaign for president, voting against it.
"This administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide," Obama said in a speech two days before that vote. "I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom."
<...>
Years after decrying Bush for it, Obama said Americans did have to make tough choices in the name of safety.
There have been a number of media reports using the same Obama quote to basically claim that he once called out Bush, but then embraced the policy. They are intentionally conflating a quote about the PAA with his position on the 2008 FISA amendments, which he voted for. They are not the same thing. The PAA was a Republican effort to absolve Bush.
While the article mentions that Obama voted against the Protect America Act (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00309), there is no mention of the fact that the Act expired in early 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Legislative_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act#Protect_America_Act_of_2007
Here's Bush's statement at the time: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080214-4.html
It's illegal to collect this information on Americans.
Here is information on the FISA law including the 2008 amendments.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008
- Prohibits the individual states from investigating, sanctioning of, or requiring disclosure by complicit telecoms or other persons.
- Permits the government not to keep records of searches, and destroy existing records (it requires them to keep the records for a period of 10 years).
- Protects telecommunications companies from lawsuits for "'past or future cooperation' with federal law enforcement authorities and will assist the intelligence community in determining the plans of terrorists". Immunity is given by a certification process, which can be overturned by a court on specific grounds.[20]
- Removes requirements for detailed descriptions of the nature of information or property targeted by the surveillance if the target is reasonably believed to be outside the country.[20]
- Increased the time for warrantless surveillance from 48 hours to 7 days, if the FISA court is notified and receives an application, specific officials sign the emergency notification, and relates to an American located outside of the United States with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power. After 7 days, if the court denies or does not review the application, the information obtained cannot be offered as evidence. If the United States Attorney General believes the information shows threat of death or bodily harm, they can try to offer the information as evidence in future proceedings.[21]
- Permits the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to jointly authorize warrantless electronic surveillance, for one-year periods, targeted at a foreigner who is abroad. This provision will sunset on December 31, 2012.
- Requires FISA court permission to target wiretaps at Americans who are overseas.
- Requires government agencies to cease warranted surveillance of a targeted American who is abroad if said person enters the United States. (However, said surveillance may resume if it is reasonably believed that the person has left the States.)
- Prohibits targeting a foreigner to eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval. [22]
- Allows the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.
- Allows eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.
- Prohibits the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.
- Requires the Inspectors General of all intelligence agencies involved in the President's Surveillance Program to "complete a comprehensive review" and report within one year
- The provisions of the Act granting immunity to the complicit telecoms create a roadblock for a number of lawsuits intended to expose and thwart the alleged abuses of power and illegal activities of the federal government since and before the September 11 attacks.[citation needed]
- Allows the government to conduct surveillance of "a U.S. person located outside of the U.S. with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power" for up to one week (168 hours) without a warrant, increased from the previous 48 hours, as long as the FISA court is notified at the time such surveillance begins, and an application as usually required for surveillance authorization is submitted by the government to FISA within those 168 hours[21]
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 6, 2013, 07:45 PM - Edit history (1)
You have not made an argument, and nothing you have put here changes the perpetuation and expansion of the surveillance state under the Obama administration, or the rank hypocrisy of your own words.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"All you've done is copy the garbage at your link. You have not made an argument, and nothing you have put here changes the perpetuation and expansion of the surveillance state under the Obama administration, or your own rank hypocrisy."
You did it again: throw around insults laced with your POV as if that makes your statement the last word.
You wanted me to respond to my previous comment. Now that I've reconciled my comments, you insist that doing so is "garbage," and then you declare that my opinion doesn't change your "perception."
I mean, you have your opinion, and you seem to want to use the dismissal of my opinion as justification for yours.
Cha
(297,809 posts)everyone else, who actually reads her OPs, knows you're just a blowhard armed with meaningless personal attacks.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)I am interested in calling you for what is a blatant agenda that has grown beyond tiresome.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I am interested in calling you for what is a blatant agenda that has grown beyond tiresome. "
...I don't care, and knock yourself out with you silly mission.
I'm sure there will be a boatload of laughs.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)Do you really think I give a shit? All you're doing is proving that when push comes to shove, you'd rather not actually discuss anything real and instead act like a little brat that just sits there and laughs instead of answering questions. So by all means, keep it up.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Do you really think I give a shit?
...yeah! I mean, you're issuing utimatums (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023185307#post89)
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)I DO care about challenging the Big Brother cheerleading squad that has popped up on DU. I DON'T care if all you can do when challenged is laugh like a bratty little schoolgirl, because that makes my job a whole hell of a lot easier. That's the difference.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Oh, you misunderstand me...I DO care about challenging the Big Brother cheerleading squad that has popped up on DU. I DON'T care if all you can do when challenged is laugh like a bratty little schoolgirl, because that makes my job a whole hell of a lot easier. That's the difference. "
...no I didn't. You're pissed about criticism of Snowden, and are demanding that it stop. Reminds me of an...what's that word?
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)and I have no problem admitting that. I joined Du because it was a place that valued freedom and the constitution at a time when both were under attack. Both are still under attack, except the DU I once knew has turned into the presidential cheeleading squad simply because he's now a Dem. Well, okay, SOME of DU has. I don't give a flying fuck if Snowden is libertarian, has sex with trees, picks his nose, masturbates to bondage porn, or whatever else people say about him. What I care about is that he risked his life and his freedom to do something for his country, and unlike serving in the military and stealing Middle Eastern oil, this was a service to America that actually mattered.
So if you have a problem with him or what he did, then I have a problem with you. And if you think that proposing legislation to end spying on Americans is a good thing but yet we should crucify the man who helped bring that change about, then take your fucking legislation and shove it where the sun don't shine. Because there's no real change unless you make it safe for people to make change.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Yes I am pissed about criticism of Snowden and I have no problem admitting that. I joined Du because it was a place that valued freedom and the constitution at a time when both were under attack."
...get use to it, and I didn't come here to support Snowden.
Also, remember this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023185307#post100
Yeah, I called it.
Downtown Hound
(12,618 posts)Cheers.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
gholtron
(376 posts)Thank you so much for posting this. Big K&R.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)I see the paid GOPers/Rightwingers/Tea Brats/Rand Paul's are on the attack again and as usual putting ProSense in th negative and portraying themselves as the all knowing - LOL
I doubt anyone is paid, just intolerant of other people's opinions and determined to try to intimidate. Good luck with that.
Cha
(297,809 posts)guility of, Illyah.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Those facts should put out the flames, but I doubt it. Some media now infer the NSA is a creation of the Patriot Act, when it is decades older. When facts are not allowed to be said, there's nothing more to be said, period.
I'm sorry about personal attacks on DUers like you. I never attack another DUer, but I do go after media and political figures. I miss DU2 which was a great place for facts, discussions, rooting out bigotry, advancing real solutions. It was a place for being supportive, not name calling or cursing other DUers daily as I see here.
The only solution that is acceptable for some will be Rand in 2016. Before that, this affair will be touted to give the GOP control in 2014. Guaranteeing more destruction of the rights of women, emigrants, elderly, minorities and the poor. We are now told that social issues don't matter, that only this one thing does.
The hero we are told is our spiritual better has said old people need to get off their asses in the hospital and get to work. This is right out of Ayn Rand. Reporting that is not a personal attack on a DUer, in fact it's not even personal about the hero. It's an ideology that needs to be discussed, but it will not be allowed to happen.
The media gives the spin the Koch dollars fund, but not the facts. It's exactly why no other solutions will be offered online, nor will any reasoned discussion.
Although I do not feel as strongly about ES as some, it is because I have never worked in the fields that would know the details of national security, etc. And I've never much believed in the concept, except that a good reputation, built on what we accept being done to each other here, is the only respect that matters.
It is from the best ideals the world will seek to emulate the USA, not ending the safety net or the rights of those harmed by the GOP, which is not important to some at DU. I am grateful to those to whom it still matters, despite calls by some to drop these things and be concerned about this one subject only.
Many of us do appreciate the time you have taken in order to give us information we would find otherwise. You have been a gold mine of information for years.
It is fun to be in the same decade with you. ~ Franklin D. Roosevelt
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)K & R
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Kinda like when China sent us back a spy plane in packing peanuts.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Like the Sun rising in the East"
...why you can't stay away: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023087676
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)is actually some of my better work. I appreciate you constantly reintroducing the Linkasaurus Rex and the Dreaded Blue Linkies post.
It always makes me chuckle!
Cheers!
Apophis
(1,407 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)The only result is going to be more secrecy, but of course the OP has no idea on what that will effect, but will rant and rave none the less. Really if someone wants something less noticed they might rant on it less. But since it's important to me, i will kick this thread. The best thing is the time and space of it all. Snowden can be called all thing one wishes it still won't change the facts.
We now are living with a government that has erected all the devices of contempt to subdue the people it's supposed to accountable to.
Some people have an inferiority complex and need to worship things they think might save them from some dreaded bogeyman, little do they understand that thing they worship could be the bogeyman