Skip to main content

View Diary: Press, polls wrongly conflate Bush and Obama NSA surveillance (189 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's interesting how much of the defense (11+ / 0-)

    rests upon:

    1. Hey, it's been going on for a long time so what's the big deal.
    2. Personality attacks on the messenger(s).
    3. Terrorists!

    Thank you for illustrating all 3 in one comment.

    •  For me, the defense is more that (5+ / 0-)

      there's no invasion of privacy because what do I care that there's a record of which numbers call which other numbers and for how long? I don't.

      The government doesn't even access that data unless some number on that log has a connection to terrorism. Then they search it and analyze for connections and patterns.

      Frankly I'm astonished they're so competent and glad they have this in their toolkit.

      •  What a crock of shit (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        divineorder

        if they wanted to subpoena just those call records to or from terrorism suspects, they could.  Even after the fact.  

        What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

        by happymisanthropy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 06:50:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They could, after the fact, (0+ / 0-)

          which would take time. So the question is so much less important than the screaming ideologues on both sides make out: Does the minor, marginal benefit of quicker access to vital information outweigh the minor, marginal privacy violation of having impersonal metadata logged for ready access?

          •  what about the severe, inevitable violations (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Argyrios

            of having such a database at the next J. Edgar Hoover's fingertips, ready to become non-impersonal at the touch of a button?

            What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

            by happymisanthropy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 07:38:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Then that person would be a criminal (0+ / 0-)

              and I would be quite upset with that person, let's call him Jay, for violating the law. However, I don't think Jay would be much inconvenienced by a lack of precedent. If Jay is a lawbreaker, then he doesn't respect the boundaries imposed by law, and so he certainly won't care what boundaries were established by precedent and discretion. Let's be clear: The data exists.  It could be misused, and if anyone, in the future, misuses it, then you will find in me a strident ally. As far as I can tell, nobody is alleging that the Obama administration misused the data. Instead, the argument seems to be that the data should not exist. Which is to say, they wish for that which is, not to be. Which strikes me as an "old man yelling at clouds" type of mentality.

              •  Jay would be inconvenienced (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                dream weaver, divineorder, mkor7

                by the fact that the dataBASE wouldn't exist, he wouldn't be able to access it with a few keystrokes, and he would in fact have to either swear a false affidavit, or falsify a court order, to get his hands on the information.

                What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

                by happymisanthropy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 11:39:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The database certainly will exist (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  divineorder

                  on the servers of the telecoms. And the Obama administration has just conclusively proved that no falsified court order is needed; a real one is readily obtainable.

                  But of course a tyrant wouldn't need a court order. Bush asserted he didn't, and people went along for a while.

      •  Then let's make it an opt-in program. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        divineorder
        there's no invasion of privacy because what do I care that there's a record of which numbers call which other numbers and for how long? I don't.
        That way, folks like you can get your way, and so can we.

        It's a win/win all around.

        Stop the NRA and the NSA
        Repeal the Patriot Act and the 2nd Amendment

        by dream weaver on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:50:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site