Skip to main content

View Diary: What if the public approves of NSA unlimited spying? (117 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The law defines what is punishable terror. (0+ / 0-)

    Juries decide if you meet the definition beyond a easonable doubt.

    Not the NSA.  

    I find it hard to care what the NSA thinks is "terrorism" and wonder why people work so hard to scare themselves. If you enjoy wondering if you're going to be persecuted, be black or wear Arab clothes and laissez le Bon temps roulez.  Then try to get DK interest for real breaches of civil liberties.  Good luck.

    "We're now in one of those periods when the reality of intense pressure on the middle class diverges from long-held assumptions of how the American bargain should work" --James Fallows

    by Inland on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 07:46:09 AM PDT

    •  huh? Juries for terrorism suspects? (5+ / 0-)

      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

      by k9disc on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 07:51:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  to quote Chris Hayes, "It's America's history" (11+ / 0-)

      When you construct a massive surveillance apparatus, history tells us that it will be brought to bear not just on, quote, "the enemy" but on the people who threaten society's power structure. On whoever exists at the political margins, whether it's Martin Luther King Jr. or some Occupy Boston protesters. It's not some Orwellian abstraction. It's America's history --- and America's recent history ---and left unchecked I fear for America 's future.

      http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/...

      Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

      by greenbastard on Tue Jun 18, 2013 at 07:54:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  bs. Secret courts (6+ / 0-)

      Secret laws secret warrants and trial by the Spooks and the now pumped up executive branch. Probable cause, due process, habeas corpus, posse comitatus, and now the 4th amendment  all our rights that protect us are gone daddy gone. NDAA 2013 was passed in January it makes indefinite detention legal. right. But hey it's all okay cause our inalienable rights just get in the way of the tools the government needs to keep us safe. Why do we need the Law if we have nothing to hide? Besides twisty polling says the public is just fine with living in a lawless police military state. After all 'terrist's are gonna kill yer family' and Obama is the only grown up in the room. He feels regret it weighs heavy on him just like Clinton felt our pain.


      NDAA 2013 Allows Indefinite Detention Of U.S. Citizens By President  

      http://www.policymic.com/...

      The NDAA of 2013 has added an array of new and controversial provisions. Of the most controversial provisions, one provision sets forth proscriptions on closing Guantánamo Bay. The bill in particular expands and enforces limits on individuals who can be transferred out of Guantánamo Bay.

      But by far the most controversial provision allows for the indefinite imprisonment of U.S. citizens, or as Obama calls it “prolonged detention.” Prolonged detention allows for the detention of an individual without a charge or trial.  

    •  This has got to be the most absurdist argument yet (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jrooth
      You must not care about breaches of civil liberties of type (A) because you care a lot about breaches of civil liberties of type (B).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site