7 ms·

It doesn't really help the issue at large but in my personal life it was nice to say, "I told you so." and not get called a crazy person anymore.

motohagiography 8y ago
Worked in security for over decade before Snowden, kept finding things I couldn't talk about, knowing I'd found the tip of an iceberg in many places without being able to piece it together. When it all came out, was relieved not to be nuts, and was more interested in what regular people thought of the whole thing. Normal people know what "parallel construction," is and how elected governments will use these systems for political ends. What I don't understand is why it's not a bigger public issue with all the controversy around the current U.S. president. The scenario where a radical takes power and has control of these systems was the precise nightmare scenario everyone was concerned about, and yet mass surveillance just isn't a part of the popular discourse in the culture war. Is it because the other team wants to use it too, or is it because the current perceived radical tyrant isn't dangerous enough?
- saint_fiasco 8y ago
  Fortunately Trump's supporters aren't fans of the intelligence community either, maybe partly thanks to Snowden.
  - linkregister 8y ago
    They're fans of the torture and assassinations though! In before I'm accused of mischaracterization, a quick web search will reveal Mr. Trump's emphatic glee regarding torture.
    - superkuh 8y ago
      The last 3 presidents have all supported the expansion of executive power, torture programs, and used (and expanded) the purely executive branch assassination program. They've all been terrible people who support torture and assassination. Obama and Trump take it even further by assassinating US citizens including minors.
      - creaghpatr 8y ago
        Which US citizen(s) including minors did the Trump administration assasinate?
        whatshisface 8y ago
        I'm not sure what the OP talked about, but minors are frequently killed as collateral damage in areas where the US is taking military action. This is especially common when explosives are used in heavily populated areas, like the many online videos where a strike is carried out in a city. Assange helped reveal that in some cases, US citizens are killed as well (this was in the movie when he was played by Benedict Cumberbatch).
        superkuh 8y ago
        Despite what the shortened URL may look like this covers the US minor that Trump assasinated too. https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-old-american-in-yemen-trump-just-killed-his-8-year-old-sister/ https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-o... These were not just collateral damage. It took 2 strikes to get the older brother. It's unclear how many were done to get the sister. At least publically all that is known about the father in terms of wrong-doing was making videos about how US foreign policy was damaging on youtube. They say he's a 'bad guy' but there's never been any evidence given. He was taken out long before they went back in to get the kids.
        DoctorOetker 8y ago
        I don't understand why your upper comment was downvoted since it points at a core aspect of the systemic problem that in a democracy the different branches are supposed to keep each other in check: legislative, judiciary and executive branches. If you have an executive branch without oversight from the judiciary, it just grows like a cancer since the executive government doesn't need to prove anything, and the right to legal defense is vaporized... your quote: >... used (and expanded) the purely executive branch assassination program
        8y ago
    - buboard 8y ago
      misdirection
  - jacobush 8y ago
    Oh, they just want the intelligence community to spy on and murder who the president points at. To shut up and do what they are told.
    - detcader 8y ago
      It's more accurate to say "the king". People still want a king. I hope Trump critics can start identifying this soon...
      - jacobush 8y ago
        It reminds of the biblical story of Israel, when the people were fed up with the corruption of the judges, who ruled the land. The judges were a sort of a "checks and balances" system. The people were not happy with the sorry state of the system. They said, other countries have kings and order, we want one too. So the most prominent prophet listened to the will of the people and said, "ok, you will have a king, I will anoint one for you, you might not like what you get though". To me the current situation rings like an echo of that, people want strong leaders to fix their problems. "History never repeats, but it rhymes" -- probably not Mark Twain
- pasabagi 8y ago
  I think Donald Trump would have to be far more popular for him to be dangerous in this sense. I don't think calling him a tyrant is realistic, either - tyrants are typically popular across broad sectors of society, not extremely divisive.
  - godelski 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule
nickpsecurity 8y ago
Biggest benefit for me, too. The difference is I had to do that with security professionals who thought certain risks were too speculative or that defenses didn't make sense. That mostly didn't change after the Snowden leaks but it did a little and I have some proof. :)

motohagiography 8y ago

Worked in security for over decade before Snowden, kept finding things I couldn't talk about, knowing I'd found the tip of an iceberg in many places without being able to piece it together. When it all came out, was relieved not to be nuts, and was more interested in what regular people thought of the whole thing. Normal people know what "parallel construction," is and how elected governments will use these systems for political ends. What I don't understand is why it's not a bigger public issue with all the controversy around the current U.S. president. The scenario where a radical takes power and has control of these systems was the precise nightmare scenario everyone was concerned about, and yet mass surveillance just isn't a part of the popular discourse in the culture war. Is it because the other team wants to use it too, or is it because the current perceived radical tyrant isn't dangerous enough?

saint_fiasco 8y ago
Fortunately Trump's supporters aren't fans of the intelligence community either, maybe partly thanks to Snowden.
- linkregister 8y ago
  They're fans of the torture and assassinations though! In before I'm accused of mischaracterization, a quick web search will reveal Mr. Trump's emphatic glee regarding torture.
  - superkuh 8y ago
    The last 3 presidents have all supported the expansion of executive power, torture programs, and used (and expanded) the purely executive branch assassination program. They've all been terrible people who support torture and assassination. Obama and Trump take it even further by assassinating US citizens including minors.
    - creaghpatr 8y ago
      Which US citizen(s) including minors did the Trump administration assasinate?
      - whatshisface 8y ago
        I'm not sure what the OP talked about, but minors are frequently killed as collateral damage in areas where the US is taking military action. This is especially common when explosives are used in heavily populated areas, like the many online videos where a strike is carried out in a city. Assange helped reveal that in some cases, US citizens are killed as well (this was in the movie when he was played by Benedict Cumberbatch).
      - superkuh 8y ago
        Despite what the shortened URL may look like this covers the US minor that Trump assasinated too. https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-old-american-in-yemen-trump-just-killed-his-8-year-old-sister/ https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30/obama-killed-a-16-year-o... These were not just collateral damage. It took 2 strikes to get the older brother. It's unclear how many were done to get the sister. At least publically all that is known about the father in terms of wrong-doing was making videos about how US foreign policy was damaging on youtube. They say he's a 'bad guy' but there's never been any evidence given. He was taken out long before they went back in to get the kids.
        DoctorOetker 8y ago
        I don't understand why your upper comment was downvoted since it points at a core aspect of the systemic problem that in a democracy the different branches are supposed to keep each other in check: legislative, judiciary and executive branches. If you have an executive branch without oversight from the judiciary, it just grows like a cancer since the executive government doesn't need to prove anything, and the right to legal defense is vaporized... your quote: >... used (and expanded) the purely executive branch assassination program
        8y ago
  - buboard 8y ago
    misdirection
- jacobush 8y ago
  Oh, they just want the intelligence community to spy on and murder who the president points at. To shut up and do what they are told.
  - detcader 8y ago
    It's more accurate to say "the king". People still want a king. I hope Trump critics can start identifying this soon...
    - jacobush 8y ago
      It reminds of the biblical story of Israel, when the people were fed up with the corruption of the judges, who ruled the land. The judges were a sort of a "checks and balances" system. The people were not happy with the sorry state of the system. They said, other countries have kings and order, we want one too. So the most prominent prophet listened to the will of the people and said, "ok, you will have a king, I will anoint one for you, you might not like what you get though". To me the current situation rings like an echo of that, people want strong leaders to fix their problems. "History never repeats, but it rhymes" -- probably not Mark Twain
pasabagi 8y ago
I think Donald Trump would have to be far more popular for him to be dangerous in this sense. I don't think calling him a tyrant is realistic, either - tyrants are typically popular across broad sectors of society, not extremely divisive.
- godelski 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule

nickpsecurity 8y ago

Biggest benefit for me, too. The difference is I had to do that with security professionals who thought certain risks were too speculative or that defenses didn't make sense. That mostly didn't change after the Snowden leaks but it did a little and I have some proof. :)