3 ms·

What's the healthy amount of unwarranted wiretapping? Let's not pretend the NSA is fighting a war on terror. It's an economic espionage machine, and an assault

What's the healthy amount of unwarranted wiretapping? Let's not pretend the NSA is fighting a war on terror. It's an economic espionage machine, and an assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. The same constitution many men died to protect and uphold. If honor, country, and integrity mean anything to employees of the NSA, they should perform their civic duty and do as the patriot Edward Snowden has done.

NotAnEconomist 8y ago
> Let's not pretend the NSA is fighting a war on terror. It's an economic espionage machine, and an assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. This seems to be completely unfounded, and out of line with my experience of the people who work there. > they should perform their civic duty and do as the patriot Edward Snowden has done. The truth is that you and I are part of a minority in the country: most people are actually vaguely okay with the idea of the government spy agency trawling through domestic networks looking for people trying to attack the US. The NSA has owned the globe on a shoe string budget in response to a civic outcry about two decades back. They did their duty, as the people of the nation asked them to. Now, you can argue that it was a poor national strategy -- that it's going to lead to a civic-society corrupting influence, and problems like parallel construction. But it's a bold allegation that people didn't do their duty because they struck a hard compromise that the majority approved of, but you personally don't. > patriot I wouldn't describe anyone who leaked legal spy programs or who took a laptop full of classified secrets to both China and Russia a patriot. There were technical means by which Snowden could have better secured the materials, and there's the simple fact that he leaked a lot of perfectly legal military spy programs to the entire world, intentionally. I'd certainly describe Snowden as an idealist, but he's not particularly a patriot.
- smokeyj 8y ago
  > They did their duty, as the people of the nation asked them to. As you may infer from current headlines - "The president told me to do it" is not exactly legal justification. We're a nation of checks and balances. If domestic spying is what the people wants then congress needs to act on that. For people intelligent enough to "own the globe" I don't see what's so confusing about this. Bypassing the cornerstone of our democracy is not a heroic act. Spying on Americans by routing traffic through five-eyes is not clever or heroic. It's incredibly dangerous and represents an existential threat to our democracy. You can't even begin to imagine how blackmail will be used to silently and invisibly form the political landscape for the next 50 years. Maybe Snowden isn't a patriot - but the NSA is a traitor to the American public.
  - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
    > If domestic spying is what the people wants then congress needs to act on that. And they have, repeatedly. For all their bluster, the legislation that they've passed immunized the corporations who participated, left standing the punishment against Qwest (who didn't), and created new avenues to collect information in secret. They held no one from either the Bush or Obama administrations, both of whom supported such programs, to account. Congress did approve, modulo some theatrics, the actions of those administrations, because it's what people, that is, their constituents wanted. > NSA is a traitor to the American public. This kind of rhetoric when people didn't do what you personally wanted, but which much of the public did, isn't helpful and is a large portion of why the current politics are so toxic. As far as anyone has been able to document, the NSA largely spends their time fighting terrorist organizations and hacking other nation-states -- doing things that legitimately keep safe Americans, in a world that isn't all that nice of a place. It's trite to snipe at how the guards do their job, safe under their watch and without anything at risk -- particularly when you're also safely the minority, so don't run the risk of your opinions being put into action. > can't even begin to imagine how blackmail will be used to silently and invisibly form the political landscape for the next 50 years Good, I'm tired of lizard people. Also, "Hoover-esque" comes to mind. Of course, the real danger for your conspiracy is the private consultancies and large corporations, which have considerably better access to information and substantially more sophisticated systems. I'm personally considerably less worried about the NSA (or other government) archives and systems than the privateer ones, particularly in the age of rogue billionaires with aspirations of nation building -- to the point I'm willing to risk it to enable the nation to defend itself from, eg, another 2016-style PSYOP campaign.
    - smokeyj 8y ago
      So, the ends justify the means. Was the war in Iraq worth it? Should I be proud of the torture and extrajudicial renditions that occurred to "keep me safe"? Sounds like the mentality of a coward. But we'll just have to agree to disagree. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

NotAnEconomist 8y ago

> Let's not pretend the NSA is fighting a war on terror. It's an economic espionage machine, and an assault on the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. This seems to be completely unfounded, and out of line with my experience of the people who work there. > they should perform their civic duty and do as the patriot Edward Snowden has done. The truth is that you and I are part of a minority in the country: most people are actually vaguely okay with the idea of the government spy agency trawling through domestic networks looking for people trying to attack the US. The NSA has owned the globe on a shoe string budget in response to a civic outcry about two decades back. They did their duty, as the people of the nation asked them to. Now, you can argue that it was a poor national strategy -- that it's going to lead to a civic-society corrupting influence, and problems like parallel construction. But it's a bold allegation that people didn't do their duty because they struck a hard compromise that the majority approved of, but you personally don't. > patriot I wouldn't describe anyone who leaked legal spy programs or who took a laptop full of classified secrets to both China and Russia a patriot. There were technical means by which Snowden could have better secured the materials, and there's the simple fact that he leaked a lot of perfectly legal military spy programs to the entire world, intentionally. I'd certainly describe Snowden as an idealist, but he's not particularly a patriot.

smokeyj 8y ago
> They did their duty, as the people of the nation asked them to. As you may infer from current headlines - "The president told me to do it" is not exactly legal justification. We're a nation of checks and balances. If domestic spying is what the people wants then congress needs to act on that. For people intelligent enough to "own the globe" I don't see what's so confusing about this. Bypassing the cornerstone of our democracy is not a heroic act. Spying on Americans by routing traffic through five-eyes is not clever or heroic. It's incredibly dangerous and represents an existential threat to our democracy. You can't even begin to imagine how blackmail will be used to silently and invisibly form the political landscape for the next 50 years. Maybe Snowden isn't a patriot - but the NSA is a traitor to the American public.
- NotAnEconomist 8y ago
  > If domestic spying is what the people wants then congress needs to act on that. And they have, repeatedly. For all their bluster, the legislation that they've passed immunized the corporations who participated, left standing the punishment against Qwest (who didn't), and created new avenues to collect information in secret. They held no one from either the Bush or Obama administrations, both of whom supported such programs, to account. Congress did approve, modulo some theatrics, the actions of those administrations, because it's what people, that is, their constituents wanted. > NSA is a traitor to the American public. This kind of rhetoric when people didn't do what you personally wanted, but which much of the public did, isn't helpful and is a large portion of why the current politics are so toxic. As far as anyone has been able to document, the NSA largely spends their time fighting terrorist organizations and hacking other nation-states -- doing things that legitimately keep safe Americans, in a world that isn't all that nice of a place. It's trite to snipe at how the guards do their job, safe under their watch and without anything at risk -- particularly when you're also safely the minority, so don't run the risk of your opinions being put into action. > can't even begin to imagine how blackmail will be used to silently and invisibly form the political landscape for the next 50 years Good, I'm tired of lizard people. Also, "Hoover-esque" comes to mind. Of course, the real danger for your conspiracy is the private consultancies and large corporations, which have considerably better access to information and substantially more sophisticated systems. I'm personally considerably less worried about the NSA (or other government) archives and systems than the privateer ones, particularly in the age of rogue billionaires with aspirations of nation building -- to the point I'm willing to risk it to enable the nation to defend itself from, eg, another 2016-style PSYOP campaign.
  - smokeyj 8y ago
    So, the ends justify the means. Was the war in Iraq worth it? Should I be proud of the torture and extrajudicial renditions that occurred to "keep me safe"? Sounds like the mentality of a coward. But we'll just have to agree to disagree. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."